cognitive dissonances and the
complexities of human behavior. Topped off with a scoop of postmodernism.
Mahlzeit.
Cheers, BR
From: CCP4 bulletin board On Behalf Of Rhys Grinter
Sent: Wednesday, July 24, 2019 4:37 AM
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
Subject: [ccp4bb] Questionable Ligand Density - Part
: [ccp4bb] Questionable Ligand Density - Part 2
Hi All,
Thanks for all the helpful comments and discussion surrounding my last post.
I've been doing a little more investigation into this issue and wanted to see
if people were able to provide me with some additional opinions/insights.
Question:
While it is perhaps understandable that reviewers may not always have
sufficient information to evaluate the quality of the interpreted model
(and must trust that authors have acted in good faith in representing
omit maps, etc.), is it not reasonable to expect reviewers to comment on
Correction! I mean't 6BV0 et. al. Many apologies!!!
Thanks Paul Brear for pointing this out.
Rhys
On Wed, 24 Jul 2019 at 21:36, Rhys Grinter wrote:
> Hi All,
>
> Thanks for all the helpful comments and discussion surrounding my last
> post. I've been doing a little more investigation into this
Hi All,
Thanks for all the helpful comments and discussion surrounding my last
post. I've been doing a little more investigation into this issue and
wanted to see if people were able to provide me with some additional
opinions/insights.
I investigated the PDB entries for the lead deposition autho
