Today, after 6 years in circulation, John Tesmer kindly informed me
about a labelling error in BMC figure 6-17
http://www.ruppweb.org/Garland/gallery/Ch6/pages/Biomolecular_Crystallograph
y_Fig_6-17.htm
I think the reason that nobody has noticed it until now is perhaps (in
addition to the fac
Is there some way to apply NCS restraints to the binding pose of a ligand
during refmac refinement?
That is, suppose I have 3 copies of the binding site and the density in
each copy is OK but not great. I would be more confident of a refined
pose that jointly satisfied the electron density at all
Hi Ethan,
DM with a mask of the ligand in chain A then applying the NCS matrices and
looking at the resulting density perhaps ?
Theoretically it should improve, this is of course assuming that your ligand
does not adopt different conformations in the three chains.
In Refmac you can also add a NCS
On Saturday, 31 January, 2015 00:51:08 Jurgen Bosch wrote:
> Hi Ethan,
> DM with a mask of the ligand in chain A then applying the NCS matrices and
> looking at the resulting density perhaps ?
Real-space refinement is not the issue.
That can be done easily in Coot by calculating an NCS-averaged m
Include the ligand residue in the NCS restraint-group to which the surrounding
protein residues belong?
On 01/30/2015 08:24 PM, Ethan A Merritt wrote:
On Saturday, 31 January, 2015 00:51:08 Jurgen Bosch wrote:
> Hi Ethan,
> DM with a mask of the ligand in chain A then applying the NCS matri
