Re: [ccp4bb] FW: pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures....

2009-12-12 Thread Frederic VELLIEUX
In fact, if you want the truth, what I now do is to download the sf.cif file, use ccp4i to regenerate the MTZ (with the same Free R-factor flags that the authors have used for structure refinement). Then feed that into Phenix for a few rounds of positional and temperature factor refinement with

Re: [ccp4bb] FW: pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures....รพ

2009-12-12 Thread Robbie Joosten
Dear Fred, People have already done this for all PDB entries: - http://eds.bmc.uu.se/eds/ : maps and many crystallographic stats - http://www.cmbi.ru.nl/pdb_redo : maps and re-refinement. And yes, the stats and maps do improve most of the time, unfortunately also for structures that are not

Re: [ccp4bb] FW: pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures

2009-12-12 Thread Paula Salgado
Yes, totally agree that the good thing about it all is that the problems have been identified and the wrong data will hopefully be eliminated. Shame it took almost 10 years since the first fabricated structure was published and more then 2 since questions were first risen about this work... Paula

Re: [ccp4bb] FW: pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures....?

2009-12-12 Thread Eric Bennett
Dear Fred, People have already done this for all PDB entries: - http://eds.bmc.uu.se/eds/ : maps and many crystallographic stats - http://www.cmbi.ru.nl/pdb_redo : maps and re-refinement. And yes, the stats and maps do improve most of the time, unfortunately also for structures that are not

Re: [ccp4bb] FW: pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures

2009-12-12 Thread Joe Cockburn
I agree with Randy Read though - it's a mistake to get too carried away with the foul-play aspect of this. There were clearly very serious problems with those structures anyway. What it shows is that you can desposit just about anything in the PDB, which is quite worrying when you consider how

[ccp4bb] pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures....

2009-12-12 Thread Dyda
On Sat, 12 Dec 2009 11:58:27 +0530 Dr. Anthony Addlagatta wrote: Bernhard, I would be worried about sending the structure factors and the coordinates along with the manuscript. I wonder why? Cheers Fred

Re: [ccp4bb] pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures....

2009-12-12 Thread Bernhard Rupp
From a statistical point of view, there could be a rare bad apple reviewer as well as a rare bad apple (fraud intending) author. Life is inherently risky but we still cross streets. More important, science is based on accessibility of primary data and reproducibility of results. Without primary

Re: [ccp4bb] pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures....

2009-12-12 Thread Ezra Peisach
A number of years ago - we were asked to setup an ftp site a particular reviewer could see the coordinates... I could have looked at the logs to figure out where they were coming in from but chose not to. Some journals also allow the author to upload additional info - that would be available

Re: [ccp4bb] FW: pdb-l: Retraction of 12 Structures...

2009-12-12 Thread Robbie Joosten
Dear Eric Bennett, 3g6a was processed by PDB_REDO (without the original R-free set which sadly wasn't deposited) on Monday, 20 July 2009 at 21:35 CEST with PDB_REDO version 2.6: http://www.cmbi.ru.nl/pdb_redo/g6/3g6a/index.html That was roughly two months after the last revision (the entry is

[ccp4bb] map deposition (was: Retraction of 12 Structures...)

2009-12-12 Thread Eric Bennett
Robbie Joosten wrote: I think the deposition of maps is a waste of space. Maps may describe what the depositors paranoidwant you to think they/paranoid have looked at. But that does not mean they looked at the right thing. Who knows what they did to the maps in terms of (unwarrented) density