Send your manuscripts to any of the IUCr journals! Might still get the occasional referee like that, but the editors should ignore those comments. plus you'd be supporting a scientific society [sorry for the advert...]
Mark J van Raaij Dpto de Estructura de Macromoleculas Centro Nacional de Biotecnologia - CSIC calle Darwin 3 E-28049 Madrid, Spain tel. (+34) 91 585 4616 http://wwwuser.cnb.csic.es/~mjvanraaij Section Editor of Acta Crystallographica F, Structural Biology Communications http://journals.iucr.org/f/ > On 16 Apr 2019, at 22:29, Diana Tomchick <diana.tomch...@utsouthwestern.edu> > wrote: > > Ah, even though it seems a long time ago, approximately one out of every two > referee comments that I receive complain about our modern methods for > processing, scaling and reporting our data collection/processing/refinement > statistics. I’m afraid it’s an ongoing effort at education. > > Diana > > ************************************************** > Diana R. Tomchick > Professor > Departments of Biophysics and Biochemistry > UT Southwestern Medical Center > 5323 Harry Hines Blvd. > Rm. ND10.214A > Dallas, TX 75390-8816 > diana.tomch...@utsouthwestern.edu <mailto:diana.tomch...@utsouthwestern.edu> > (214) 645-6383 (phone) > (214) 645-6353 (fax) > > On Apr 16, 2019, at 3:09 PM, Frank von Delft <frank.vonde...@sgc.ox.ac.uk > <mailto:frank.vonde...@sgc.ox.ac.uk>> wrote: > > Jan, tell your reviewer to join us all in the 21st century. > > Diederichs and Karplus, Science, about 2 decades ago. (Technically, 2012 > <https://science.sciencemag.org/content/336/6084/1030?sid=8becd183-203a-4c7b-8c8d-815e18e15887>, > but it really is a long long time ago now.) > > > On 16/04/2019 18:06, Tim Gruene wrote: >> 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 >> <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 >>> <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1> > > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1> > > UT Southwestern > > Medical Center > > The future of medicine, today. > > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > <https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1> ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
