- phenixbb - phenix-online.org

composite simulated annealing omit map.
by Appu kumar 18 Dec '12

18 Dec '12

Dear members, please guide me which mtz. file i should use to make composite SA omit map. Out of two mtz file which one should i consider, Initial mtz file which is an output of scalepacktomtz programme or the recent mtz file which is an output of phenix/refmac after refinement. What is the sigma level at which these map should be made.? Thanks in advance Appu

2 1

fwd: WPCPW 21
by Nathaniel Echols 14 Dec '12

14 Dec '12

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Williams, John Charles" <jwilliams(a)coh.org> To: "PHENIX user mailing list" <phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org> Cc: Date: Fri, 14 Dec 2012 13:03:49 -0800 Subject: WCPCW 21 All, Just wanted to inform you that registration for the West Coast Protein Crystallography Conference is now open. Wayne Hendrickson will be the keynote speaker! The meeting, March 17th to the 21st at the Monterey Plaza and Spa, emphasizes all aspects of protein/macromolecular methods and developments. The fees are all inclusive - registration, room, food and social hours. Please see www.wcpcw.org. Happy Holidays. Best, John

1 0

PDB header
by Eric Girard 13 Dec '12

13 Dec '12

Dear phenix users, I currently try to deposit a structure within PDBe. I discovered that the pdb header has missing information, in particular K_sol, B_sol, Wilson B, Estimate_errors, overall anisotropic B value . Is it linked to the TWIN_LSQ_F target used (Phenix version 1.8.1_1168) or to something wrong I did? How can I recover these information? Thanks for your help. Best regards. Eric. -- *************************************************************** Eric Girard Extremophiles and Large Macromolecular Assemblies (ELMA) group Institut de Biologie Structurale J.-P. Ebel UMR 5075 CEA-CNRS-UJF-PSB 41, Rue Jules Horowitz 38027 Grenoble Cedex 1, France Phone: +33 (0)4 38 78 96 45 Fax: +33 (0)4 38 78 54 94 Web site: http://www.ibs.fr/ ***************************************************************

1 0

Refinement and glycosylation.
by Jan van Agthoven 12 Dec '12

12 Dec '12

Hi everyone, I refined my structure using phenix.refine and used the following parameters to define the ASN-NAG link: refinement.pdb_interpretation.apply_cif_link { data_link = NAG-ASN residue_selection_1 = chain A and resname NAG and resseq x residue_selection_2 = chain A and resname ASN and resseq y } However I would like the glycosylation to be Beta (NAG in Beta configuration). How can I define this in the parameter file? Thanks,

2 3

pathological case with soaking
by Appu kumar 12 Dec '12

12 Dec '12

Respected members,, I have one question regarding soaking. Binding of the substrate to enzyme leads to active site closure. So if we are soaking the enzyme crystal with the substrate, and collecting the data and solving the structure, then how would one distinguish the existence of apo and substrate bound form of enzyme in same crystal. I meant to say, soaking may cause the crystal to have quasi-apo-enzyme and quasi-substrate-enzyme complex existing together. Is there any way to take care of such pathological condition during data processing, or structure solving? . I would highly appreciate your help and looking forward to get valuable advices. Please graduate me in this kind of weired situation. Thank you Appu

