To follow on from this thread: To answer Jon, I did try to see if P6 subgroups were a possibility but can rule this out for a few reasons (MR doesn't give solutions, merging stats not suggestive of P6, the other dataset with the twin fraction that is significantly further from 50:50); and the d3:d3 NCS is not parallel to any crystallographic axis
The spacegroup is indeed P3 sub 2, not P321, and the solution again only possible in P3 sub 2 not P3 sub 1, so spacegroup confidence is high I did get one reply from Petrus Zwart that twin refinement / map improvement is a subject being worked on What I might try is a Phaser MR where the "missing domains" are searched for using cut out density of the one placed domain, rather than model (which could possibly be a better choice at this low resolution? Thoughts appreciated) Best wishes & thanks everyone Andy ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?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/
