In new version (it should be in ccp4 6.2.0, if not then it will come ccp4 6.3, otherwise you can take it from York's web site: ) TPO as well as SEP are peptides.
Break in coot may be due to misinterpretation of SEP or TPO as peptide in coot and it may be because of older version of the dictionary. Do the distances, angles between neighbouring residues make sence? If not then refinement also had problems regards Garib On 22 Mar 2012, at 00:39, Joel Tyndall wrote: > As a follow up question the bulletin board, why is SEP a peptide (L-peptide) > and TPO not (non-polymer)? > > Joel > > _________________________________ > Joel Tyndall, PhD > > Senior Lecturer in Medicinal Chemistry > National School of Pharmacy > University of Otago > PO Box 56 Dunedin 9054 > New Zealand > Skype: jtyndall > http://www.researcherid.com/rid/C-2803-2008 > Pukeka Matua > Te Kura Taiwhanga Putaiao > Te Whare Wananga o Otago > Pouaka Poutapeta 56 Otepoti 9054 > Aotearoa > > Ph / Waea +64 3 4797293 > Fax / Waeawhakaahua +64 3 4797034 > > From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Rajesh > kumar > Sent: Thursday, 22 March 2012 12:00 p.m. > To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: [ccp4bb] refining phosphorylated residues > > Dear All, > > I have a structure of a protein and peptide complex, in which peptide has > modified residues ( phosphoserine and phosphothreonine). > During refinement these both gets disconnected with adjacent residues and > its hard to connect them. > Could you please suggest me some options. > > Thanks > Rajesh Garib N Murshudov Structural Studies Division MRC Laboratory of Molecular Biology Hills Road Cambridge CB2 0QH UK Email: ga...@mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk Web http://www.mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk
