January 2010 - phenixbb - phenix-online.org

Can PHENIX write the peak list to a PDB file?
by Joe Krahn 04 Dec '10

04 Dec '10

PHENIX has an option to find positive and negative peaks, but only lists them in the log file along with the residue they are closest to. Is it possible to write out the actual peak coordinates, such as to a PDB file? Thanks, Joe Krahn

5 7

Bad ligand parameters
by Joe Krahn 21 Oct '10

21 Oct '10

I found that residue TRS has different dihedral target angles for the three hydroxyl oxygens, which are actually all equivalent. They have a periodicity of 1, but should have a periodicity of 3. What is the best way to handle such discrepancies? Most ligand parameters are probably auto-generated based on a reference structure, and there is probably a lot of conformation bias. In this case, it seems that parameterization should have been able to detect symmetry. It would be nice if parameters could include information about whether a human has done any validation. Actually, a ligand Wiki might be nice, where people can easily put comments, even if they are not sure about how to improve the parameters. Joe Krahn

9 13

Re: [phenixbb] phenix.automr ensemble/component question
by Thomas C. Terwilliger 23 Jul '10

23 Jul '10

Hi Scott, Your first command looks good to me. It is saying that the composition of the crystal is 2 copies of each chain: component_1.component_copies=2 component_2.component_copies=2 and you want to search for 2 copies of each of your search models: ensemble_1.copies_to_find=2 ensemble_2.copies_to_find=2 All the best, Tom T > Hi Phenixers, > > I'm a bit confused about the proper syntax for my phenix.automr job. > This is probably a simple concept, but I'm running on 3 hours of sleep > as my kid was up all night, and my synapses aren't working so good. > > I expect 2 copies of my protein per AU > > My protein is composed of two domains > > I have a single PDB search model for each domain > > is either of these commands correct? > > phenix.automr data=mydata.sca \ > ensemble_1.coords=domain1.pdb \ > ensemble_1.identity=95 \ > ensemble_1.copies_to_find=2 \ > component_1.mass=40579 \ > component_1.component_copies=2 \ > ensemble_2.coords=domain2.pdb \ > ensemble_2.identity=95 \ > ensemble_2.copies_to_find=2 \ > component_2.mass=13410 \ > component_2.component_copies=2 > > > or > > > phenix.automr data=mydata.sca \ > ensemble_1.coords=domain1.pdb \ > ensemble_1.identity=95 \ > ensemble_1.copies_to_find=1 \ > component_1.mass=40579 \ > component_1.component_copies=2 \ > ensemble_2.coords=domain2.pdb \ > ensemble_2.identity=95 \ > ensemble_2.copies_to_find=1 \ > component_2.mass=13410 \ > component_2.component_copies=2 > > > essentially I'm not really using an ensemble of search models, I only > have a single PDB for each domain. So should ensemble_1.copies_to_find > and ensemble_2.copies_to_find be set to 1 or 2? > > > Thanks, > Scott > > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > Scott Classen, Ph.D. > SIBYLS Beamline 12.3.1 > http://bl1231.als.lbl.gov > Advanced Light Source > Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory > 1 Cyclotron Rd > MS6R2100 > Berkeley, CA 94720 > C) 510.206.4418 > O) 510.495.2697 > Beamline) 510.495.2134 > ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~~ > > > > > _______________________________________________ > phenixbb mailing list > phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org > http://www.phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb >

2 2

Clarification on ADPs in PDB files for TLS refinement ?
by Phil Jeffrey 27 Feb '10

27 Feb '10

Hi, Having a discussion with a colleague yesterday on differences in Phenix and Refmac representations of TLS B-factors in the PDB file I came across two different definitions for what the PDB ANISOU U's correspond to as written by Phenix: 1. From necat.chem.cornell.edu/workshops/.../WK04_PavelAfonine.pdf on p.20 U(TOTAL)= U(ATOM) + U(TLS) + U(CRYST) and only U(atom) + U(tls) is stored in the PDB ANISOU card. 2. From http://proteincrystallography.org/ccp4bb/message8948.html "Utotal = Utls + Ulocal + Ucryst. So, the ANISOU records always contain Utotal and ATOM records contain isotropic equivalent of Utotal" Which is not the same thing. I suspect it's #1. Am I right ? I would think that U(cryst) is potentially a non-zero contribution to atomic ANISOU values but is actually applied before the TLS/Anisotropic B-factors are refined. As a tie-breaker between #1 and #2 the program documentation suggest that it is just U(tls)+U(atom) but the paragraph that nominally explains it is not short of of inconsistencies, referring to the ANISOU record as having the "the total B-factor (B_tls + B_individual)" whereas they're not only not B's (they are U's) but it's also not the *total* U or B by its own definitions. IMHO it would warrant a rewrite for clarity since B and U are used interchangeably and "total" has variable usage. Phil Jeffrey Princeton

