- phenixbb - phenix-online.org

18 Days to the deadline: Please apply for RapiData 2013, a course on Data Collection and Structure Solving at the NSLS.
by Robert Sweet 17 Jan '13

17 Jan '13

We are offering RapiData 2013, the fifteenth offering of our popular course: Rapid Data Collection and Structure Solving at the NSLS: A Practical Course in Macromolecular X-Ray Diffraction Measurement The course will be held 21-26 April 2013: http://www.bnl.gov/RapiData/. Students could be at any level from advanced undergraduate to full professor. The course should accommodate 48 students total. We encourage all students to bring their own specimens for data collection, and to bring old data for the data-reduction and structure-solving tutorials. Please read the Course Announcement at http://www.bnl.gov/RapiData/. You'll see that many experts in the field will be available for lectures and tutorials. You'll find the application materials on the Course Application tab at this site. For the eleventh time we will hold a short lecture course on the fundamentals of crystallography for roughly five hours on Sunday 21 April. The body of the RapiData course really requires that students have a healthy knowledge of crystallography. For potential students who have some experience but are shaky about fundamentals, this course will help. There will be a small additional fee for the fundamentals course, to pay for Saturday night accomodations and food on Sunday morning and noon. Latin American Scientists: Several scholarships are available, from the International Union of Crystallography, to pay partial travel and subsistence costs for Latin-American students and junior faculty (under 40 yrs). Please apply for the course, and then contact R. Sweet (sweet(a)bnl.gov) if you are interested in applying for a scholarship. In accordance with the standards of the International Union of Crystallography, we observe the basic policy of non-discrimination, affirming the right and freedom of scientists to associate in international scientific activity without regard to such factors as citizenship, religion, creed, political stance, ethnic origin, race, colour, language, age, or gender, in accordance with the Statutes of the International Council for Science. At this course no barriers will exist beyond the application procedure that would prevent the participation of bona fide scientists. Please apply or send your students to our course, Bob Sweet, Sonya Kiss, and Alex Soares Course Announcement at http://www.bnl.gov/RapiData/ ========================================================================= Robert M. Sweet E-Dress: sweet(a)bnl.gov Group Leader, PXRR: Macromolecular ^ (that's L Crystallography Research Resource at NSLS not 1) http://px.nsls.bnl.gov/ Photon Sciences and Biology Dept Mail Stop, Bldg 463 Brookhaven Nat'l Lab. Phones: Upton, NY 11973 631 344 3401 (Office) U.S.A. 631 344 2741 (Facsimile) =========================================================================

1 0

how to modify C-D bond length restraints in phenix?
by Maxime Cuypers 17 Jan '13

17 Jan '13

Hi, i am refining a perdeuterated neutron structure and have noticed a lot of positive density aside the D atoms on aliphatic and aromatic side chains. just in the alignment of C-D bonds (C-D then +), suggesting that phenix.refine constraints these bond lengths too short in my case. i tried automatic weights for geometry refinement and unrestrained specific C-D refinement but it is not satisfactory. then i found the following funny distances (angströms) in the pdb database neutron structures: 3KYX: program: Phenix.refine D-prot Distances: C-D aromatics = 0.93-0.94 C-D aliph. = 0.98 1CQ2 Program : xplor3.1 D-protein (despite the atoms being labelled as H according to abstract) Distances: C-D aromatics = 1.06-1.08 C-D aliph. = 1.08 4FC1 H-protein Distances: program: Phenix.refine C-H aromatics = 0.93 C-H aliph. = 0.97 1VCX H-protein program: CNS Distances: C-H aromatics = 1.06-1.10 C-H aliph. = 1.09 those neutron C-D/C-H bond lengths in pdb seem pretty much inconsistentto me. So it seems that phenix.refine uses C-D/ C-H bonds restrains that are different to other programs to below 1.0 Ang. ( ca. 0.10 A differences) how can i change the restraints to make it all longer bond lengths for C-D only? with a .cif file? i saw that phenix uses the CCP4 monomer library but the one in : /usr/local/phenix-.../chem_data/mon_lib/list only seem to be applying modifications. any clue on how to specifically modify the restraints parameters on C-D bonds would be very appreciated. Thanks, Maxime

