>
>
> I've never looked at this statistics before, so I'm a bit surprised
>
So am I !
> - I was expecting a larger discrepancy between Wilson B and average B at
> low resolution. Although this is probably because PHENIX uses Peter Zwart's
> likelihood-based Wilson B estimation (Peter - what's th
Hi Dirk,
this seems to be the case indeed (*):
Resolution_range Wilson_B Average_B Number_of_structures
0.00 - 1.00 9.77 13.11 94
1.00 - 1.25 10.58 16.44 401
1.25 - 1.50 13.50 19.14 1050
1.50 - 1.75 17.20 21.76 3600
1
Dear Murugan,
at higher resolution, the Wilson plot captures mainly the contribution
of atoms with lower B-factors which leads to a systematic
underestimation of the true B-factor distribution. Accordingly, the
average B-factor of refined structures tend to be higher then the Wilson
B-factor
Usually, this means that the linear fit of a straight line to the
automatically-selected "good" region of your Wilson plot produced a
slope that was ... well. wrong.
Have a look at your Wilson plot (graph log(mean(Intensity)) vs
(0.5/d-spacing)^2) in your favorite graphing program, and then
Dear all,
If one could find a difference of more than 15 between Wilson B factor
of the data ( 55) and Mean B factor of the structure, (30) what could be the
possible reasons? I am seeing it in my structure. Could someone tell me
why it could be?? Thanks in advance.
Yours faithfully,
Murug
