Re: [ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy
Dear Lande, On Wed, Oct 26, 2022 at 08:09:10AM +0100, Lande Fu wrote: > I noticed STARANISO processd the data all the way down to 1.7A, with > very poor stats on high resolution shell. Were you looking at the second table in the original email? It is not in a format I recognize as coming from STARANISO ... maybe this is from the UCLA server or some manual procedure? Cheers Clemens 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/
Re: [ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy
Dear Shenyuan Xu, I dealt with a similar problem recently. In my particular case, a combination of the correction with STARANISO and a subsequent molecular replacement with the MoRDa pipeline helped me a lot. MoRDa was able to suggest how to place individual protein domains separately in the unit cell and which model templates to choose. Then I rebuilt carefully the main chain(s). I have heard several times that BUSTER is very smart in the refinement of low-resolution structures. But I do not have personal experience. By the way, regarding the reported completeness after the STARANISO correction, is it spherical or ellipsoidal? Good luck! Martin On 24. 10. 22 3:43, Xu, Shenyuan wrote: Dear CCP4 community, I have encountered a dataset, which I thought should be easy to solve. The volume of the cell unit seems to be expanded after image 271, which I think is caused by radiation damage. After removing the last few images, the scaled statistics seem good with the resolution set at 3:07 A: d_max d_min #obs #uniq mult. %comp r_mrg r_meas r_pim r_anom cc1/2 cc_ano 91.54 8.33 3086 1197 2.58 98.44 345.2 51.3 0.101 0.133 0.086 0.145 0.973* -0.148 8.33 6.61 3005 1225 2.45 99.51 256.5 27.3 0.160 0.212 0.138 0.260 0.923* -0.140 6.61 5.78 2883 1190 2.42 98.43 92.9 9.4 0.278 0.368 0.237 0.461 0.541* -0.165 5.78 5.25 3195 1217 2.63 99.10 75.6 8.1 0.283 0.369 0.233 0.436 0.618* -0.107 5.25 4.87 3192 1206 2.65 99.42 92.5 8.3 0.281 0.367 0.232 0.427 0.856* -0.187 4.87 4.59 3230 1213 2.66 99.02 118.4 10.3 0.288 0.378 0.240 0.456 0.870* -0.053 4.59 4.36 2797 1156 2.42 92.93 137.0 12.2 0.309 0.410 0.266 0.496 0.843* -0.239 4.36 4.17 2694 1118 2.41 93.17 280.2 16.2 0.419 0.575 0.392 0.847 0.491* -0.142 4.17 4.01 3102 1188 2.61 95.50 133.6 9.9 0.392 0.516 0.330 0.622 0.663* -0.268 4.01 3.87 3224 1205 2.68 98.69 120.4 7.3 0.406 0.539 0.349 0.687 0.791* -0.126 3.87 3.75 2939 1181 2.49 98.91 90.7 6.8 0.491 0.652 0.425 0.810 0.691* -0.042 3.75 3.64 1981 1021 1.94 82.34 87.3 5.0 0.557 0.756 0.506 0.885 0.540* -0.018 3.64 3.54 2374 1082 2.19 89.13 194.6 11.2 0.502 0.675 0.447 0.973 0.625* -0.237 3.54 3.46 2622 1122 2.34 92.35 310.5 10.1 0.432 0.585 0.392 0.851 0.603* -0.154 3.46 3.38 1739 945 1.84 76.58 48.2 3.6 0.930 1.247 0.822 1.542 0.444* -0.046 3.38 3.31 2847 1240 2.30 98.57 85.4 4.2 0.691 0.930 0.616 1.242 0.523* -0.060 3.31 3.24 2838 1153 2.46 97.88 70.8 3.3 0.693 0.934 0.620 1.341 0.362* 0.006 3.24 3.18 3097 1212 2.56 97.66 71.4 2.5 0.692 0.924 0.605 1.173 0.526* 0.044 3.18 3.12 3204 1216 2.63 99.10 79.6 3.7 0.668 0.886 0.576 1.338 0.440* -0.081 3.12 