[phenixbb] Stalled refinement

Kay Diederichs kay.diederichs at uni-konstanz.de
Fri Apr 18 15:53:11 PDT 2014


Hi Yarrow,

of course the data quality will suffer but ultimately it depends on the 
amount of splitting - as long as the integration profile covers both 
parts then the total intensity is conserved, and recovered.

I have seen many datasets with split reflections that were usable for MR 
and refinement. But I doubt that many of these would be suitable for 
experimental phasing.

best,

Kay


Am 18.04.14 23:21, schrieb Yarrow Madrona:
> Hi Kay,
>
> Looking at the data I can see that many of the spots are actually split.
> I guess this may be causing problems in refinement if split spots are
> integrated as a single spot?
>
>
> On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 2:17 PM, Kay Diederichs
> <kay.diederichs at uni-konstanz.de <mailto:kay.diederichs at uni-konstanz.de>>
> wrote:
>
>     It is a good idea to try several data processing programs in
>     difficult cases.
>
>     BTW the latest MOSFLM can also integrate two (or more) lattices.
>
>     Pls report your results.
>
>     Kay
>
>
>     Am 18.04.14 22:59, schrieb Yarrow Madrona:
>
>         Thanks Kay,
>
>         XDS kicked out a lot of reflections. There were about 23,000
>         rejected
>         reflections out of ~ 190,000 collected. I can clearly see
>         another minor
>         lattice in many frames and I presume that the rejections are
>         coming from
>         the minor lattice that was not selected. I was thinking of
>         processing
>         with EVAL15 to see if I get better results. Thanks for your
>         help. Maybe
>         respond off-line as this is a discussion maybe more suited for
>         another
>         mailing list (CCP4?).
>
>         -Yarrow
>
>
>         On Fri, Apr 18, 2014 at 7:11 AM, Kay Diederichs
>         <kay.diederichs at uni-konstanz.__de
>         <mailto:kay.diederichs at uni-konstanz.de>
>         <mailto:kay.diederichs at uni-__konstanz.de
>         <mailto:kay.diederichs at uni-konstanz.de>>>
>
>         wrote:
>
>              Hi Yarrow,
>
>              the problem is that during structure solution, many wrong
>         paths may
>              have to be followed until finally identifying the correct path.
>
>              So the general answer to this kind of problem is: in some
>         way, your
>              parameterization of the experiment is wrong or incomplete.
>
>               From what you write, data quality does not seem to be the
>         problem.
>              But: did XDS really integrate _all_ the reflections, or only a
>              subset (say, every second reflection)?
>
>              Check out
>         http://strucbio.biologie.uni-____konstanz.de/ccp4wiki/index.____php/Refinement#what_can_go_____wrong_in_refinement.3F
>         <http://strucbio.biologie.uni-__konstanz.de/ccp4wiki/index.__php/Refinement#what_can_go___wrong_in_refinement.3F>
>
>
>         <http://strucbio.biologie.uni-__konstanz.de/ccp4wiki/index.__php/Refinement#what_can_go___wrong_in_refinement.3F
>         <http://strucbio.biologie.uni-konstanz.de/ccp4wiki/index.php/Refinement#what_can_go_wrong_in_refinement.3F>>
>
>              If, after thorough attempts, you fail to find the solution,
>         upload
>              your current model, sequence and raw data frames to a
>         Dropbox folder
>              and post the link here - there may be people who succeed in
>              processing the data nicely, or otherwise can identify the
>         problem
>              based on the data (rather than based on your description only).
>
>              HTH,
>
>              Kay
>
>              Am 18.04.14 01:25, schrieb
>         phenixbb-request at phenix-____online.org
>         <mailto:phenixbb-request at phenix-__online.org>
>              <mailto:phenixbb-request at __phenix-online.org
>         <mailto:phenixbb-request at phenix-online.org>>:
>
>
>                  Date: Thu, 17 Apr 2014 16:25:00 -0700
