Dear Farhan,
Your dataset does not seem to be that critically anisotropic to me. But of 
course, try the STARANISO server and make your own decision.
To me, the dataset seems to be collected with a suboptimal data strategy. 
Although I do not know your setup, I would make the crystal-to-detector 
distance shorter next time. Or maybe rotate a bit more with the crystal? I do 
not know the details.
And now, to the point of the resolution. The optimal approach is to try paired 
refinement, or even better - paired refinement with the complete 
cross-validation protocol. This can be done using program PAIREF that is easy 
to be installed to your CCP4 installation by the following commands:

ccp4-python -m ensurepip --user
ccp4-python -m pip install pairef --no-deps --upgrade --user

The easiest way to use PAIREF is via GUI. Use the following command:

ccp4-python -m pairef --gui

To know more about the program and about the protocol, please read further.
The original work: 
https://journals.iucr.org/m/issues/2020/04/00/mf5044/index.html
Upgrade for PHENIX users: 
https://scripts.iucr.org/cgi-bin/paper?S2053230X21006129

We organized a webinar about the PAIREF about a half year ago. We even made a 
video from that. The video covers a short introduction to paired refinement, 
installation of PAIREF, and running a test case.

The link for the webinar is here: 
https://pairef.fjfi.cvut.cz/dokuwiki/doku.php?id=webinar_2021-03
Direct link to the video: 
https://pairef.fjfi.cvut.cz/docs/pairef_poli_webinar/PAIREF_webinar_23Mar2021_.mp4

I would not care about low data completeness in case when PAIREF shows 
improvement of your model. From my point of view, you have the ideal starting 
point. Start with the resolution of 1.8AA and verify, whether the higher shells 
improve your model. I hope you will be able to make the best decision, good 
luck! ;-) And do not hesitate to ask me for more details about PAIREF.
Best regards,
Petr


________________________________________
From: CCP4 bulletin board <CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK> on behalf of Tushar R. 
<rtusha...@gmail.com>
Sent: Saturday, September 11, 2021 6:46:32 PM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] criteria to set resolution limit

Along with the paper mentioned by Rajiv, you could look at this paper as well 
which discusses a major shift in the understanding of data quality from 
I/sig(I) based to CC1/2 based indicators.

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC4684713/

Hope this helps.

All the best.

Best,
Tushar.



On Sat, 11 Sep 2021, 09:36 Rajiv gandhi.s, 
<raji....@gmail.com<mailto:raji....@gmail.com>> wrote:
Dear Chang,
One need to set resolution cut off, to have a meaningful data without losing 
high resolution data and keeping data integrity. Some key quality indicators 
like I/Sigma I,  CC 1/2 and Rpim etc., at outer most shell need to be 
considered.  What was the CC 1/2 value in outer shell ?

Please refer to the below paper.
How good are my data and what is the resolution
Assessing and maximizing data quality in macromolecular crystallograph

On Sat, 11 Sep 2021, 9:52 pm Tao-Hsin Chang, 
<taohsin.ch...@gmail.com<mailto:taohsin.ch...@gmail.com>> wrote:
Hi Farhan,

It looks like that your diffraction data has an anisotropic issue and it leads 
to the issues of resolution limit, intensity, and completeness. Check The 
STARANISO Server (https://staraniso.globalphasing.org/cgi-bin/staraniso.cgi). 
It may be useful for your case.

Best wishes,
Tao-Hsin

On Sep 11, 2021, at 11:55 AM, Syed Farhan Ali 
<alifarhan...@gmail.com<mailto:alifarhan...@gmail.com>> wrote:

Dear All,

I have query regarding one of my dataset. I am running aimless by keeping 
highest resolution 1.62 A and getting  I/SigI = 2 but data completeness is 
around 22 in outermost shell. And if I am increasing the resolution cutoff up 
to 1.8 A then I/SigI is 6.2 and completeness is 82.4.
I have attached the screenshot of the result.
What should be the criteria to set the resolution limit?  Should I stick to  
I/SigI  or I have to consider about the completeness of data.
And if completeness is also a guiding factor than how much minimum completeness 
I can keep in the higher resolution shell.





Regards,
Farhan




________________________________

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

<Screenshot 2021-09-11 at 8.43.25 PM.png><screenshot1.6.tiff>


________________________________

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

________________________________

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

________________________________

To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link:
https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/WA-JISC.exe?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1

########################################################################

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/

Reply via email to