3.07 3059 1172 2.61 98.16 73.5 2.4 0.714 0.945 0.612 1.633 0.362* -0.177 91.50 3.07 57108 23259 2.46 95.22 138.4 10.8 0.383 0.513 0.336 0.671 0.656* -0.149 I used Mrbump to do the MR, most sequence identities of the starting templates are more than 0.85, and some of them are structures predicted from alpha fold 2. But after refinement (including jelly-body, proSmart, TLC), the best R/Free R stuck at around 0.42/0.45. Inspecting the electron density map shows that the model does not fit the electron density well. The space group is P1, Cell is 58.49 63.97 91.60 91.71 91.86 99.47, should be 5 or 6 molecules in the asymmetric unit. I checked the data quality, it said the data is highly anisotropy. Then I searched the CCP4 forum and used theSTARANISO Server and UCLA server, but still cannot improve the refinement. The data statistics after drawing ellipsoidal resolution limits is good: resolution observed redundancy completenes rmerge i/sigma before/after before/after before/after before/after before/after 7.90 4957 1185 3.5 3.3 97.3% 92.6% 13.0% 12.7% 11.9 7.2 5.58 8023 2397 3.0 3.6 98.6% 98.9% 30.3% 11.8% 5.5 7.5 4.56 11176 2624 3.3 3.1 99.1% 97.5% 57.1% 18.2% 3.7 6.3 3.95 11694 3213 2.9 3.1 94.0% 99.0% 53.1% 27.5% 4.2 4.3 3.53 12065 3524 2.6 3.0 92.8% 99.0% 49.8% 45.9% 3.2 2.8 3.22 12828 4098 2.5 3.2 93.8% 99.1% 69.3% 53.2% 2.1 2.7 2.98 17566 4628 3.2 3.3 98.6% 99.1% 98.1% 60.0%
Re: [ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy
How to deal with poor data is a challenge. Look at the images - see at what resolution there is detectable diffraction. Then run a self rotation function.Do you expect a trimer? dimer? etc and does the self rotation give any clues? Are your models dimers? trimers? etc. Eleanor On Wed, 26 Oct 2022 at 08:09, Lande Fu < 8bc2565720d4-dmarc-requ...@jiscmail.ac.uk> wrote: > Hello Shenyuan, > > > I noticed STARANISO processd the data all the way down to 1.7A, with very > poor stats on high resolution shell. I have two suggesstions: > 1.You may want to reivse the raw images to check the anisotropy (that all > spots are distributed in an flat ellipse). > 2. If you can scale&merge the data with Aimless suite in CCP4, check > "Anisotropic deltaB" value below summary table. > > > For MR, there is too much to tell and it's better to improve data > processing first. > > > > > > regards, > Lande > > > > 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/
Re: [ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy
Hello Shenyuan, I noticed STARANISO processd the data all the way down to 1.7A, with very poor stats on high resolution shell. I have two suggesstions: 1.You may want to reivse the raw images to check the anisotropy (that all spots are distributed in an flat ellipse). 2. If you can scale&merge the data with Aimless suite in CCP4, check "Anisotropic deltaB" value below summary table. For MR, there is too much to tell and it's better to improve data processing first. regards, Lande 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/
Re: [ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy
