I would say try to get better crystals and data, and also do a MAD experiment. 
But...perfect twins are really hard, I think. Maybe vary the crystallization 
conditions a bit, additive screen, seeding, etc.

JPK

-----Original Message-----
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of RHYS 
GRINTER
Sent: Tuesday, December 16, 2014 10:37 AM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] P31 or P32

Hi Eleanor,

The data is perfectly twinned, with the original auto processing assigning a 
point group of P312,  but I reprocessed it in P3 and it seems to be behaving 
okay.
Are there any additional precautions I should take at the phasing stage with 
twinned data?

BW

Rhys
________________________________________
From: CCP4 bulletin board [CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Eleanor Dodson 
[eleanor.dod...@york.ac.uk]
Sent: 16 December 2014 15:13
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] P31 or P32

Sorry - of course it can.. Sorry.
 Only if the twinning is perfect then you apparently get a higher symmetry..
Eleanor

On 16 December 2014 at 14:26, Tim Gruene 
<t...@shelx.uni-ac.gwdg.de<mailto:t...@shelx.uni-ac.gwdg.de>> wrote:
Dear Rhys,

I would try to place idealised secondary structure elements with coot into the 
density - at this resolution they probably fit both hands, but you may see a 
difference when you do e.g. rigid body refinement.

Best,
Tim

On 12/16/2014 10:39 AM, RHYS GRINTER wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> This will no doubt show something of my ignorance with experimental phasing, 
> however I'm currently working on solving a 3.8A SAD dataset with Pt anomalous 
> signal. Both Shelx and Xtriage see reasonable anomalous signal to about 7A 
> and seem to get  statistics suggesting a solution when I run SAD phasing 
> using Autosol in Phenix. After density modification I get pretty nice looking 
> maps with clear solvent channels and interconnected density for protein, 
> however there is very little difference in map R-factor between the hands and 
> the maps from both the P31 and P32 solution appear comparable in structure.
> Obviously DM is struggling to break the hand ambiguity, however can some one 
> tell me if what I'm seeing represents a definite solution? And what is the 
> best way to proceed from here?
>
> Cheers,
>
> Rhys
>

--
Dr Tim Gruene
Institut fuer anorganische Chemie
Tammannstr. 4
D-37077 Goettingen

GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A

Reply via email to