5 5

auto-open MTZ scheme
by Paul Emsley 29 Jan '10

29 Jan '10

Dear Phenixers, Prompted by Randy Read, Kevin and I have agreed that Coot should be able to auto-open MTZ files with columns labelled groupname.F_phi.F and groupname.F_phi.phi and groupname.DF_phi.DF, groupname.DF_phi.phi for difference maps for any value of groupname, of course. (Any weights should be applied to Fs before writing the file). We were wondering what the Phenix community/developers thought about that idea (there's not much point in adding this feature if you don't agree). Thanks, Paul.

5 7

For your consideration: Table 1
by SIPPEL,KATHERINE H 29 Jan '10

29 Jan '10

Dear PHENIX programmers, I would like to preface this comment by saying that I love your suite of programs. I have converted to a 100% PHENIX fan girl and am dragging the rest of my lab down with me. I realize that you have a lot on your plates right now, what with all the bug fixes, updates, and bulletin board troubleshooting that you do. I am also primarily a biologist and have no comprehension of the effort required to keep everything running, but I do have a suggestion/request. I was putting the finishing touched on the first draft of a manuscript today and thought to myself, wouldn't it me wonderful if PHENIX could generate that all important crystallographic Table 1. You know the one that I am talking about with the data and refinement statistics. I am thinking a combination of PDB_EXTRACT and MOLEMAN where you input the log files from scaling and refinement and it outputs a handy-dandy test file with "parameter<tab>number that could easily be imported into your favorite spreadsheet (Open Office or Excel). I envision an interface with check boxes for the parameters you want to include and a place were you could input the resid of ligands for atom and b-factor counts. Like I said it is just a suggestion, in case you find yourselves bored and with time on your hands. Thanks for your time, Katherine -- SIPPEL,KATHERINE H Ph. D. candidate McKenna Lab Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology College of Medicine University of Florida

3 2

phenix.pdbtools and anomalous?
by Kay Diederichs 28 Jan '10

28 Jan '10

Hi, I like the way I can obtain Fcalc with phenix.pdbtools --f-model. However I need to have the anomalous signal as well, for certain atoms, and a given wavelength. This does not seem to be possible with phenix.pdbtools. Is there a way to do this with phenix.refine ? thanks, Kay -- Kay Diederichs http://strucbio.biologie.uni-konstanz.de email: Kay.Diederichs(a)uni-konstanz.de Tel +49 7531 88 4049 Fax 3183 Fachbereich Biologie, Universität Konstanz, Box M647, D-78457 Konstanz This e-mail is digitally signed. If your e-mail client does not have the necessary capabilities, just ignore the attached signature "smime.p7s".

2 2

Re: [phenixbb] refinement with alternative molecules?
by Su-Chang Lin 28 Jan '10

28 Jan '10

Hi Ralf, I've done the refinement with alt. conf.. The occupancy is 0.58 for Mol A, 0.42 for Mol B. The maps look OK. R-factors drops a little bit. Before when I put Mol A in that region for refinement, I saw additional densities (a helix) for Mol B. When I put Mol B in the region for refinement, I saw additional densities (loops) for Mol A. Now with alt. conf. there are no additional densities. Can I use the occupancies for publication? Or do I need to do/check something else? Thanks! Su-Chang > Hi Su-Chang, > > I will try to refine the structure without NCS restraints. > I'd be interested to know how it goes, although I'm too busy to get > into the NCS code right now. > If the resolution is low I'd think it is better to use NCS, without > alt. conf. The mismatches you saw between related molcules may > be pure artifacts. But trying is better than guessing! > Ralf > _______________________________________________ > phenixbb mailing list > phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org > http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb

3 2

new release of IL MILIONE
by Dritan Siliqi 28 Jan '10

28 Jan '10

1 0

Using LigandFit to identify unknown density
by Katya Heldwein 28 Jan '10

28 Jan '10

Hi, I'd like to run LigandFit to identify a small molecule accounting for an unknown density. How do I do that, preferably, in a command-line mode? Katya -- Ekaterina Heldwein, Ph.D. Assistant Professor Department of Molecular Biology and Microbiology Tufts University School of Medicine 136 Harrison Ave Boston, MA 02111 phone: 617-636-0858 fax: 617-636-0337 e-mail: katya.heldwein(a)tufts.edu

5 8