The improvement in statistics by STARANISO is really spectacular, but I do wonder how much is caused by the directionally variable resolution limits and how much by the removal of solvent rings? The original data set statistics have big dips in CC1/2 at 6, 4.3 and 3.7 Å. Also in the final statistics table, the completeness is really high, but I guess reflections from the "bad" direction(s) are not taken into account? It would be good to also know the spherical completeness and the CC1/2 values before going too far ahead with these data. Or perhaps better phrased: I'd simultaneously try to get a dataset from a better flash-cooled crystal while trying to get the most out of this dataset. Mark J van Raaij Dpto de Estructura de Macromoleculas, lab 20B Centro Nacional de Biotecnologia - CSIC calle Darwin 3 E-28049 Madrid, Spain tel. +34 91 585 4616 (internal 432092) Section Editor Acta Crystallographica F https://journals.iucr.org/f/ > On 24 Oct 2022, at 03:43, Xu, Shenyuan wrote: > > Dear CCP4 community, > > I have encountered a dataset, which I thought should be easy to solve. The > volume of the cell unit seems to be expanded after image 271, which I think > is caused by radiation damage. After removing the last few images, the scaled > statistics seem good with the resolution set at 3:07 A: > > d_max d_min #obs #uniq mult. %comp r_mrg r_meas >r_pim r_anom cc1/2 cc_ano > 91.54 8.33 3086 11972.58 98.44 345.251.30.101 > 0.1330.0860.145 0.973* -0.148 > 8.33 6.61 3005 12252.45 99.51 256.527.30.160 > 0.2120.1380.260 0.923* -0.140 > 6.61 5.78 2883 11902.42 98.43 92.9 9.40.278 > 0.3680.2370.461 0.541* -0.165 > 5.78 5.25 3195 12172.63 99.10 75.6 8.10.283 > 0.3690.2330.436 0.618* -0.107 > 5.25 4.87 3192 12062.65 99.42 92.5 8.30.281 > 0.3670.2320.427 0.856* -0.187 > 4.87 4.59 3230 12132.66 99.02 118.410.30.288 > 0.3780.2400.456 0.870* -0.053 > 4.59 4.36 2797 11562.42 92.93 137.012.20.309 > 0.4100.2660.496 0.843* -0.239 > 4.36 4.17 2694 11182.41 93.17 280.216.20.419 > 0.5750.3920.847 0.491* -0.142 > 4.17 4.01 3102 11882.61 95.50 133.6 9.90.392 > 0.5160.3300.622 0.663* -0.268 > 4.01 3.87 3224 12052.68 98.69 120.4 7.30.406 > 0.5390.3490.687 0.791* -0.126 > 3.87 3.75 2939 11812.49 98.91 90.7 6.80.491 > 0.6520.4250.810 0.691* -0.042 > 3.75 3.64 1981 10211.94 82.34 87.3 5.00.557 > 0.7560.5060.885 0.540* -0.018 > 3.64 3.54 2374 10822.19 89.13 194.611.20.502 > 0.6750.4470.973 0.625* -0.237 > 3.54 3.46 2622 11222.34 92.35 310.510.10.432 > 0.5850.3920.851 0.603* -0.154 > 3.46 3.38 17399451.84 76.58 48.2 3.60.930 > 1.2470.8221.542 0.444* -0.046 > 3.38 3.31 2847 12402.30 98.57 85.4 4.20.691 > 0.9300.6161.242 0.523* -0.060 > 3.31 3.24 2838 11532.46 97.88 70.8 3.30.693 > 0.9340.6201.341 0.362* 0.006 > 3.24 3.18 3097 12122.56 97.66 71.4 2.50.692 > 0.9240.6051.173 0.526* 0.044 > 3.18 3.12 3204 12162.63 99.10 79.6 3.70.668 > 0.8860.5761.338 0.440* -0.081 > 3.12 3.07 3059 11722.61 98.16 73.5 2.40.714 > 0.9450.6121.633 0.362* -0.177 > 91.50 3.07 57108 232592.46 95.22 138.410.80.383 > 0.5130.3360.671 0.656* -0.149 > > I used Mrbump to do the MR, most sequence identities of the starting > templates are more than 0.85, and some of them are structures predicted