2 4

Macromolecular Crystallography School announcement : 2013 in Uruguay
by Alejandro Buschiazzo 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce the *second Macromolecular Crystallography School 2013 *at the Institut Pasteur de Montevideo (Uruguay). All details can be found at www.pasteur.edu.uy/mx2013 <http://www.pasteur.edu.uy/mx2013> *Title:* "Macromolecular Crystallography School 2013: From data processing to structure refinement and beyond" *Dates:*April 9th-17th, 2013. *Site:*Institut Pasteur de Montevideo (Montevideo), Uruguay *The workshop content:* Conceived to provide theoretical background and hands-on abilities in the use of computational tools to exploit X ray diffraction data. Through lectures, tutorials and hands-on trouble-shooting, the students will be trained in state-of-the-art macromolecular crystallography. Particular emphasis will be given to data processing, phasing/structure determination and model refinement/validation. The workshop will feature authors and experts of many modern crystallographic software packages. This workshop represents the continuation within the series started in 2010 (http://www.pasteur.edu.uy/mxcourse) on Macromolecular Crystallography. In this opportunity it is being co-organized by the Center for Structural Biology of the Mercosur CeBEM (www.cebem.org.ar <http://www.cebem.org.ar>), jointly with the Collaborative Computational Project Number 4 (CCP4 -- UK www.ccp4.ac.uk <http://www.ccp4.ac.uk>). Support from the Institut Pasteur International Network, the International Union of Crystallography and Institut Pasteur de Montevideo is also greatly acknowledged. *Applicants:* Graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and young scientists are encouraged to apply. Only 20 applicants will be selected for participation. Participants of the workshop are strongly encouraged to bring their own problem data sets so they can be used during the workshop's hands-on sessions. There is no registration fee. Support for accommodation, per diem and local transportation will be provided to all participants from abroad. Support to cover travel expenses will be considered on a case-by-case basis. Specific requests should be well-grounded as we will only be able to select a limited number. *Application:* Application *deadline is February 10, 2013*. Application form, the program, contact info and other details can be found at www.pasteur.edu.uy/mx2013 <http://www.pasteur.edu.uy/mx2013> Please address further inquiries to mx2013(a)pasteur.edu.uy <mailto:[email protected]> Ronan Keegan and Alejandro Buschiazzo -- Alejandro Buschiazzo, PhD Research Scientist Unit of Protein Crystallography Institut Pasteur de Montevideo Mataojo 2020 Montevideo 11400 URUGUAY Phone: +598 25220910 int. 120 Fax: +598 25224185 http://www.pasteur.edu.uy/pxf

5 14

Heavy atoms outside of molecule
by Brennan Bonnet 16 Jan '13

16 Jan '13

Hi all, Is there an option in Phenix that will fix the heavy atom positions so that they are at their equivalent positions within the molecule? Thanks Brennan

