Dear Jürgen,
Although not a phaser developer, here are some comments from my side:
Try to collect data on a many crystals as you can lay your hands on and don't
look at resolution alone. A 3.0 Å solvable data set is much more useful than a
1.7 Å unsolvable one. Also once you have figured out
Hi Jurgen,
You could send me a logfile off-list, and maybe I would spot something in there.
We’ve put some effort into putting more intelligence into the Phaser search, so
that it adapts to the initial perceived difficulty of the problem in setting
the initial parameters, and then adapts to
Hi again,
I should have mentioned that, if you have a good enough model, it’s often
possible to solve the structure in P1. The molecular replacement solution will
settle on one of the twin domains (or you may end up with more than one
solution, related by the twin law(s)). Then the symmetry
Dear Jurgen,
Thanks for your interest in DIALS - we are working hard at the moment on
testing the software and finding bugs (and fixing them!) and I would say
right now it's not quite ready for the general user, but we do plan to make
an alpha release of the software before the end of the year.
Thanks Randy,
so from your reply it seems that cutoff is differently treated. And if I
interpret your email correctly it is better to provide Phaser with a truncated
versus a full data set. I tried both cases, but I had assumed that if you
restrict the resolution within Phaser it would be the
Dear colleagues,
we are trying to find a cost-effective solution to reformat commercial
crystallisation screens from 15ml-Falcons into 1- or 2ml-deepwell blocks using
a liquid handling robot.
We have spoken to various vendors but are a bit shocked by the prices they ask
for their solutions.
The Art Robbins Scorpion has this function baked in the the operating
software. When I was shopping for liquid handling robots for
screen-making, only the Emerald Biosystems Opti-Matrix and the Scorpion
were affordable for a small lab. The Scorpion can handle more solutions
at one time.