>                  From: Yarrow Madrona<amadrona at uci.edu
>         <mailto:amadrona at uci.edu> <mailto:amadrona at uci.edu
>         <mailto:amadrona at uci.edu>>>
>                  To: PHENIX user mailing list<phenixbb at phenix-online.____org
>                  <mailto:phenixbb at phenix-__online.org
>         <mailto:phenixbb at phenix-online.org>>>
>
>                  Subject: [phenixbb] Stalled refinement
>                  Message-ID:
>
>
>         <__CAMHjG6bPE4q1xWidpE2VwFMJ9qLS____qjtLRuLMM1ef9vWBHBfZKg at mail.____gmail.com
>         <http://gmail.com>
>
>         <mailto:CAMHjG6bPE4q1xWidpE2Vw__FMJ9qLSqjtLRuLMM1ef9vWBHBfZKg at __mail.gmail.com
>         <mailto:CAMHjG6bPE4q1xWidpE2VwFMJ9qLSqjtLRuLMM1ef9vWBHBfZKg at mail.gmail.com>>>
>
>                  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="utf-8"
>
>
>                  Hello,
>
>                  I using the latest stable build of phenx.refine (1.8.4)
>         I recently
>                  collected data, processed and obtained an MR solution using
>                  phaser. I am
>                  stuck trying to refine with an Rfree sitting at 40%
>
>                  I really want to know if the high Rfree is due to poor data
>                  quality or if
>                  non-crystallographic symmetry involving a near perfect
>         two fold
>                  rotation
>                  between the two molecules in the ASU could somehow impede
>                  refinement. Stats
>                  and other information is below. Thank you for any help
>         you can give.
>
>                  -Yarrow
>
>
>                  Visually, the quality of the data is marginal at best
>                  (streaky/ice rings in
>                  many frames) despite good processing stats from XDS.
>         Processing
>                  with mosflm
>                  or HKL2000 managed to index but failed pretty bad in
>         integration and
>                  scaling.
>
>                  Phaser gave high TFZ scores for 2 molecules in the asu
>         (see below).
>
>                  Density for a cholesterol like ligand shows up even
>         though not
>                  present in
>                  the search model.
>
>                  MolRep Self rotation shows rotational symmetry.
>         https://www.dropbox.com/s/____2zsajl5o091k50r/CYP142A2-____032814_21_rf%20copy.pdf
>         <https://www.dropbox.com/s/__2zsajl5o091k50r/CYP142A2-__032814_21_rf%20copy.pdf>
>
>
>         <https://www.dropbox.com/s/__2zsajl5o091k50r/CYP142A2-__032814_21_rf%20copy.pdf
>         <https://www.dropbox.com/s/2zsajl5o091k50r/CYP142A2-032814_21_rf%20copy.pdf>>
>
>                  The 2 molecules in the ASU are related by almost a 2
>         fold rotation:
>
>                  Rotation matrix for chain A to chain B:
>
>                  new_ncs_group
>                  rota_matrix    1.0000    0.0000    0.0000
>                  rota_matrix    0.0000    1.0000    0.0000
>                  rota_matrix    0.0000    0.0000    1.0000
>                  tran_orth     0.0000    0.0000    0.0000
>
>                  center_orth   15.2016    0.5245   33.7070
>
>                  rota_matrix   -0.9860   -0.1636   -0.0309
>                  rota_matrix   -0.1659    0.9511    0.2605
>                  rota_matrix   -0.0132    0.2620   -0.9650
>                  tran_orth      34.3310  -24.0033  107.0457
>
>                  center_orth   15.7607    7.2426   77.7512
>
>                  RMSD, B onto A = 0.0007 after phaser
>                  RMSD, B onto A = 0.347 after one round of refinement in
>         phenix
>
>
>                  Refinement using aniostropically corrected data (ucla
>         web server:
>         Services.mbi.ucla.edu/____anisoscale
>         <http://Services.mbi.ucla.edu/__anisoscale>
>                  <http://Services.mbi.ucla.edu/__anisoscale
>         <http://Services.mbi.ucla.edu/anisoscale>>) did not improve the
>
>                  Rfree in refinement.
>
>
>                  Statistics are listed below:
