Correct, this special NMR issue of NSMB does not have any pdfs for
some reason.
The presubmission manuscript can be downloaded from
my site: http://atbweb.stanford.edu/scripts/papers.php?sendfile=162
On Nov 18, 2008, at 8:26 PM, Kantardjieff, Katherine wrote:
In regards to the reference below,
In regards to the reference below, it does not appear to be in the online
archive of NSMB... Those pages are mysteriously missing between volumes 10 and
11.
>
>
You might find this review useful:
X-ray Crystallography and NMR: Complementary Views of
Structure and Dynamics, Nature Structural Bi
Robbie,
Thanks, this looks like it was pretty close to what I was looking for.
Pete
R.P. Joosten wrote:
> Hi Pete,
>
> Well, with Yasara NMR (not freeware) you can render all the distance
> constraints and colour them by violation. If you are really interested,
> I can ask one of the NMR guys h
> dipolar couplings (NMR). But even then one should always look at the
> structure model in the context of the experimental data. High
Is there an easy way to do this for NMR data? For x-ray data, it's
relatively straightforward to re-calculate a map using the deposited
model and amplitudes, whic
IL PROTECTED]>>
*Date: *November 15, 2008 9:51:36 AM EST
*To: *Boaz Shaanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED] <mailto:[EMAIL PROTECTED]>>
*Subject: **Re: [ccp4bb] X-Ray versus NMR Structure*
Boaz:
I have always and still fee that this paper is a landmark, because it
shows that neither the
Begin forwarded message:
From: "Charles W. Carter Jr." <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: November 15, 2008 9:51:36 AM EST
To: Boaz Shaanan <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] X-Ray versus NMR Structure
Boaz:
I have always and still fee that this paper is a landmark, b
Dear All,
> RMSD of ensemble of NMR structures can be interpreted as the
> uncertainty of coordinates. Core residues of NMR structures have
> smaller RMSDs in a similar way that core residues of crystal
> structures have relatively smaller B-factors compared to surface
> residues.
The problem with
You might find this review useful:
X-ray Crystallography and NMR: Complementary Views of
Structure and Dynamics, Nature Structural Biology 4, 862-865 (1997).
The pre-publication manuscript is available on my website,
publication section.
Axel Brunger
On Nov 14, 2008, at 3:13 PM, Boaz Shaanan
oops, I forgot to give the reference:
Science (1992), vol. 257, p. 961
Boaz
- Original Message -
From: Young-Tae Lee <[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, November 14, 2008 23:57
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] X-Ray versus NMR Structure
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Here are s
t;[EMAIL PROTECTED]>
Date: Friday, November 14, 2008 23:57
Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] X-Ray versus NMR Structure
To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK
> Here are some of my thoughts and I was also seeking good
> references
> pointing out systematic comparison of X-ray and NMR approaches.
>
Here are some of my thoughts and I was also seeking good references
pointing out systematic comparison of X-ray and NMR approaches.
Both X-ray and NMR structures are models calculated from experimental
data. Therefore coordinates from both structures have uncertainty and
are inevitably some
How about this one:
Can't
Refine
Your
Structure
To
Acceptable
Likelihood
Typical error bars on crystallographic data are ~5% (R_sym), but with
very few exceptions the models in the PDB do not fit their corresponding
observations to better than ~40% error (R_cryst for intensities).
Gerard? W
> I've noticed that
> several papers describe NMR structures as "atomic resolution
> structures" and I'm just wondering what people think of this.
I think that "atomic resolution" is one of those terms which mean
different things to different people. There are clearly two groups
among crystal
Hi David:
I haven't read all my email yet so apologize if this has already been
mentioned, but Fred Allain and Gabriele Varani did something along
these lines specifically for nucleic acids (RNA):
F.H.T. Allain and G. Varani. How Accurately and Precisely can RNA
Structure be determined by
I think we should slowly arrive in the 21st century and realize that
methods are complementary to each other.
I've never done NMR by myself only some xray stuff and attempts to
merge EM data with xray almost 10 years ago to arrive at ab initio
phases.
Sure one can argue what information can y
Dear Tassos, Bernhard and David,
If I may push this humourous response (obviously tainted with
crystallographic bias) a little further, I would say that my favourite
mnemonic for the acronym "NMR" is
N eeds
M or
But there is a more fundamental difference. Crystallography determines the
positions (more or less accurate) whereas NMR measures distances between
certain atoms. NMR is local, 1-dimensinal information that -with enough data-
can be used to generate a three dimensional model compatible with it,
although I agree with the statement below, I would say that X-ray
crystallography also only generates a molecular model (not "a
structure"). Rather than a structure, X-ray crystallography generates
an electron density map. The quality of the model based in it depends
on the quality of this
Since I don't like attachments, I will first iterate the title of the
attached publication:
"Traditional Biomolecular Structure Determination by NMR Spectroscopy
Allows for Major Errors "
It immediately reminded me of an older one (ehm .. one author in
common!), addressed at that time mos
Dear all,
Does anyone know of a good published reference that describes the pros
and cons of X-ray versus NMR structure determination. Something
specific to nucleic acids would even be better. I've noticed that
several papers describe NMR structures as "atomic resolution
structures" and I
20 matches
Mail list logo
