In all versions of Phaser up to the currently distributed ones, the assumed RMS
error of the model is used to generate an a priori SigmaA curve for the
likelihood target. At the end of the structure solution, the map coefficients
are computed by using those a priori SigmaA values to calculate
Here is Randy's reply:
Dear Hari,
Well, it turns out to be a combination of some bad data and a
poorly-considered feature in Phaser.
Something must have gone wrong with the data from 2.9 to 2.8A, because
the intensities are much too large. I've been developing a new
relative Wilson plot tool
Hi ,
I just switched to ccp4-6.1.3 and ran the phaser which is bundled
with the ccp4-6.1.3 release. After molecular replacement I get a
pretty good solution (TFZ 59.2) and output pdb and mtz files.
I am then looking at the maps from the phaser output mtz i.e the FWT ,
PHWT map and the FWT PHIC
Hi,
Similar problem occured even in CCP4-6.1.0 in our case. So, we used to take the
phaser output model and do rigid body refinement with REFMAC and see the density
(in coot), which normally much better than output from PHASER mtz. I am not sure
whether it is for case to case or it is general