2 3

P3 pseudotranslation
by Ethayathulla A.S 15 Jan '13

15 Jan '13

Hello I am trying to solve a structure with P3 Pseudotranslation at 3.5A. The 3.5 dataset have cell of 150,150,200 and 5A dataset have smaller cell 150,150, 100. The data can be scaled in P321, p3221,p3121 with similar rsym (6 (54). Pointless gave me Spacegroups as P3221 or P3121 as soln. I tried Phenix.xtriage it showed me 40% Pseudotranslation peak ( 0,0,0.5) for 3.5A dataset as the c-axis is double that of 5A data. According to cell content analysis it can be dimer in 3.5A and monomer for 5A dataset. So I tried MR with both datasets with homology model build using similar fold protein. I got solns for dimer with LLGs with 1000's in P3221,P3121,P321 with 3.5A dataset. There were 28 solutions ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ SOLU SET RFZ=2.0 TFZ=8.2 PAK=0 LLG=259 TFZ==11.3 LLG=1181 TFZ==28.4 ( SOLU SPAC P 32 2 1) SOLU 6DIM ENSE partial EULER 94.4 2.7 25.5 FRAC -0.07 -1.07 -0.81 BFAC -1.00 Solution #2 annotation (history): SOLU SET RFZ=2.0 TFZ=8.2 PAK=0 LLG=225 LLG=1066 ( SOLU SPAC P 31 2 1) +++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ So I refined the solns. of P3221, p321 it refined to 44/54 after that it doesn’t go down. The 0.5 Pseudotranslated molecule can been as symmetry molecule along c-axis. The packing looks very good. I have attached the image of it with native patt map. I deleted one monomer and refined to check the solution I could see clearly see the other molecule. I could see 2n+1 odd reflections to be weak. To check whether two fold can be due to twinning due to pseudotranslation I could not observe it. So I tried to see check whether the it can be P32 merohedral twinning with pseudotranslation with twinning of 0.36 (h,-h-k,-l) from yeates server. I try to use the dimer of P3212 and try for alternative spacegroup which yield me unique soln in P32. I refined the molecule four molecule which yielded me 46/49 and when I apply twinning fraction the r-factor decreases to 40/45. Similarly for 4.5A dataset I used dimer of 3.4 dataset dimer which yield me solution in P32 but cannot refine it gets struck for 45/50.I tried to use the dimer with 5A dataset I get unique solu and refine with merohedral twinning the r/freeR goes to 38/57. How I can check whether it is P32 merohedral twinning with Pseudotranslated or P3221. Also the patterson analysis another peak of height 4% ( 0.050, 0.102, 0.495 ) : 4.452 . Is it significant ? Any suggestion will be helpful Thank you Abdul ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ Patterson analyses from phenix.xtriage Frac. coord. : 0.000 0.000 0.500 Distance to origin : 103.157 Height (origin=100) : 40.427 p_value(height) : 2.740e-04 The full list of Patterson peaks is: x y z height p-value(height) ( 0.000, 0.000, 0.500 ) : 40.427 (2.740e-04) ( 0.050, 0.102, 0.495 ) : 4.452 (9.782e-01) ++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++ -- *********************************************** Dr. A.S. Ethayathulla Dept of biophysics AIIMS, new delhi ***********************************************

2 1

fwd: Annual CCP4 summer school in USA, at APS, June 18-26
by Nathaniel Echols 15 Jan '13

15 Jan '13

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Ruslan Sanishvili (Nukri)" <nukri(a)aps.anl.gov> To: phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org Cc: Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 17:46:48 -0600 (CST) Subject: Annual CCP4 summer school in USA, at APS, June 18-26 Dear Colleagues, We are pleased to announce the sixth annual CCP4 summer school at Advanced Photon Source (APS), Argonne National Laboratory (ANL). All details can be found at http://www.ccp4.ac.uk/schools/APS-2013/index.php Title: "CCP4 school: From data collection to structure refinement and beyond" Dates: June 18 to 26. Site: Advanced Photon Source, Argonne National Laboratory, Argonne, Illinois (Near Chicago), USA The school content: Data collection workshop the first two days: beamline training and data collection on GM/CA-CAT beamlines 23ID-B and 23ID-D. For data collection, only the participants' crystals will be used. Software workshop: The rest of the time after data collection will feature many modern crystallographic software packages taught by authors and other experts. It will be organized in three Sections – lectures, tutorials and hands-on trouble-shooting. There will be model data sets available for tutorials but data, provided by participants, will have higher priority for the hands-on sessions. Applicants: Graduate students, postdoctoral researchers and young scientists at the assistant professor level are encouraged to apply. Only 20 applicants will be selected for participation. Participants of the workshop are strongly encouraged to bring their own problem data sets or crystals so the problems can be addressed during data collection workshop and/or hands-on sessions. Application: Application deadline is April 5. The application form, the program, contact info and other details can be found at http: http://www.ccp4.ac.uk/schools/APS-2013/index.php Fees: There is no fee for the workshop. The students will be responsible for their transportation and lodging. The workshop organizers will arrange economical lodging at the Argonne Guest House. The workshop will also cover the expenses for all meals and refreshments. Garib, Ronan and Nukri Ruslan Sanishvili (Nukri) Macromolecular Crystallographer GM/CA@APS X-ray Science Division, ANL 9700 S. Cass Ave. Argonne, IL 60439 Tel: (630)252-0665 Fax: (630)252-0667 rsanishvili(a)anl.gov

