Re: [ccp4bb] Bug in mmCIF handling of UNK residues?

2021-02-13 Thread Philip D. Jeffrey
And if the actual residue ID is ambiguous ? UNK is exactly what you should use. There's also a distinction between getting it to work in the refinement program and having it properly annotated in PDB - e.g. I've encountered some monomer inconsistencies between Coot and Phenix. The RCSB ligand

Re: [ccp4bb] Bug in mmCIF handling of UNK residues?

2021-02-13 Thread Nicholas Larsen
I hope this doesn't confuse the discussion, but my understanding was "UNK" stood for "unknown" residue and this will cause errors. UNK naming convention is the default output of Schrodinger when generating ligand PDB files. Coot will display the PDB containing "UNK" as a residue, but if you try t

Re: [ccp4bb] Bug in mmCIF handling of UNK residues?

2021-02-13 Thread Tristan Croll
Browsing backwards through a dozen or so of the most recent UNK-containing structures, I haven't found a counter-example yet - apart from those where the UNK residues are a single contiguous stretch and given their own chain ID. So a recent problem? From: Philip

[ccp4bb] Call for papers M&M 2021

2021-02-13 Thread Giovanna Scapin
> > Dear All > > Just a kind reminder > > Deadline for abstract submission for the M&M 2021 meeting is February 18, > 2021. Information on how to submit the abstract can be found in the meeting > homepage (https://www.microscopy.org/MandM/2021/) > > Giovanna > >> >> The Microscopy & Mic