You have obviously solved this problem, but one thing that can change
apparent Rfactors is the number of reflections accepted..
If one gives you 5% more very weak reflections say, then those will
inevitably have high Rfactors and this can increase the apparent Rfactor
without changing the map
Hello Everone,
Thanks for all the help. The key to finding the problem was following up on
Tim Gruene's suggestion to compare the data sets directly. It appears that an
error occurred during conversion from I to F - until I find the log file for
the conversion, I can't guess what was done.
Hello Everyone
I have two data sets, from the same crystal form (space group P32) of the same
protein, collected at 100 K at SSRL, about 2.2 A resolution, that refining to R
= 0.14, Rf = 0.26 (refmac/TLS). This is a molecular replacement solution, from
a model with about 40% homology (after
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Sue,
if you made your rmsd (bonds) 20-30 times smaller I would agree they
were not too loose. 0.14A is pretty high. So two suggestions:
a) check the molprobity report of your PDB if its geometry is sane
b) check the CC plot of one data set
too)
and see if it gives better refinement results.
Cheers,
Robbie
-Original Message-
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of
Roberts, Sue A - (suer)
Sent: Wednesday, June 26, 2013 17:45
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [ccp4bb] R too low?
Hello
