Re: [ccp4bb] High R/Rfree after MR

2017-10-13 Thread Gerard Bricogne
Dear Randy, On Fri, Oct 13, 2017 at 04:11:44PM +0100, Randy Read wrote: > Just to add to this point. The MR algorithms in Phaser are now able > to make better use of intensity data, which is particularly > important when you have any very weak data. Having weak data can’t > be avoided when you

Re: [ccp4bb] High R/Rfree after MR

2017-10-13 Thread Gianluca Cioci
Thank to all for the replies ! I have tried the UCLA server using the unmerged intensities from XDS and the verdict is strong anisotropy The Rfactors (after Phaser+Refmac) are only slightly lower for the Corrected. Non Corrected:Corrected R factor 0.3778 R

Re: [ccp4bb] High R/Rfree after MR

2017-10-13 Thread Randy Read
Just to add to this point. The MR algorithms in Phaser are now able to make better use of intensity data, which is particularly important when you have any very weak data. Having weak data can’t be avoided when you have serious anisotropy (or tNCS or a combination of the two). Unfortunately,

[ccp4bb] Problem with ref format (from Rigaku)

2017-10-13 Thread Gottfried Palm
Dear all,   this is a question about scaling data integrated in CrystalClear (Rigaku data processing gui based on d*trek) in ccp4. Since scaling dtprofit.ref files from different scans is sometimes poor or even failing within CrystalClear (i.e. with dtscaleaverage after merging them), I used to

[ccp4bb] AW: [ccp4bb] High R/Rfree after MR

2017-10-13 Thread Herman . Schreuder
Dear GIA, In addition to the anisotropy, I would also check your diffraction images and make sure that there are no (even hardly perceptible) ice rings present. Depending on how the data processing software handled this, they may cause high Rfactors in the range you mentioned. Best, Herman

Re: [ccp4bb] High R/Rfree after MR

2017-10-13 Thread vincent Chaptal
Dear Gia and Paul, about anisotropy, one point to keep in mind is that it is not necessarily linked to the difference in resolution limits. In fact I am at the moment working on one of these cases, with extremely large difference in resolution limits, but relatively low anisotropy. Anisotropy

Re: [ccp4bb] High R/Rfree after MR

2017-10-13 Thread Kay Diederichs
Gianluca, you could become an expert yourself, by trying - the UCLA anisotropy server - STARANISO with these data, and report here what the outcome in each case is - Rwork/Rfree, map appearance, ... My personal experience is that both refmac and phenix.refine deal well with moderate

Re: [ccp4bb] High R/Rfree after MR

2017-10-13 Thread Paul Miller
I had a similar problem to what you describe. In my case the dataset was severely anisotropic (2.6A, 3.4A, 4.6A in each axis). The R factors were stuck similar to yours but the map looked good. I was told by someone with a much better appreciation of the theory than myself that the anisotropy

[ccp4bb] High R/Rfree after MR

2017-10-13 Thread Gianluca Cioci
Dear All, I am trying to refine a structure at 3.3A. Model has 60% identity to the target. Maps look OK (for 3.3A) and rebuilding in Coot is relatively straightforward. However, after some rebuilding cycles the R factors are stuck at 0.37/0.39 (REFMAC). XTRIAGE tells me that everything is normal

Re: [ccp4bb] AW: [ccp4bb] C-terminal amide

2017-10-13 Thread Eleanor Dodson
You have labelled the TYC as an L-peptide in the dictionary have you? ( Look at any peptide for the position and format for the label ) I thought REFMAC would then automatically creat a peptide link between residue n and n+1 Eleanor PS and remove the TER record! On 13 October 2017 at 08:08,

[ccp4bb] AW: [ccp4bb] C-terminal amide

2017-10-13 Thread Herman . Schreuder
Hi Abhisek (and BB), I use the attached cif file. It has an NH2 residue defined as a peptide and gets automatically linked to the peptide chain in the buster procedure I use. So if your last residue is Tyr 100, you add NH2 101 as a HETATM in the peptide chain. I have not tested it with Refmac