Morning,
in some cases we're finding substantial differences in what we see if we
allow Coot to generate density automatically from an mtz as opposed to
generating maps with CCP4 and reading them in - specifically some large
peaks in a CCP4 difference map at about 3.5 to 4 sigma that are
effectively non-existant in the Coot-generate mtz difference map (partly
visible at 2.2 sigma but really just part of the noise). This is for a
pretty well refined 1.7A dataset.
Is there a consensus amongst the Coot-community about mtzs vs. maps? Do
users regard Coot-generated mtz density as good for quick exploration
but use maps for more detailed work? Or am I being overly trusting of CCP4?
Cheers,
Craig.
--
Dr Craig Morton Ph: +61 3 9288 2480
Senior Associate Fx: +61 3 9416 2676
St Vincent's Institute www.svi.edu.au
