[ccp4bb] Phaser: removing H in PDB increases the RFZ ?!

2010-01-12 Thread Francois Berenger

Hello,

I have 4 molecules.
If I use Phaser's AUTO_MR with all default parameters on them,
I get the following scores:

 no_modif remove_H
molecule RFZ TFZ  RFZ TFZ
16.9 9.6  7.0 9.4
25.2 5.9  5.4 6.2
34.2 4.5  4.7 5.2
44.9 6.8  5.2 6.7

Hence, here are my existential questions, given that I heard
many times H is transparent for X-rays:
* should I always remove H before running Phaser?
* why?

Here are a few lines of one of my PDBs containing H, in case it is
misinterpreted by Phaser:
---
ATOM  6 1H   ALA A   1  18.629  -3.443  12.782  1.00  0.00 

ATOM  7 2H   ALA A   1  18.427  -2.484  13.918  1.00  0.00 

ATOM  8 3H   ALA A   1  17.496  -2.462  12.742  1.00  0.00 

ATOM  9  HA  ALA A   1  19.811  -0.866  13.013  1.00  0.00 

ATOM 10 1HB  ALA A   1  21.071  -1.469  10.982  1.00  0.00 

ATOM 11 2HB  ALA A   1  21.038  -2.809  12.152  1.00  0.00 

ATOM 12 3HB  ALA A   1  19.983  -2.852  10.720  1.00  0.00 


---

Thanks a lot,
Francois.


Re: [ccp4bb] Phaser: removing H in PDB increases the RFZ ?!

2010-01-12 Thread Eleanor Dodson

Just to avoid any problem

pdbcur xyzin X.pdb xyzout X-nohyd.pdb
DELHYD
END

Eleanor


Francois Berenger wrote:

Markus Rudolph wrote:


Hello,

long ago I had a case when HG1 etc. were interpreted as mercury by 
phaser.


Could that be relevant to your case?


I hope not.
However, as I have already seen EPMR handle some Hydrogen as Carbon,
I am ready to see anything happening! :(

I will have a quick look to see if I can make Phaser
output atom numbers from what was read from the PDB.

Regards,
F.


Regards,

Markus

On Tue, 12 Jan 2010, Francois Berenger wrote:


Hello,

I have 4 molecules.
If I use Phaser's AUTO_MR with all default parameters on them,
I get the following scores:

no_modif remove_H
molecule RFZ TFZ  RFZ TFZ
16.9 9.6  7.0 9.4
25.2 5.9  5.4 6.2
34.2 4.5  4.7 5.2
44.9 6.8  5.2 6.7

Hence, here are my existential questions, given that I heard
many times H is transparent for X-rays:
* should I always remove H before running Phaser?
* why?

Here are a few lines of one of my PDBs containing H, in case it is
misinterpreted by Phaser:
---
ATOM  6 1H   ALA A   1  18.629  -3.443  12.782  1.00  0.00 
ATOM  7 2H   ALA A   1  18.427  -2.484  13.918  1.00  0.00 
ATOM  8 3H   ALA A   1  17.496  -2.462  12.742  1.00  0.00 
ATOM  9  HA  ALA A   1  19.811  -0.866  13.013  1.00  0.00 
ATOM 10 1HB  ALA A   1  21.071  -1.469  10.982  1.00  0.00 
ATOM 11 2HB  ALA A   1  21.038  -2.809  12.152  1.00  0.00 
ATOM 12 3HB  ALA A   1  19.983  -2.852  10.720  1.00  0.00 ---


Thanks a lot,
Francois.



Re: [ccp4bb] Phaser: removing H in PDB increases the RFZ ?!

2010-01-12 Thread Ed Pozharski
The increase in RFZ is relatively small and not entirely unexpected.
While hydrogens only contribute one electron (as opposed to carbon (6),
nitrogen(7), oxygen(8) and sulfur (16)), there are many hydrogens (in
fact, almost as many as all the other atoms combined).  For instance, in
lysozyme you have (I used 3a67)

613 carbons, 193 nitrogens, 185 oxygens, 10 sulfurs and 

959 hydrogens.

Electron-wise this translates into ~13% of electrons being supplied by
hydrogens.  I certainly do not know how many hydrogens your model
contains, but from the snippet you present it seems that you may have
full set.  Also, the problem will be exacerbated by the fact that you
have B-factors of the hydrogens set to zero.  Assuming that your
non-hydrogen atoms have B-factors set to, say, 20, this will
approximately double the relative contribution of hydrogens at the
higher resolution end.  True, contribution of hydrogens is not exactly
additive, but it's probably not surprising to see roughly 5 percent
change in RFZ.  What is very interesting is that it seems to be general
*improvement*, so maybe we ought to include hydrogens when doing MR.  I
don't know if PHASER generates riding hydrogens automatically.

I think that characterize hydrogens as transparent to x-rays is
somewhat misleading.  There are plenty of examples where hydrogens are
seen in ultrahigh resolution structures.  Modern refinement programs all
use riding hydrogens and it improves models.  More precise statement is
that at not-ultrahigh (non-atomic) resolution (i.e. worse than 1.2A)
optical resolution is too low to distinguish two atoms separated by ~1A
(typical value of X-H covalent bond).

Cheers,

Ed.

On Tue, 2010-01-12 at 17:42 +0900, Francois Berenger wrote:
 Hello,
 
 I have 4 molecules.
 If I use Phaser's AUTO_MR with all default parameters on them,
 I get the following scores:
 
   no_modif remove_H
 molecule RFZ TFZ  RFZ TFZ
 16.9 9.6  7.0 9.4
 25.2 5.9  5.4 6.2
 34.2 4.5  4.7 5.2
 44.9 6.8  5.2 6.7
 
 Hence, here are my existential questions, given that I heard
 many times H is transparent for X-rays:
 * should I always remove H before running Phaser?
 * why?
 
 Here are a few lines of one of my PDBs containing H, in case it is
 misinterpreted by Phaser:
 ---
 ATOM  6 1H   ALA A   1  18.629  -3.443  12.782  1.00  0.00 
 
 ATOM  7 2H   ALA A   1  18.427  -2.484  13.918  1.00  0.00 
 
 ATOM  8 3H   ALA A   1  17.496  -2.462  12.742  1.00  0.00 
 
 ATOM  9  HA  ALA A   1  19.811  -0.866  13.013  1.00  0.00 
 
 ATOM 10 1HB  ALA A   1  21.071  -1.469  10.982  1.00  0.00 
 
 ATOM 11 2HB  ALA A   1  21.038  -2.809  12.152  1.00  0.00 
 
 ATOM 12 3HB  ALA A   1  19.983  -2.852  10.720  1.00  0.00 
 
 ---
 
 Thanks a lot,
 Francois.


-- 
Edwin Pozharski, PhD, Assistant Professor
University of Maryland, Baltimore
--
When the Way is forgotten duty and justice appear;
Then knowledge and wisdom are born along with hypocrisy.
When harmonious relationships dissolve then respect and devotion arise;
When a nation falls to chaos then loyalty and patriotism are born.
--   / Lao Tse /