1 0

Ligand building/refinement woes
by Machius, Mischa Christian 15 Jan '13

15 Jan '13

I seem to be having the hardest time building/refining NADPH (PDB code NAP). When fetching this common ligand from within coot, Phenix (1.81-1168) subsequently does not seem to accept it and bombs noting all kinds of violations. When I have Phenix automatically build NAP into the density, it does place NAP (albeit completely out of otherwise quite nice density). When I then take the coordinates, read them into coot together with the CIF that Phenix writes into the ligand_build directory, placing and refinement in coot works well, but subsequent refinement in Phenix, using the very same CIF, again bombs. Since hydrogens are often an issue when going from coot to Phenix I remove them before running Refine. I have also tried just refining the coordinates as they came out of ligand_build. But Phenix still bombs and doesn't seem to accept its own CIF. I would have thought that a ligand as common as NAP wouldn't require a lot of gymnastics, perhaps not even reading CIF information, and that it would go all automatically.That's probably too optimistic on my part. It's probably something silly, but I can't figure out what it is. Any ideas? Many thanks in advance, MM

3 4

Fwd: WCPCW21
by Nathaniel Echols 15 Jan '13

15 Jan '13

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Williams, John Charles" <jwilliams(a)coh.org> To: "PHENIX user mailing list" <phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org> Cc: Date: Mon, 14 Jan 2013 10:29:12 -0800 Subject: WCPCW21 Dear All, The West Coast Protein Crystallography Workshop is rapidly approaching. The standard rates close Jan 21st. Also, we are now able to accept credit cards. Due to IT security issues, the CC number needs to be called in to Ariadna Bello, senior secretary in Dept of Molecular Medicine, City of Hope. Finally, please submit your abstracts as soon as possible as we will start to select oral presentations. Best, John

1 0

Electron Density
by CPMAS Chen 15 Jan '13

15 Jan '13

Thanks, Nat, If the density level(map or coefficient) of phenix is not an absolute level, then I really do not need to worry what shows up by coot. I used the Fourier map generated by phenix, .mtz file. Thanks! 6. density level (CPMAS Chen) > 7. Re: density level (Nathaniel Echols) > 9. Re: density level (Pavel Afonine) > > > > ------------------------------ > > > Message: 7 > Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 12:21:00 -0800 > From: Nathaniel Echols <nechols(a)lbl.gov> > To: PHENIX user mailing list <phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org> > Subject: Re: [phenixbb] density level > Message-ID: > <CALeAa1Mty9= > U-CFcmhJ1ZRWAiuXMeOS0RHVT4YtXpOVBO0EDyQ(a)mail.gmail.com> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1 > > On Sun, Jan 13, 2013 at 11:38 AM, CPMAS Chen <cpmasmit(a)gmail.com> wrote: > > I recently updated my old phenix-1.6.4-486 to phenix-dev-1266. To my > > surprise, the absolute electron density on the 2Fo-Fc map is quite > > different. > > The electron density maps (or coefficients) generated by Phenix are > not on an absolute scale, and the values displayed by Coot are more or > less irrelevant. The scaling method changed significantly between > 1.6.4 and 1.8, so I'm not surprised that the map levels did too. > > > By the way, is there a simple way to keep only F and SIGF column of the > > autoxds generated truncate.mtz via phenix? the GUI does not allow to > reduce > > columns. I normally use IMEAN and SIGIMEAN to do refinement, but this may > > not be necessary as it is pointed in the maillist, since the intensity is > > already transformed to amplitude after truncation in autoxds. > > > > I can specify labels by xray_data.labels = "F, SIGF", but apparently > phenix > > treats it as containing anomalous data. the following is extracted from > the > > refine pdb file > > > > MIN(FOBS/SIGMA_FOBS) : 1.16 > > REMARK 3 COMPLETENESS FOR RANGE (%) : 97.11 > > REMARK 3 NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS : 143207 > > REMARK 3 NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS (NON-ANOMALOUS) : 73247 > > > > Also, in the auto generated def file, > > xray_data.labels = "F, SIGF, DANO, SIGDANO" > > This is intentional - why would you want to throw out information? > However, you can always use either the reflection file editor (in the > latest builds) or the French & Wilson GUI to convert IMEAN to F. > > > -Nat > > > > > ------------------------------ > > Message: 9 > Date: Sun, 13 Jan 2013 21:19:17 -0800 > From: Pavel Afonine <pafonine(a)lbl.gov> > To: PHENIX user mailing list <phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org> > Subject: Re: [phenixbb] density level > Message-ID: <50F39555.8000000(a)lbl.gov> > Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"; Format="flowed" > > Hi, > > what kind of file you use to see the map in Coot: Fourier map > coefficients (MTZ file) or actual map (CCP4 binary formatted file with > the map)? I need to know this before offering a first guess on what may > be the reason for this. > > Pavel > > On 1/13/13 11:38 AM, CPMAS Chen wrote: > > Dear PhenixBBer, > > > > I recently updated my old phenix-1.6.4-486 to phenix-dev-1266. To > > my surprise, the absolute electron density on the 2Fo-Fc map is quite > > different. > > > > https://www.dropbox.com/s/prs0z8ayb73kg9k/Screenshot_sigma.png > > > > At the same sigma level(1.5), the absolute density of the violet map > > is 0.32e/A^3 (phenix-dev-1266), while that of the blue map is > > 0.01e/A^3(phenix-1.6.4-486). Besides the different phenix used, there > > is no other difference on the data and model used. > > > > Sam encountered a similar problem on the density. > > > > http://phenix-online.org/pipermail/phenixbb/2012-December/019226.html > > > > By the way, is there a simple way to keep only F and SIGF column of > > the autoxds generated truncate.mtz via phenix? the GUI does not allow > > to reduce columns. I normally use IMEAN and SIGIMEAN to do refinement, > > but this may not be necessary as it is pointed in the maillist, since > > the intensity is already transformed to amplitude after truncation in > > autoxds. > > > > I can specify labels by xray_data.labels = "F, SIGF", but apparently > > phenix treats it as containing anomalous data. the following is > > extracted from the refine pdb file > > > > MIN(FOBS/SIGMA_FOBS) : 1.16 > > REMARK 3 COMPLETENESS FOR RANGE (%) : 97.11 > > REMARK 3 NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS : 143207 > > REMARK 3 NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS (NON-ANOMALOUS) : 73247 > > > > Also, in the auto generated def file, > > xray_data.labels = "F, SIGF, DANO, SIGDANO" > > > > Or there is a work round for this issue? > > > > Thanks! > > > > -- > > > > *************************************************** > > > > Charles Chen > > > > Research Associate > > > > University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine > > > > Department of Anesthesiology > > > > ****************************************************** > > > > > > > > _______________________________________________ > > phenixbb mailing list > > phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org > > http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb > >

1 0

density level
by CPMAS Chen 14 Jan '13

14 Jan '13

Dear PhenixBBer, I recently updated my old phenix-1.6.4-486 to phenix-dev-1266. To my surprise, the absolute electron density on the 2Fo-Fc map is quite different. https://www.dropbox.com/s/prs0z8ayb73kg9k/Screenshot_sigma.png At the same sigma level(1.5), the absolute density of the violet map is 0.32e/A^3 (phenix-dev-1266), while that of the blue map is 0.01e/A^3(phenix-1.6.4-486). Besides the different phenix used, there is no other difference on the data and model used. Sam encountered a similar problem on the density. http://phenix-online.org/pipermail/phenixbb/2012-December/019226.html By the way, is there a simple way to keep only F and SIGF column of the autoxds generated truncate.mtz via phenix? the GUI does not allow to reduce columns. I normally use IMEAN and SIGIMEAN to do refinement, but this may not be necessary as it is pointed in the maillist, since the intensity is already transformed to amplitude after truncation in autoxds. I can specify labels by xray_data.labels = "F, SIGF", but apparently phenix treats it as containing anomalous data. the following is extracted from the refine pdb file MIN(FOBS/SIGMA_FOBS) : 1.16 REMARK 3 COMPLETENESS FOR RANGE (%) : 97.11 REMARK 3 NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS : 143207 REMARK 3 NUMBER OF REFLECTIONS (NON-ANOMALOUS) : 73247 Also, in the auto generated def file, xray_data.labels = "F, SIGF, DANO, SIGDANO" Or there is a work round for this issue? Thanks! -- *************************************************** Charles Chen Research Associate University of Pittsburgh School of Medicine Department of Anesthesiology ******************************************************

3 2