Re: [ccp4bb] just how bad can phases be and still help

- Protein crystallography

Main steps:

- Protein purification
- Crystallisation

Special:

- Programs for crystallography
- X-ray detectors

Basic tutorials:

   - Chemistry
   - Protein
   - Peptide
   - Amino Acids

Xtal community:

- CCP4BB

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 1999 <-- November 1999 <-- 30 November 1999

Previous message:
Subject: Re: MS for verification of protein constructs
From: James Whisstock James {- dot -} Whisstock {- at -} MED {- dot -} MONASH {- dot -} EDU {- dot -} AU
Date: 2007-09-05

Next message:
Subject: Re: few organophophates coordiantes
From: vijay kumar vijay_bioinfo {- at -} YAHOO {- dot -} COM
Date: 2007-09-07

Subject: Re: just how bad can phases be and still help
From: "Bryan W {- dot -} Lepore" bryanlepore {- at -} MAIL {- dot -} UTEXAS {- dot -} EDU
Date: 2007-09-07

On Thu, 6 Sep 2007, William Scott wrote:
> I think the reason it works is because the lack of closure error is
> nearly random and the signal is not

interesting notion

> Low initial FOM in many senses are good [..] because density
> modification has more latitude

my understanding was that density modification is designed to make the FOM
optimal, almost 1.0, always ; as such, the only discrimination that
density modification provides is map interpretation, and at least not the
_modified_ FOM.

-bryan

CCP4bb navigation

CCP4bb <-- 1999 <-- November 1999 <-- 30 November 1999

Next message:
Subject: Re: few organophophates coordiantes
From: vijay kumar vijay_bioinfo {- at -} YAHOO {- dot -} COM
Date: 2007-09-07