Dear Perrakis,
The R merge of the lowest resolution shell is 0.08.
The matthews' analysisi is below:
For estimated molecular weight   78750.
Nmol/asym  Matthews Coeff  %solvent       P(2.90)     P(tot)
_______________________________
  1         7.90            84.45         0.00         0.00
  2         3.95            68.89         0.06         0.04
  3         2.63            53.34         0.69         0.62
  4         1.98            37.78         0.25         0.33
  5         1.58            22.23         0.00         0.00
  6         1.32             6.67         0.00         0.00
Do you mean that it is possible that there is only 2 molecules in the ASU?

I have also performed a 4.5 SF with Molrep. The log file is pasted as below:
  Number of RF peaks :      10
             theta    phi     chi    alpha    beta   gamma      Rf
Rf/sigma
 Sol_RF   1     0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.1101E+06
10.89
 Sol_RF   2     0.00    0.00   30.00   30.00    0.00    0.00    0.3374E+05
3.34
 Sol_RF   3    90.00  -68.59  179.99    0.00  180.00  -42.83    0.2630E+05
2.60
 Sol_RF   4   148.78   30.00  179.98   30.00  -62.44  150.00     7709.
0.76
 Sol_RF   5   117.57   30.00  179.99   30.00 -124.86  150.00     6042.
0.60
 Sol_RF   6    56.28   60.00  179.98   60.00 -112.56  120.00     5925.
0.59
 Sol_RF   7    90.00  -60.00   90.00   30.00  -90.00  -30.00     5917.
0.59
 Sol_RF   8    90.00  -30.00   60.94   60.00  -60.94  -60.00     5485.
0.54
 Sol_RF   9   135.89 -165.91  179.98   14.09   88.22  165.91     5424.
0.54
 Sol_RF  10   138.31 -169.98  179.99   10.02   83.38  169.98     5249.
0.52

I think the SF function indicate that there are three molecules in the ASU.
Am i right?

Thansk and best wishes.

On Wed, Jul 15, 2009 at 2:27 PM, Anastassis Perrakis <a.perra...@nki.nl>wrote:

