The cells are related. You double 2 axes, giving 4x the P2 volume (not double).
You gain a C (translational centering in the ab plane) so you have 2x the asu 
content in C2.
Pointless tells you about the space group based on the indexed reflections,
so you might want to look at the images to decide whether the P2 indexing 
simply missed a 
(commensurate) superstructure with t=~(1/2, 1/2, 0). You can probably 
distinguish
a modulation in the zonal reflections h+k=2n. 

Stuff like this happens frequently, with minimal translocations switching from 
one 
crystal form to the other. Minor changes in crystallization conditions 
(additives?)
might stabilize one or the other. 

Also note that superstructure detectability is a matter of resolution. 
Deviations from a 
perfect translational symmetry (crystallographic) to NCS (loss of the element) 
are
more significant at high resolution, where the indexing may pick up the extra
spots but not at low resolution, where the symmetry still looks (almost) 
perfect 
(or, coming from the other side, not detect merging problems and assign higher 
symmetry). The transition from crystallographic symmetry to related NCS and
vice versa is a continuous one and often hard to detect.

Best, BR

-----Original Message-----
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Markus 
Heckmann
Sent: Thursday, November 9, 2017 2:28 AM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [ccp4bb] unit cell is double between 2 forms

Dear all,
we crystallized a small protein, that gives crystals P2 with cell
Cell     53.16   65.73   72.89        90  110.94      90
(has 3 molecules in the asymmetric unit). Tested with pointless. Does not give 
any other possibility.

The other crystal form of the same protein, similar conditions:
C2
Cell     109.14  124.37   73.42        90  111.75      90. This has 6
molecules in the a.s.u. Tested with pointless. Does not give any other 
possibility.
The cell length a, b of C2 is twice that of P2.

Is it usual to get such crystals from similar conditions or am I missing 
something?

Many thanks,
Mark

Reply via email to