Dear Jan, You statistics look quite solid.
R-factors are not good criteria to judge the resolution cut-off. The weighting schemes in refinement programs have much improved since the late 1990s. A good starting point to learn more is Rupp's "Against Method: Table 1 -Cui Bono?", https://doi.org/10.1016/j.str. 2018.04.013 Best regards, Tim On Tuesday, April 16, 2019 6:57:06 PM CEST Jan van Agthoven wrote: > Hi everyone, > I’m trying to publish two structures at 3.1Å resolution with the following > refinement statistics: > > Resolution range (Å) 49.2-3.1 > 49.3-3.1 Rfactor (%) > 24.0 (32.4) 23.4 (32.0) Rfree (%) > 26.6 (29.2) > 26.3 (31.6) > > Data collection > Completeness 100 (100) > 100 (100) > > Redundancy 6.9 (7.0) > 6.2 (6.3) > > Molecules in asymmetric unit 1 > 1 > > Average I/σ 14.1 (1.7) > 15.3 (2.0) > > Rmerge (%) 14.9 (100) > 12.7 (100) > > Rmeas (%) 16.2 (100) > 13.9 (100) > > Rsym (%) 6.2 (68.6) > 5.5 (57.1) Wilson B-factor > 65.6 62.7 > > I’ve been told that the Rfree factor in the last shell are too high. Does > anyone know how I can improve these Rfree factors other then cutting the > resolution, which already is rather low? > ######################################################################## > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 -- -- Tim Gruene Head of the Centre for X-ray Structure Analysis Faculty of Chemistry University of Vienna Phone: +43-1-4277-70202 GPG Key ID = A46BEE1A ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
signature.asc
Description: This is a digitally signed message part.