> Hi all -
> On 15 Jul 2009, at 7:03, Lijun Liu wrote:
>
> Hello dear Wei,
>
> 1) Your dataset has a high overall Rmerge.  The outmost shell (70%) is very
> high, which suggests a need to shrink resolution.  What about I/s(I),
> redundancy and completeness?  Also, how many reflections (percentage) have
> been subjected to rejection?  Too many rejections may mean a SG error.
>
>
> 70% Rmerge alone in the outer shell, can indeed be reasonable for such high
> symmetry, depending on e.g. redundancy and what Lijun also mentions. I would
> be more interested in the low resolution Rmerge to be able to have an
> opinion about the dataset ...
>
>
> 2) Software analyses including Phenix.xtriage give good suggestions, but
> they should be used reasonably.  P6n22 could be twinned from P6n or P3n12 or
> P3n21 or even P3n, when close to be perfectly twinned.
>
>
> Correct, but phenix.xtriage as well as Pointless, will still pick up
> possible twining even if you have merged data to P6n. Still, its best to
> integrate the data to P1, which is always perfectly legitimate, and then run
> one of these programs to get the likelihood of the correct space group,
> and consider twining.
>
> 3) Please try a little more analyses of the cell shape and A.U. shape (very
> long in your case), with Matthews' coefficient analyses, you may get more
> hints about packing and SG.
>
>
> Indeed, for example keep in mind that for 2.9 A resolution from a good
> beamline, you might have a solvent content of 70%, quite easily.
>
> 4) Try to find one molecule first in such a big A.U.  [Automatic scripts
> have a higher chance to fail than a smart manual scrip (very personal)].
>
>
> Here I do disagree, since I found that automated scripts
> are explicitly more useful in the case of multiple copies, and smarter than
> (my) old manual scripts. The reason is that they are likely to keep a lot of
> initial solutions for the first molecule, and then look for the second based
> on these many possibilities for the first, and so on, which can be very
> powerful.
>
> 5) Use a lower resolution ~4-5 Å data to do a better self rotation
> function.  Why do not paste a .ps plot for the SR peaks.
>
>
> Using low resolution for SF is a good idea, 5-6 is also nice. But please do
> not send us any attachments at the BB ;-)
>
> A.
>
>
>
> Good luck.
>
> Lijun
>
> On Jul 14, 2009, at 4:23 AM, Wei Zhang wrote:
>
> Dears,
> I am doing molecular replacement of a protein complex with a P622 data set
> with large cell parameters (a=b=135, c=480). The data set seems well. R
> merge is 0.17 for all and 0.70 for the last shell of 2.9 angstrom. I am not
> sure it is a complex in the crystal. Phenix analysis reveal there is no
> twin. The proposed protein complex is about 70 kDa with a larger subunit of
> 50 kDa and a small subunit of 20 kDa. The matthews analysis indicates that
> there might be 3 complexes in the ASU. The structure of the 50 kDa subunit
> is known while the 20 kDa one is unknown. But molecular replacement failed
> with either Phaser or Molrep.
> Self-rotation with CNS reported the result as below:
>  ! index, psi, phi, kappa, RF-function ( 0.25)
>  1     0.000   0.000 180.000   29.7217
> Self-ratation with Molrep reported the result as below:
>   Number of RF peaks :      30
>              theta    phi     chi    alpha    beta   gamma      Rf
> Rf/sigma
>  Sol_RF   1     0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.00    0.3444E+05
> 17.13
>  Sol_RF   2    90.00  -80.07  179.99    0.00  180.00  -19.86     5061.
> 2.52
>  Sol_RF   3    90.00  -65.53  179.99    0.00  180.00  -48.94     4890.
> 2.43
>  Sol_RF   4    90.00  -76.12  179.99    0.00  180.00  -27.76     4722.
> 2.35
>  Sol_RF   5    11.42   90.00   61.00   30.00   11.53   30.00     2438.
> 1.21
>  Sol_RF   6   164.38   60.00  179.99   60.00  -31.24  120.00     1850.
> 0.92
>  Sol_RF   7    85.13 -141.54  179.97   38.32 -170.26  141.40     1805.
> 0.90
>  Sol_RF   8    90.00  -60.00   90.00   30.00  -90.00  -30.00     1764.
> 0.88
>  Sol_RF   9    84.07 -144.87  179.96   34.98 -168.15  144.73     1743.
> 0.87
>  Sol_RF  10    72.25  -60.00   89.30   46.76  -84.03  -13.24     1665.
> 0.83
>  Sol_RF  11   138.24 -130.77  180.00   49.23   83.52  130.77     1608.
> 0.80
>  Sol_RF  12   170.36   30.00  179.99   30.00  -19.28  150.00     1590.
> 0.79
>  Sol_RF  13    82.04   60.00  179.99   60.00 -164.07  120.00     1571.
> 0.78
>  Sol_RF  14   141.01   30.00  179.99   30.00  -77.99  150.00     1554.
> 0.77
>  Sol_RF  15   123.63 -155.38  179.98   24.62  112.74  155.38     1517.
> 0.75
>  Sol_RF  16   148.80   30.00  179.99   30.00  -62.39  150.00     1450.
> 0.72
>  Sol_RF  17   142.61   30.00  180.00   30.00  -74.78  150.00     1439.
> 0.72
>  Sol_RF  18    72.25 -150.00  179.99   30.00 -144.50  150.00     1422.
> 0.71
>  Sol_RF  19    47.42 -120.00  179.98   60.00  -94.83  120.00     1417.
> 0.71
>  Sol_RF  20   153.12   30.00  179.98   30.00  -53.75  150.00     1292.
> 0.64
>  Sol_RF  21   155.99   30.00  179.98   30.00  -48.01  150.00     1274.
> 0.63
>  Sol_RF  22   138.05   30.00  179.99   30.00  -83.91  150.00     1258.
> 0.63
>  Sol_RF  23    54.12  120.00   89.15   60.00   69.32    0.00     1254.
> 0.62
>  Sol_RF  24   129.04 -136.48  179.99   43.52  101.93  136.48     1193.
> 0.59
>  Sol_RF  25   138.65 -164.29  179.99   15.71   82.69  164.29     1185.
> 0.59
>  Sol_RF  26    84.16   51.37  179.98   51.37 -168.32  128.63     1176.
> 0.59
>  Sol_RF  27    90.00  150.00   59.82   60.00   59.82  -60.00     1162.
> 0.58
>  Sol_RF  28    43.66 -133.74  179.98   46.26  -87.31  133.74     1161.
> 0.58
>  Sol_RF  29   127.85 -169.33  179.99   10.67  104.29  169.33     1153.
> 0.57
>  Sol_RF  30   124.15   30.00  179.99   30.00 -111.71  150.00     1147.
> 0.57
>
> My question is:
> 1. For a 70 kDa protein compelx, is it common to have such a large cell
> with a dimention as long as 480 angstrom?
> 2. Is it possible that the longest dimention of cell is doubled? If it is,
> how to divide it?
> 3. How to interpret the self-rotation results. The results from CNS and
> Molrep differs so much.
> 4. Any other suggestions on the molecular replacement are appraciated.
>
> Thanks.
>
> Wei Zhang
> PKU
>
>
>
> Lijun Liu, PhD
> Institute of Molecular Biology
> Department of Physics
> University of Oregon
> Eugene, OR 97403
> 541-346-5176
> http://www.uoregon.edu/~liulj/ <http://www.uoregon.edu/%7Eliulj/>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>
>

Reply via email to