I just checked a recent refmac job and it seems that in the output mtz
the Fobs has indeed changed. what's more interesting, the number of
missing reflections has changed too (disturbingly, it decreased so that
the dataset looks more complete 97.07% to 97.17% in this case).
But if the same
Message-
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:ccp...@jiscmail.ac.uk] On Behalf Of Ed
Pozharski
Sent: Tuesday, May 18, 2010 6:47 AM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] updated mtz file or original one in refmac5
I just checked a recent refmac job and it seems that in the output mtz
On Tue, 2010-05-18 at 07:03 -0700, Miller, Mitchell D. wrote:
The decrease in missing reflections are due to the fact that
the output file does not include the missing reflections that
are lower resolution than the lowest resolution observed
reflection. Thus, this file is no longer
Hello every one,
I am just starting to use refmac to do refinement. There is an mtz output file
each time. Should I use this one for further refinement or should I use the
original mtz file (the one after scaling)? Thanks.
Jay
Hi Jay
I always use the original, I only use the new one for maps
deposition of Fcalc etc. But I don't think it does any harm to use
the new one, all the info is copied over.
HTH.
Cheers
-- Ian
On Mon, May 17, 2010 at 5:25 PM, Jay Pan ccp4p...@gmail.com wrote:
Hello every one,
I am just
Hi Jay
No, don't use the new one: the F's in there have been scaled by the
overall anisotropic B-factors. (At least, they used to be, a few years
ago.)
Definitely go with the old one, every time. The output mtz has the
coefficients for the maps, that's all.
Cheers
phx.
On
