Dear all,
I would like to remind you on a workshop on The Future of Microfocus Protein
Crystallography which will take place at the MAX IV User meeting on the 24th
and the 25th of September, 2013, in Lund, Sweden.
Recent developments within protein crystallography methods in combination with
Hi,
We are looking for highly motivated crystallographer, preferably fresh PhD
graduate for the position of Research Fellow in the Experimental Therapeutic
Centre, Agency for Science and Technology Research, Singapore. The centre
focuses on drug-discovery research and the candidate will be
Hey!
I was reading a lot lately on data processing and the ongoing debate in the
community on how to submit Table 1.
Here is an example of medium resolution data integrated with XDS, merged in
SCALA and preliminarily refined in phenix.
Overall
On Mon, Jul 22, 2013 at 10:19 AM, Stefan Gajewski sgajew...@gmail.comwrote:
The maps shows signs of over fitting, the B-factors do not look correct in
my opinion.
What do correct B-factors look like? What refinement strategy did you
use for them?
Note that the R-free value in the 3.4A
Hi,
The density in both space groups looks very similar, with no obvious
differences.
The data was processed in XDS followed by refinement in REFMAC and then PHENIX.
Yes, the statistics of the orthorhombic structure is probably more realistic.
But when both are refined in REFMAC these
On Monday, 22 July 2013, Katherine Donovan wrote:
Hi All,
I have a data set that was collected to about 2.2A, which I have processed in
either P21 (to 2.4 A) or C2221 (2.25A).
So I'm confused.
You may not know what the spacegroup is, but you are processing
the same spots either way. Why
On 7/22/13 11:20 PM, Ethan Merritt wrote:
Which brings up the point that something seems to have
gone wrong in one of your processing runs.
Both runs claim mean (I/sigI) in the outer shell is 2.0,
but in one case this is for the 2.4A shell and in the other case
it's for the 2.2A shell. That is