from > alpha fold 2. But after refinement (including jelly-body, proSmart, TLC), the > best R/Free R stuck at around 0.42/0.45. Inspecting the electron density map > shows that the model does not fit the electron density well. The space group > is P1, Cell is 58.49 63.97 91.60 91.71 91.86 99.47, should be 5 or 6 > molecules in the asymmetric unit. > > I checked the data quality, it said the data is highly anisotropy. Then > I searched the CCP4 forum and used the STARANISO Server and UCLA server, but > still cannot improve the refinement. The data statistics after drawing > ellipsoidal resolution limits is good: > > > resolution observed redundancycompletenesrmerge > i/sigma > before/after before/after before/afterbefore/after > before/after > 7.90 4957 1185 3.5 3.397.3% 92.6%13.0% 12.7%11.9 > 7.2 > 5.5
Re: [ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy
Dear Shenyuan Xu, it is a good sign that the model and density to not match - at 3.07A, one often only has model bias with a poor MR solution. You don't want to start with refinement, better to start with model building: make the model fit the density better, before you run refinement, and check again for R/Rfree. Best regards, Tim On Mon, 24 Oct 2022 09:43:19 +0800 "Xu, Shenyuan" wrote: > Inspecting the electron > density map shows that the model does not fit the electron density > well. -- -- Tim Gruene Head of the Centre for X-ray Structure Analysis Faculty of Chemistry University of Vienna Phone: +43-1-4277-70202 GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A 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/ pgph0PwzhE5yN.pgp Description: OpenPGP digital signature
[ccp4bb] AW: [ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy
Dear Shenyuan, I have two suggestions: 1. Is your protein a single or a multi-domain protein? If it is a multi-domain protein, you should search with the individual domains. 2. Given the low resolution, high anisotropy and expected large number of molecules in the asymmetric unit, you may have an exceptionally high solvent content, maybe >75%. Is the electron density of all molecules bad, or have a few molecules better electron density? If a few molecules have reasonable density, I would keep those and delete the molecules with bad density. Alternatively, I would start a MR search for only 3 or 4 molecules. Best, Herman Von: CCP4 bulletin board Im Auftrag von Xu, Shenyuan Gesendet: Montag, 24. Oktober 2022 03:43 An: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK Betreff: [ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy Dear CCP4 community, I have encountered a dataset, which I thought should be easy to solve. The volume of the cell unit seems to be expanded after image 271, which I think is caused by radiation damage. After removing the last few images, the scaled statistics seem good with the resolution set at 3:07 A: d_max d_min #obs #uniq mult. %comp r_mrg r_meas r_pim r_anom cc1/2 cc_ano 91.54 8.33 3086 11972.58 98.44 345.251.30.1010.133 0.0860.145 0.973* -0.148 8.33 6.61 3005 12252.45 99.51 256.527.30.1600.212 0.1380.260 0.923* -0.140 6.61 5.78 2883 11902.42 