Hi,
every time you run phenix.refine it may exclude some reflections from
refinement per Read 1999 (Acta Cryst. (1999). D55, 1759-1764). Usually the
number of reflections omitted ranges from none to just a few, however, this
may be just enough to make the resolution statistics look slightly
different.
Also, if you use Iobs as input data, internally they are converted into
Fobs using F&W method, and some reflections may not "survive" this
conversion. This may be another reason for discrepancies.
Pavel

On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 9:45 PM venkatareddy dadireddy <[email protected]>
wrote:

>
> Thank you very much Garib.
>
> Venkat
>
> On Sat, Apr 6, 2024 at 1:12 AM Garib Murshudov <[email protected]>
> wrote:
>
>> Unless you are confident that twin exists you should not use twin
>> refinement (Occam’s razor)
>>
>>
>>
>> On 5 Apr 2024, at 17:24, venkatareddy dadireddy <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the LMB:
>> *[email protected] <[email protected]>-.*
>> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender
>> and know the content is safe.
>> If you think this is a phishing email, please forward it to
>> [email protected]
>>
>>
>> --
>> Hi Kay and Garib,
>>
>> Thank you for your input.
>> It is actually the twin refinement that gave rise to resolution
>> discrepancy.
>> For what reason I don't remember that I have turned the twin refinement ON
>> and the same job was cloned again and again.
>> With the twin refinement OFF, it gave rise to resolution present in the
>> MTZ (2.0 A).
>> From Xtriage: *the correlation between*
>> *the intensities related by the twin law 1/2*h-3/2*k, -1/2*h-1/2*k,-l
>> with an estimated twin*
>> *fraction of 0.10 is most likely due to an NCS axis parallel to the twin
>> axis*.
>> The statistics independent of twin laws show no twinning (more close to
>> untwinned than perfect twin).
>> Please suggest to me on how I proceed with refinement (twin OFF or ON).
>>
>> Thank you,
>> Venkat
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> On Fri, Apr 5, 2024 at 1:00 AM Garib Murshudov <[email protected]>
>> wrote:
>>
>>> Did you use twin refinement (is it really twin if you used that).
>>> If twin refinement was used then twin related intensities might have
>>> different resolution, in case when your crystal are pseudomerohedral
>>> twinned.
>>>
>>> Regards
>>> Garib
>>>
>>> On 4 Apr 2024, at 18:40, venkatareddy dadireddy <[email protected]>
>>> wrote:
>>>
>>> CAUTION: This email originated from outside of the LMB:
>>> *[email protected] <[email protected]>-.*
>>> Do not click links or open attachments unless you recognize the sender
>>> and know the content is safe.
>>> If you think this is a phishing email, please forward it to
>>> [email protected]
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>> Hi Kay,
>>>
>>> Thank you very much for your insights.
>>> Following are the cell parameters from mtz and pdb header.
>>> *MTZ: 117.8560   66.1700   70.9040   90.0000   91.4240   90.000*
>>>
>>> *CRYST1  117.856   66.170   70.904  90.00  91.42  90.00 C 1 2 1*
>>>
>>> The only difference is in the 3rd decimal point.
>>>
>>>
>>> Thank you,
>>> Venkat
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> On Tue, Apr 2, 2024 at 10:10 PM Kay Diederichs <
>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>
>>>> Hi Venkatareddy Dadireddy,
>>>>
>>>> do the unit cell parameters of your MTZ file and PDB file agree exactly
>>>> ?
>>>>
>>>> Take for example a cell of (100,110,120,90,90,90) in the header of the
>>>> MTZ file,
>>>> and (97,110,120,90,90,90) in the CRYST1 line of the PDB file.
>>>>
>>>> In this example, the (50,0,0) reflection would be at 2.0A resolution if
>>>> using the cell from the MTZ file,
>>>> but it would be at 1.94A resolution if calculating the resolution based
>>>> on the cell from the PDB file.
>>>>
>>>> So perhaps REFMAC5 takes the cell from the PDB file, and phenix.refine
>>>> takes the cell from the MTZ?
>>>> I didn't check but it may be worth finding out.
>>>>
>>>> HTH,
>>>> Kay
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> On Tue, 2 Apr 2024 21:16:57 +0530, venkatareddy dadireddy <
>>>> [email protected]> wrote:
>>>>
>>>> >Hi,
>>>> >
>>>> >The resolution range in my MTZ file is 70.88 - 2.0 A. When I refined my
>>>> >structure using REFMAC5, the resolution that it gives is 70.88 - 1.94
>>>> A,
>>>> >the difference of 0.04 A. I also used Phenix.refine which gives the
>>>> >resolution output as it is in the MTZ file. Again, EDS (validation
>>>> report)
>>>> >gives the right resolution. What could be the possible reason for this
>>>> >discrepancy? I have the structure deposited in the Protein Data Bank
>>>> and it
>>>> >is on hold. Thank you in advance for your help.
>>>> >
>>>> >Thank you,
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >
>>>> >*Venkatareddy Dadireddy,B1-10,Prof. S. Ramakumar's Lab,Dept. of
>>>> >Physics,IISc, Banglore.Cell: 07259492227*
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> >########################################################################
>>>> >
>>>> >To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>>>> >https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>>>> >
>>>> >This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a
>>>> mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are
>>>> available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
>>>> >
>>>>
>>>> ########################################################################
>>>>
>>>> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>>>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>>>>
>>>> This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a
>>>> mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are
>>>> available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
>>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> --
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> *Venkatareddy Dadireddy,B1-10,Prof. S. Ramakumar's Lab,Dept. of
>>> Physics,IISc, Banglore.Cell: 07259492227*
>>>
>>> ------------------------------
>>>
>>> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>> --
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>>
>> *Venkatareddy Dadireddy,B1-10,Prof. S. Ramakumar's Lab,Dept. of
>> Physics,IISc, Banglore.Cell: 07259492227*
>>
>> ------------------------------
>>
>> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
>> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>>
>>
>>
>
> --
>
>
>
>
>
>
> *Venkatareddy Dadireddy,B1-10,Prof. S. Ramakumar's Lab,Dept. of
> Physics,IISc, Banglore.Cell: 07259492227*
>
> ------------------------------
>
> To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
> https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
>

########################################################################

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list 
hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at 
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/

Reply via email to