Hello everyone
sorry for the intervention with some basic questions regarding twinning
In continuation with the discussion with Liang i would like to ask a
question which i faced..i have also solved a structure and the statistics
depending on twin laws as described through xtriage, phenix is as f
Woops! Sorry. I was thinking Rpim, which is always lower than Rmerge.
Rmeas is always higher, and more correctly estimates the
infinite-multiplicity Rmerge.
Sorry for the confusion, and thanks for the many reminders I just got
about the definition!
-James Holton
MAD Scientist
On 3/29/201
To support James Holton, MAD Scientist
From the very far past:
In 60's we have estimated X-ray diffraction data by eyes, using strips of
intensities made with propagating exposure factor increase of 2 (I guess in F
it corresponds to sqrt(2)~=1.4).
We have used to estimate our Weissenberg diffra
Ahh. But what I'm saying is that Rmeas is not a replacement for
Rmerge because Rmeas is _always_ lower than Rmerge. It is even less
useful that a low-multiplicity Rmerge for evaluating the
diffractometer.
I fully realize that Rmeas does have the desirable property of being
"flatter" with respect
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Hi James,
you misquote me: I was saying that Rmeas should be replacing Rmerge,
and I guess everything you say holds for Rmeas, too, but still it is a
better statistical quantity than Rmerge. So please replace Rmerge with
Rmeas.
Best,
Tim
On 03/29/20
I must disagree with Tim on the statement "Rmerge should not be
published anymore". That would be a shame. Perhaps even a crime.
When Uli Arndt introduced Rmerge he was in no way, shape or form
proposing that it be used for resolution cutoffs, or anything else
about the quality of the "structure
As mentioned lots of reasons for this.
a. Poor crystal
b. Poor mount of the crystal
c. Poor equipment or non-working equipment
d. Poor maintenance of good equipment
e. Improper cryoprotection
f. Vibration or movement of goniometer, goniometer head, mounting pin, mounting
loop, magnet, etc
g. Temp
There's a second side to that.
Reviewers who can't get enough data and request even more when you submit a
decent paper with 18 pages of supplement for example.
Jürgen
On Mar 29, 2013, at 7:32 AM, Toufic El Arnaout wrote:
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0053374
-BEGIN PGP SIGNED MESSAGE-
Hash: SHA1
Dear Hamid,
the statistics for I/sigI and the R-value per resolution shell would
shed more light than the overall values.
Judging from the Rmerge in the high resolution shell the data may have
been processed by somebody who still thinks Rmerge <= 30%
Without seeing the raw data and watching the integration of frames, I
would be suspicious of an incorrect space group assignment with an
Rmerge > 0.10. Are image spots well-predicted by the integration program
(all spots have predictions, all predictions have spots)? Are the spots
well-resolved
Dear CCP4BB Members,
I am interested in your expert comments/opinions about two values
of a protein crystal diffraction data. Basically I am new to this field and do
not have much idea about diffraction data interpretation and crystallography
software’s use.
1)
What could be the possib
http://www.plosone.org/article/info:doi%2F10.1371%2Fjournal.pone.0053374
On Fri, Mar 29, 2013 at 4:09 AM, Eric Bennett wrote:
> Scott,
>
> I'm not sure I understand your last paragraph. Once researchers have had
> their data pass peer review (which I interpret as meaning a journal has
> accept
12 matches
Mail list logo
