Maybe something to do with the SCALE tag?
Minglei
> On Jul 6, 2015, at 11:02 PM, Jens Kaiser wrote:
>
> Eleanor,
> Thanks for the suggestion. I changed atom numbers to 1 and 2 and
> residue numbers to 1 and 2. The behavior is identical.
>
> Thanks!
>
> Jens
>
> On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 06:48
Eleanor,
Thanks for the suggestion. I changed atom numbers to 1 and 2 and
residue numbers to 1 and 2. The behavior is identical.
Thanks!
Jens
On Tue, 2015-07-07 at 06:48 +0100, Eleanor Dodson wrote:
> I wonder if this is due to the late residue number. Could you try
> again reducing that to so
I wonder if this is due to the late residue number. Could you try again
reducing that to something smaller. I seem to remember SFALL stores a flag
to recall which residue contributed to which density and there could be a
limit on its size.
Will test when I get near a working system
Eleanor
On 6 J
Dear All,
I would like to co-crystallise short cyclic peptides ~10 residues with
viral particles. I am not quite trust about the quality of the peptide that
I am using now. Do you have any good peptide manufacturer to recommend? Any
successful story (paper) can I refer to? Thanks.
Best wishes,
hk
Yamei
You should ask questions about Phenix on the PhenixBB
http://www.phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb.
You problem arises because you also need to supply the data_link.cif (most
likely file name).
Contact me directly if you need more help.
Cheers
Nigel
---
Nigel W. Moriarty
Build
All,
We seem to have stumbled upon a problem in sfall. The two attached pdb
files are nearly identical, except the coordinates and b-factors for the
two atoms are swapped. When calculating Fs with sfall, we get
drastically different mtz files. Upon calculating the corresponding
Fcalc maps, it see
Dear Eric Karg,
if you want to cut the resolution by only a few tenth of A, it is
sufficient to simply cut the resolution, e.g. within the refinement
program. If the data you want to exclude are quite some part of the
data, e.g. 30% or more, I would probably reprocess and rescale to be on
the safe
Thank you for all your comments! I think it would be great to have the "paired
refinement" implemented in future updates of refinement programs.
Coming back to my original questions: if I have overestimated the high
resolution cutoff, what is the correct procedure to refine against lower
resol
Hi Rhys,
Just to add onto Herman's suggestions: filling space with waters/atoms is actually what Arp-wArp is doing in the process of building the model. Perhaps you could also try that?
Cheers,
Boaz
Boaz Shaanan, Ph.D.
Dept. of Li
Dear Rhys,
what you are trying to do is at the edge of what is possible and you may, or
may not succeed. It will also depend on the percentage solvent in your
crystals. The more solvent, the better the chances. What I would do is to
automatically add a lot of water, to fill features of the unkn
Hi All,
I recently obtained a molecular replacement solution for a 100kDa protein
I'm working on, using an ensemble of low sequence identity models for
around 1/4 of the protein into 2.6A data. I got initial Tfz scores of
around 8.2 (LLG of 100 or so), which I improved to 14 (LLG 350) which
manual
11 matches
Mail list logo
