Re: [ccp4bb] practical limits of MR?

Protein crystallography Programs for crystallography X-ray detectors
Basic tutorials:
Protein Peptide

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 2007 <-- March 2007 <-- 05 March 2007

Previous message:
Subject: Re: Problems in MR
From: Leo Chavas leo {- at -} PFWEIS {- dot -} KEK {- dot -} JP
Date: 2007-03-05

Next message:
Subject: Re: practical limits of MR?
From: Nat Echols echols {- at -} UCLINK {- dot -} BERKELEY {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2007-03-05

Subject: Re: practical limits of MR?
From: William Scott wgscott {- at -} CHEMISTRY {- dot -} UCSC {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2007-03-05

We just solved a 142 nucleotide asymmetric unit of a novel
ribozyme structure using only A-form RNA helical fragments and phaser. I'm
trying to find some time to write the paper but the basic idea is sketched
out in the supplementary material to the paper that comes out March 16th
in Science.

I was fairly stunned that it worked. I was trying to get a low-res mask
to aid in finding 22 Br atoms (which we never used, except to confirm the
trace after the fact). Although there were 2 molecules in the asymmetric
unit, they differ radically and no 2-fold symmetry could be used to help.

Bill

On Mon, 5 Mar 2007, Nat Echols wrote:

I had a debate with a coworker about using MR in desperation and I'm
curious what the most extreme case is where a very different model was used
to solve a structure. This could be highest RMSD, lowest % identity, or
most incomplete model. I'm also curious whether homology modelling has
ever been useful for this. (I'm pretty sure I've come across papers
discussing this last concept.)

thanks,
Nat

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 2007 <-- March 2007 <-- 05 March 2007

Previous message:
Subject: Re: Problems in MR
From: Leo Chavas leo {- at -} PFWEIS {- dot -} KEK {- dot -} JP
Date: 2007-03-05

Next message:
Subject: Re: practical limits of MR?
From: Nat Echols echols {- at -} UCLINK {- dot -} BERKELEY {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2007-03-05