1 0

Re: [phenixbb] phenix and weak data
by Douglas Theobald 12 Dec '12

12 Dec '12

Hi Ed, Thanks for all the info, its very useful. So I have two questions now. What is the evidence, if any, that the exptl sigmas are actually negligible compared to fit beta (is it alluded to in Lunin 2002)? Is there somewhere in phenix output I can verify this myself? And, in comparison, how does refmac handle the exptl sigmas? Maybe this last question is more appropriate for ccp4bb, but contrasting with phenix would be helpful for me. I know there's a box, checked by default, "Use exptl sigmas to weight Xray terms". Cheers, D On Dec 10, 2012, at 1:04 PM, Ed Pozharski <epozh001(a)UMARYLAND.EDU> wrote: > On 12/06/2012 05:35 PM, Douglas Theobald wrote: > >> However, I was surprised to hear rumors that with phenix "the data are not properly weighted in refinement by incorporating observed sigmas" and such. > Douglas, > > Up to a certain point in its derivation, maximum likelihood target is > exactly the same in all implementations. Where Lunin/cctbx/phenix > approach is different is that it derives analytical expressions for > model error parameters by optimization of the maximum likelihood target > itself with respect to these. It's a clever approach, except that it > does not work unless one ignores experimental errors. > > A minimization target contains essentially a difference between > calculated and observed structural amplitudes (properly scaled etc). > For each reflection it must be properly weighted by combined > uncertainty, which includes both model error and experimental error. > Assume that former is much larger than the latter which can then be > ignored. Both errors are now combined in a single parameter (per > resolution shell, called beta), which can be calculated analytically. > Once this is done, we go back and check - and indeed, this combined > model error is larger than the experimental one. > > There are few interesting consequences of this. > > First, it seems clear that weighting every reflection in a resolution > shell the same way is a compromise. One expects less precisely measured > reflections should be weighted down. But the effect may be small. > > Second, mathematically it turns out that the target value (towards which > Fc is pushed) for some reflections should be set to exactly zero. The > cutoff is Fo<sqrt(es*beta). Quote from Lunin et al., 2002: > > "...in this case, the likelihood-based target fits the calculated > magnitude to the zero value (Fs*=0) regardless of the particular value > of Fobs." > > Third, one is tempted to interpret the beta parameter as the model > variance. The problem is sqrt(beta) ends up significantly higher than > one would expect from the R-values. This, imho, poses a bit of a problem > in light of the second issue - resetting Fs* to zero for "weak > reflections". If beta ends up overestimated for whatever reason, then > those reflections aren't that weak anymore. > > Yet, the refinement still seems to work just fine. So perhaps > overestimated model error is not a big deal in that respect. Indeed it > is not. In fact, one can multiply beta by arbitrary number, and the > relative weight applied to individual reflections in maximum likelihood > will remain roughly the same. So while it provides robust > resolution-dependent weighting, the absolute value of beta parameter is > not easily interpreted (as absolute model error). > > Hopefully all is well in sunny Waltham, > > Ed. > > -- > Oh, suddenly throwing a giraffe into a volcano to make water is crazy? > Julian, King of Lemurs > >

3 12

Postdoctoral position in crystallography of the CFTR ion channel
by Machius, Mischa Christian 12 Dec '12

12 Dec '12

On behalf of a collaborator, I'd like to bring this open position to your attention. Postdoctoral position available in the laboratory of Jack Riordan, Dept of Biochemistry and Biophysics and Cystic Fibrosis Center, University of North Carolina at Chapel Hill. To join and provide a major contribution to a team working on the production, purification and characterization of the CFTR ion channel protein for crystallization and X-ray crystallography. Required experience working with membrane proteins and lipids and/or protein crystallization. Focus will be on crystallization in meso in collaboration with experts in that technology. Contact: jack_riordan(a)med.unc.edu<mailto:[email protected]> The University of North Carolina is an equal opportunity employer. ----------------------------------------------------------------------- Mischa Machius, PhD Director, Center for Structural Biology Assoc. Professor, Dept. of Pharmacology University of North Carolina 4079 Genetic Medicine CB#7365 120 Mason Farm Road Chapel Hill, NC 27599-7365, U.S.A. tel: +1-919-843-4485 fax: +1-919-966-5640 email: machius(a)med.unc.edu<mailto:[email protected]>

