e used later on to locate heavy atom sites by difference
> Fourier methods and you can also combine with experimental phases in
> non-optimal cases
>
> Best,
> Debanu.
>
> From: CCP4 bulletin board [CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of Zhih
cule in the asymmetric unit?
>
> Determined from the Matthews Coefficient (poor), size exclusion column
> (better), or self RF (best) ?
>
>
> On Nov 7, 2013, at 8:36 AM, Zhihong Yu wrote:
>
> > Hi, all
> >
> > I'm a rookie in resolving a brand new structur
Costakes, Ph.D.
> Department of Structural Biology
> Purdue University
> Hockmeyer Hall, Room 320
> 240 S. Martin Jischke Drive, West Lafayette, IN 47907
>
>
> --------
>
>
> ---
Hi, all
I'm a rookie in resolving a brand new structure. I have some questions for
my current case and look forward to some suggestions.
Now I’m working on a protein like this:
N-ter(55aa)—domainA(110aa)—linker(30aa)—domainB(150aa)—C-ter(20aa), I got a
diffraction data just to 3.5Å, and there is
Matthew & Nat,
Thanks very much, your answers made me much clear about the map
manipulating, as well as usage of Refmac and FFT. Just from my results, I
think I agree with Nat that "Sigma" and "Weight" is unnecessary when running
FFT based on a Refmac-resulted mtz file, since my "A1.map" is exactl
into how the programmer wrote their program to know what is going on.
> For now, I suggest you just use coot map which is more realistic to
> me. Also new version of pymol seems to work better.
>
> On Fri, Jan 7, 2011 at 1:42 PM, Zhihong Yu wrote:
> > Hi,all
> >
> >
Hi,all
I refined a protein-ligand complex structure using Refmac5 and got the map
coefficient "A.mtz" file. I want to represent the electron density in Pymol,
so I transformed "A.mtz" into "A.map" ccp4-format map file using FFT in
ccp4i (parameters are: generate "simple" map in "CCP4" format to co
