| Quick navigation: | Home | Site Map || References | Biography || Copyright | Other copyright | Contact us | | |
|
|
Re: [ccp4bb] an over refined structure |
|
CCP4bb navigationCCP4bb <-- 2008 <-- February 2008 <-- 07 February 2008Subject: Re: an over refined structure From: Dirk Kostrewa kostrewa {- at -} LMB {- dot -} UNI-MUENCHEN {- dot -} DE Date: 2008-02-07 I'm not convinced, that thin shells are sufficient: I think, in principle, one should omit thick shells (greater than the diameter of the G-function of the molecule/assembly that is used to describe NCS- interactions in reciprocal space), and use the inner thin layer of these thick shells, because only those should be completely independent of any working set reflections. But this would be too "expensive" given the low number of observed reflections that one usually has ... However, if you don't apply NCS restraints/constraints, there is no need for any such precautions. Best regards, Dirk. Am 07.02.2008 um 16:35 schrieb Doug Ohlendorf: > It is important when using NCS that the Rfree reflections be > selected is > distributed thin resolution shells. That way application of NCS > should not > mix Rwork and Rfree sets. Normal random selection or Rfree + NCS > (especially 4x or higher) will drive Rfree down unfairly. > > Doug Ohlendorf > > -----Original Message----- > From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK] On Behalf Of > Eleanor Dodson > Sent: Tuesday, February 05, 2008 3:38 AM > To: CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK > Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] an over refined structure > > I agree that the difference in Rwork to Rfree is quite acceptable at > your resolution. You cannot/ should not use Rfactors as a criteria for > structure correctness. > As Ian points out - choosing a different Rfree set of reflections can > change Rfree a good deal. > certain NCS operators can relate reflections exactly making it hard to > get a truly independent Free R set, and there are other reasons to > make > it a blunt edged tool. > > The map is the best validator - are there blobs still not fitted? > (maybe > side chains you have placed wrongly..) Are there many positive or > negative peaks in the difference map? How well does the NCS match > the 2 > molecules? > > etc etc. > Eleanor > > George M. Sheldrick wrote: >> Dear Sun, >> >> If we take Ian's formula for the ratio of R(free) to R(work) from his >> paper Acta D56 (2000) 442-450 and make some reasonable >> approximations, >> we can reformulate it as: >> >> R(free)/R(work) = sqrt[(1+Q)/(1-Q)] with Q = 0.025pd^3(1-s) >> >> where s is the fractional solvent content, d is the resolution, p is >> the effective number of parameters refined per atom after allowing >> for >> the restraints applied, d^3 means d cubed and sqrt means square root. >> >> The difficult number to estimate is p. It would be 4 for an isotropic >> refinement without any restraints. I guess that p=1.5 might be an >> appropriate value for a typical protein refinement (giving an R- >> factor >> ratio of about 1.4 for s=0.6 and d=2.8). In that case, your R-factor >> ratio of 0.277/0.215 = 1.29 is well within the allowed range! >> >> However it should be added that this formula is almost a >> self-fulfilling prophesy. If we relax the geometric restraints we >> increase p, which then leads to a larger 'allowed' R-factor ratio! >> >> Best wishes, George >> >> >> Prof. George M. Sheldrick FRS >> Dept. Structural Chemistry, >> University of Goettingen, >> Tammannstr. 4, >> D37077 Goettingen, Germany >> Tel. +49-551-39-3021 or -3068 >> Fax. +49-551-39-2582 >> >> >> ******************************************************* Dirk Kostrewa Gene Center, A 5.07 Ludwig-Maximilians-University Feodor-Lynen-Str. 25 81377 Munich Germany Phone: +49-89-2180-76845 Fax: +49-89-2180-76999 E-mail: kostrewa@lmb.uni-muenchen.de ******************************************************* CCP4bb navigationCCP4bb <-- 2008 <-- February 2008 <-- 07 February 2008 |
| ProteinCrystallography.org: Copyright 2006-2008 by Quid United Ltd |