Yes, that's possible, assuming that one of the sidechains is rotameric and the other isn't. The rotamer will only be changed, though, if it's an improved fit to the map.<div><br></div><div>Jeff<br><br><div class="gmail_quote">
On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:54 AM, Nathaniel Echols <span dir="ltr"><<a href="mailto:nechols@lbl.gov" target="_blank">nechols@lbl.gov</a>></span> wrote:<br><blockquote class="gmail_quote" style="margin:0 0 0 .8ex;border-left:1px #ccc solid;padding-left:1ex">
<div class="im">On Thu, Jun 21, 2012 at 7:49 AM, Jeff Headd <<a href="mailto:jjheadd@lbl.gov">jjheadd@lbl.gov</a>> wrote:<br>
> It is not necessary to exclude residues when using the torsion angle NCS<br>
> restraints, even if they are in�different�rotamers. The potential used to<br>
> restrain related torsions automatically shuts off in cases where the related<br>
> torsions are sufficiently different, such as for different rotameric states.<br>
<br>
</div>One possibility here is that the sidechains forming crystal contacts<br>
are in non-rotameric conformations - in this case, wouldn't the<br>
rotamer correction try to adjust them to agree with other chains?<br>
<br>
-Nat<br>
<div class="HOEnZb"><div class="h5">_______________________________________________<br>
phenixbb mailing list<br>
<a href="mailto:phenixbb@phenix-online.org">phenixbb@phenix-online.org</a><br>
<a href="http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb" target="_blank">http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb</a><br>
</div></div></blockquote></div><br></div>