>
>                  UNIT CELL: 51.487 88.923 89.592 90 97.15 90 P21
>
>                  RESOLUTION     NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS    COMPLETENESS
>         R-FACTOR
>                    R-FACTOR
>                  COMPARED I/SIGMA   R-meas  CC(1/2)  Anomal  SigAno   Nano
>                       LIMIT     OBSERVED  UNIQUE  POSSIBLE     OF DATA
>         observed
>                    expected
>                                                       Corr
>
>                         5.99        8280    1927      2087       92.3%
>              3.1%
>                        3.3%
>                      8246   35.09      3.5%    99.8*    20*   0.909    1296
>                         4.30       14606    3401      3487       97.5%
>              3.3%
>                        3.5%
>                     14580   33.37      3.8%    99.9*    11*   0.843    2273
>                         3.53       17961    4244      4445       95.5%
>              3.8%
>                        3.9%
>                     17944   31.11      4.4%    99.8*    -2    0.789    2721
>                         3.06       21954    5068      5221       97.1%
>              4.9%
>                        5.1%
>                     21933   24.81      5.6%    99.7*    -2    0.780    3455
>                         2.74       25741    5830      5933       98.3%
>              7.6%
>                        7.6%
>                     25713   18.88      8.6%    99.5*    -2    0.782    4165
>                         2.51       27859    6311      6483       97.3%
>             10.8%
>                       10.8%
>                     27824   14.06     12.3%    99.1*    -2    0.774    4385
>                         2.32       31336    6979      7084       98.5%
>             14.9%
>                       15.3%
>                     31296   10.49     16.8%    98.5*    -4    0.748    5095
>                         2.17       32396    7347      7567       97.1%
>             22.3%
>                       22.7%
>                     32341    7.46     25.4%    97.3*    -7    0.728    5055
>                         2.05       32254    7339      8047       91.2%
>             33.1%
>                       33.5%
>                     32075    5.06     37.5%    94.8*    -6    0.724    5155
>                        total      212387   48446     50354       96.2%
>              7.8%
>                        7.9%
>                  211952   16.57      8.8%    99.7*    -3    0.768   33600
>
>                  Processing with mosflm or HKL2000 managed to index but
>         failed
>                  pretty bad in
>                  integration and scaling.
>
>
>                  Phaser:
>
>                  SOLU SET RFZ=27.5 TFZ=24.2 PAK=0 LLG=1711 RF++ TFZ=64.6
>         PAK=0
>                  LLG=3610
>                  LLG=4865
>                  -------------- next part --------------
>                  An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>
>         URL:<http://phenix-online.org/____pipermail/phenixbb/____attachments/20140417/e09ab4e4/____attachment.htm
>         <http://phenix-online.org/__pipermail/phenixbb/__attachments/20140417/e09ab4e4/__attachment.htm>
>
>         <http://phenix-online.org/__pipermail/phenixbb/__attachments/20140417/e09ab4e4/__attachment.htm
>         <http://phenix-online.org/pipermail/phenixbb/attachments/20140417/e09ab4e4/attachment.htm>>>
>
>                  ------------------------------
>
>
>
>
>
>     _______________________________________________
>     phenixbb mailing list
>     phenixbb at phenix-online.org <mailto:phenixbb at phenix-online.org>
>     http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
>
>

-------------- next part --------------
A non-text attachment was scrubbed...
Name: smime.p7s
Type: application/pkcs7-signature
Size: 4678 bytes
Desc: S/MIME Cryptographic Signature
URL: <http://phenix-online.org/pipermail/phenixbb/attachments/20140419/df052fa2/attachment-0001.p7s>


More information about the phenixbb mailing list