n be an issue with complexes containing
>>> DNA if the buffers aren’t quite right. (I’ve seen this a lot)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Lastly, remember that the scattering profile represents the solution
>>> average of the particle, not just a single s
In theory, there should be a simple way to calculate P(r) directly from the
crystal structure rather than indirectly from the expected scattering curve.
Distribution of pair distances, r^2 weighted. This would remove any ambiguity
about choice of Dmax. ... but I can't think of any of the common
buffers aren’t quite right. (I’ve seen this a lot)
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>> Lastly, remember that the scattering profile represents the solution
>>> average of the particle, not just a single snapshot. Some discrepancies
>>> like those you note should b
y, remember that the scattering profile represents the solution
>> average of the particle, not just a single snapshot. Some discrepancies
>> like those you note should be expected.
>>
>>
>>
>> Hope that helps,
>>
>>
>>
>> Kushol
>>
>>
>>
>> Kus
al Message-
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Xun Lu
Sent: Saturday, June 16, 2012 2:29 PM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [ccp4bb] Do my SAXS data agree with the crystal structure?
Dear all,
I have solved a protein-DNA structure, and I also d
Hi Xun,
it is difficult to judge without seeing the P(r) plots, but seeing as
you have a dimer in your crystal structure and a dimer in your SAXS,
AND your Chi2 value seems reasonable for a good match between PX and
SAXS, I'd say you've got what you need.
A matching P(r) plot would be nice, but t
Dear all,
I have solved a protein-DNA structure, and I also did SAXS to get some
ideas of the solution structure. The SAXS data were good, no aggregation at
all three tested concentrations. I tried to use Crysol to see if my crystal
structure fits the SAXS. The fitting to the scat