98.43 92.9 9.40.2780.368 0.2370.461 0.541* -0.165 5.78 5.25 3195 12172.63 99.10 75.6 8.10.2830.369 0.2330.436 0.618* -0.107 5.25 4.87 3192 12062.65 99.42 92.5 8.30.2810.367 0.2320.427 0.856* -0.187 4.87 4.59 3230 12132.66 99.02 118.410.30.2880.378 0.2400.456 0.870* -0.053 4.59 4.36 2797 11562.42 92.93 137.012.20.3090.410 0.2660.496 0.843* -0.239 4.36 4.17 2694 11182.41 93.17 280.216.20.4190.575 0.3920.847 0.491* -0.142 4.17 4.01 3102 11882.61 95.50 133.6 9.90.3920.516 0.3300.622 0.663* -0.268 4.01 3.87 3224 12052.68 98.69 120.4 7.30.4060.539 0.3490.687 0.791* -0.126 3.87 3.75 2939 11812.49 98.91 90.7 6.80.4910.652 0.4250.810 0.691* -0.042 3.75 3.64 1981 10211.94 82.34 87.3 5.00.5570.756 0.5060.885 0.540* -0.018 3.64 3.54 2374 10822.19 89.13 194.611.20.5020.675 0.4470.973 0.625* -0.237 3.54 3.46 2622 11222.34 92.35 310.510.10.4320.585 0.3920.851 0.603* -0.154 3.46 3.38 17399451.84 76.58 48.2 3.60.9301.247 0.8221.542 0.444* -0.046 3.38 3.31 2847 12402.30 98.57 85.4 4.20.6910.930 0.6161.242 0.523* -0.060 3.31 3.24 2838 11532.46 97.88 70.8 3.30.6930.934 0.6201.341 0.362* 0.006 3.24 3.18 3097 12122.56 97.66 71.4 2.50.6920.924 0.6051.173 0.526* 0.044 3.18 3.12 3204 12162.63 99.10 79.6 3.70.6680.886 0.5761.338 0.440* -0.081 3.12 3.07 3059 11722.61 98.16 73.5 2.40.7140.945 0.6121.633 0.362* -0.177 91.50 3.07 57108 232592.46 95.22 138.410.80.3830.513 0.3360.671 0.656* -0.149 I used Mrbump to do the MR, most sequence identities of the starting templates are more than 0.85, and some of them are structures predicted from alpha fold 2. But after refinement (including jelly-body, proSmart, TLC), the best R/Free R stuck at around 0.42/0.45. Inspecting the electron density map shows that the model does not fit the electron density well. The space group is P1, Cell is 58.49 63.97 91.60 91.71 91.86 99.47, should be 5 or 6 molecules in the asymmetric unit. I checked the data quality, it said the data is highly anisotropy. Then I searched the CCP4 forum and used the STARANISO Server and UCLA server, but still cannot improve the refinement. The data statistics after drawing ellipsoidal resolution limits is good: resolution observed redundancycompletenesrmerge i/sigma before/after before/after before/afterbefore/after before/after 7.90 4957 1185 3.5 3.397.3% 92.6%13.0% 12.7%11.9 7.2 5.58 8023 2397 3.0 3.698.6% 98.9%30.3% 11.8% 5.5 7.5 4.5611176 2624 3.3 3.199.1% 97.5%57.1% 18.2% 3.7 6.3 3.9511694 3213 2.9 3.194.0% 99.0%53.1% 27.5% 4.2 4.3 3.5312065 3524 2.6 3.092.8% 99.0%49.8% 45.9% 3.2
[ccp4bb] Low resolution and high anisotropy
Dear CCP4 community, I have encountered a dataset, which I thought should be easy to solve. The volume of the cell unit seems to be expanded after image 271, which I think is caused by radiation damage. After removing the last few images, the scaled statistics seem good with the resolution set at 3:07 A: d_max d_min #obs #uniq mult. %comp r_mrg r_measr_pim r_anom cc1/2 cc_ano 91.54 8.33 3086 11972.58 98.44 345.251.30.101 0.1330.0860.145 0.973* -0.148 8.33 6.61 3005 12252.45 99.51 256.527.30.160 0.2120.1380.260 0.923* -0.140 6.61 5.78 2883 11902.42 98.43 92.9 9.40.278 