I fully agree. Unfortunately, not everyone does that so cases like I described will keep appearing.
Cheers,
Robbie
On 30 May 2020 16:40, Eleanor Dodson <eleanor.dod...@york.ac.uk> wrote:
My pennysworth. If you find your maps look better after the anisotroy correction use it, but it may be helpful to those wo want to mine your data if you deposit the whole sphere..eleanorOn Sat, 30 May 2020 at 09:36, Robbie Joosten <robbie_joos...@hotmail.com> wrote:Hi Everyone,
I've been looking at some recent PDB entries that have much lower spherical) completeness than reported in the coordinate file. One reason for this is that the data were anisotropicly truncated, another reason is some mess-up with the deposition of the reflection data. There is a lot of discussion about the former practice and I don't want to go in to that, but the second one is obviously an error. Now how do I distinguish these cases?
Sometimes, you can look at the reported number of reflections and compare that to the deposited reflection file and you will find that something has clearly gone wrong. However, the reported number of reflections is not entirely reliable because of other issues so I'd rather not use it. If you use PDBpeep (e.g. for 6rjy) you can see something is wrong, but that is completely visual. Is there a tool in CCP4 that reports both spherical and ellipsoidal completeness (on merged reflection data)? That would make it easy to distinguish such cases.
Cheers,
Robbie
########################################################################
To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
This message was issued to members of www.jiscmail.ac.uk/CCP4BB, a mailing list hosted by www.jiscmail.ac.uk, terms & conditions are available at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/
To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1