0.3680.2370.461 0.541* -0.165 5.78 5.25 3195 12172.63 99.10 75.6 8.10.283 0.3690.2330.436 0.618* -0.107 5.25 4.87 3192 12062.65 99.42 92.5 8.30.281 0.3670.2320.427 0.856* -0.187 4.87 4.59 3230 12132.66 99.02 118.410.30.288 0.3780.2400.456 0.870* -0.053 4.59 4.36 2797 11562.42 92.93 137.012.20.309 0.4100.2660.496 0.843* -0.239 4.36 4.17 2694 11182.41 93.17 280.216.20.419 0.5750.3920.847 0.491* -0.142 4.17 4.01 3102 11882.61 95.50 133.6 9.90.392 0.5160.3300.622 0.663* -0.268 4.01 3.87 3224 12052.68 98.69 120.4 7.30.406 0.5390.3490.687 0.791* -0.126 3.87 3.75 2939 11812.49 98.91 90.7 6.80.491 0.6520.4250.810 0.691* -0.042 3.75 3.64 1981 10211.94 82.34 87.3 5.00.557 0.7560.5060.885 0.540* -0.018 3.64 3.54 2374 10822.19 89.13 194.611.20.502 0.6750.4470.973 0.625* -0.237 3.54 3.46 2622 11222.34 92.35 310.510.10.432 0.5850.3920.851 0.603* -0.154 3.46 3.38 17399451.84 76.58 48.2 3.60.930 1.2470.8221.542 0.444* -0.046 3.38 3.31 2847 12402.30 98.57 85.4 4.20.691 0.9300.6161.242 0.523* -0.060 3.31 3.24 2838 11532.46 97.88 70.8 3.30.693 0.9340.6201.341 0.362* 0.006 3.24 3.18 3097 12122.56 97.66 71.4 2.50.692 0.9240.6051.173 0.526* 0.044 3.18 3.12 3204 12162.63 99.10 79.6 3.70.668 0.8860.5761.338 0.440* -0.081 3.12 3.07 3059 11722.61 98.16 73.5 2.40.714 0.9450.6121.633 0.362* -0.177 91.50 3.07 57108 232592.46 95.22 138.410.80.383 0.5130.3360.671 0.656* -0.149 I used Mrbump to do the MR, most sequence identities of the starting templates are more than 0.85, and some of them are structures predicted from alpha fold 2. But after refinement (including jelly-body, proSmart, TLC), the best R/Free R stuck at around 0.42/0.45. Inspecting the electron density map shows that the model does not fit the electron density well. The space group is P1, Cell is 58.49 63.97 91.60 91.71 91.86 99.47, should be 5 or 6 molecules in the asymmetric unit. I checked the data quality, it said the data is highly anisotropy. Then I searched the CCP4 forum and used the STARANISO Server and UCLA server, but still cannot improve the refinement. The data statistics after drawing ellipsoidal resolution limits is good: resolution observed redundancycompletenesrmerge i/sigma before/after before/after before/afterbefore/after before/after 7.90 4957 1185 3.5 3.397.3% 92.6%13.0% 12.7% 11.9 7.2 5.58 8023 2397 3.0 3.698.6% 98.9%30.3% 11.8% 5.5 7.5 4.5611176 2624 3.3 3.199.1% 97.5%57.1% 18.2% 3.7 6.3 3.9511694 3213 2.9 3.194.0% 99.0%53.1% 27.5% 4.2 4.3 3.5312065 3524 2.6 3.092.8% 99.0%49.8% 45.9% 3.2 2.8 3.2212828 4098 2.5 3.293.8% 99.1%69.3% 53.2% 2.1 2.7 2.9817566 4628 3.2 3.398.6% 99.1%98.1% 60.0% 1.6 2.7 2.7919405 4631 3.3 3.198.1% 96.8% 203.0% 70.3% 0.8 2.7 2.6320871 4001 3.3 2.598.1% 90.1% 760.1% 41.2% 0.3 3.4 2.5020352 5406 3.0 3.297.8% 97.3% -99.9% 66.0% 0.0 2.6 2.3817281 5689 2.5 3.293.8% 98.2% -99.9% 81.4% 0.0 1.8 2.2813198 3874 1.8 2.168.6% 88.0% 546.3% 193.2% 0.1 0.6 2.1910429 4961 1.4 2.652.5% 92.7% -99.9% 31.0% 0.0 4.8 2.11 7776 4275 1.0 2.141.2% 90.1% -99.9% 266.0% 0.0 0.6 2.04 5561 6084 0.7 2.930.9% 97.6% 531.4% 109.2% 0.1 1.1 1.97 3818 6700 0.4 3.123.4% 97.4% -99.9% 85.8% 0.0 1.6 1.91 2269 5906 0.3 2.717.0% 83.9