1 0

SA Fo-Fc omit map
by Mengbin Chen 12 Dec '12

12 Dec '12

Dear Phenix Users, I have been playing around with Phenix AutoBuild GUI to generate a fo-fc sa omit map of the ligand in a protein structure, and I have the input files as follows: output.mtz (data type:experimental data) ligand.pdb (data type: omit box atoms & ligands) ligand.cif (data type: restraints of the ligand) protein.pdb (data type: starting model) omit map type: simulated annealing omit region: omit around PDB fie I have set the occupancies of all ligand atoms zero and deleted the ligand coordinates in my starting model. After the run finished and I checked the refined coordinates and map.mtz in COOT, I found that there was no electron density around the ligand while the protein model was in electron density, which was exactly opposite of what I wanted before. Furthermore, I have 3 Mg2+ ions in protein.pdb file, all of which moved away from where they were after the refinement run, which was not wanted either. Could anyone tell me how to do the sa omit map of ligand correctly? Thanks in advance! Mengbin -- Mengbin Chen Department of Chemistry University of Pennsylvania

2 1

Re: [phenixbb] Fwd: parameters for averaged kick maps
by Pavel Afonine 10 Dec '12

10 Dec '12

Hi Jose, kick-map related parameters in ordered_solvent scope of parameters are leftover that I forgot to remove back when I was working on it. So you can see it as a minor bug. And yes, you can't change them. Sorry about delayed answer (I saw the email on phenixbb but did note reply immediately and it sank in the flood of other stuff). Pavel On 12/10/12 11:04 AM, Jose M de Pereda wrote: > Dear Phenix Team, > > Last week I sent an e-mail to the phenixbb regarding the parameters > that control de generation of averaged kick maps. Unfortunately, I > have not received any feedback from the community. > > I wonder if you could give me some help on this subject. > > Probably, the calculation of averaged kick maps is already very well > optimized in phenix.refine and phenix.maps. Yet, I am still curious. > > Thanks a lot in advance > All the best > > Jose > > > -------- Original Message -------- > Subject: [phenixbb] parameters for averaged kick maps > Date: Tue, 04 Dec 2012 10:12:46 +0100 > From: Jose M de Pereda <pereda(a)usal.es> > Reply-To: PHENIX user mailing list <phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org> > To: PHENIX user mailing list <phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org> > > > > Dear all, > > I would like to compare averaged kick maps obtained using different “kick sizes”. > Is it possible to define the kick size and the number of kicks in phenix.refine and/or phenix.maps? > > In phenix.refine, the “ordered_solvent” section has keywords to control the generation of kick maps: > kick_map { > kick_size = 0.5 > number_of_kicks = 100 > } > But, it seems to me that these can not be used during the generation of maps or maps’ coefficients. > > Related with this issue, does phenix.refine always use the same kick > size or does it adjust it ad hoc (e.g. based on ML error estimates)? > > Thanks a lot, > Jose > > > -- > ------------------------------------------------------------ > Jose M de Pereda, PhD > Instituto de Biologia Molecular y Celular del Cancer (IBMCC) > Spanish National Research Council - University of Salamanca > Campus Unamuno s/n > E-37007 Salamanca, Spain > Phone: +34-923-294817 > Fax: +34-923-294795 > http://xtal.cicancer.org/ > ------------------------------------------------------------ > >

1 0

Simulated annealing map
by Appu kumar 10 Dec '12

10 Dec '12

Thank you Terwilliger, Thomas for you quick reply, for guiding me on how to make simulated annealing omit map. Now i am able to make it but i have one question. i want to show the SA omit map of ligand with the map of omitted region around ligand. I tried it, i got the map also, but the omitted map of region around ligand is show in recatangular box which is not as great as of ligand inside the omitted region. Thank you

2 1

Please apply for RapiData 2013, a course on Data Collection and Structure Solving at the NSLS.
by Robert Sweet 10 Dec '12

10 Dec '12

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

Real Space CC Raw Data
by Eddie Pryor 08 Dec '12

08 Dec '12

Hi, All, To satisfy a reviewer, I would like to include a supplemental figure that contains, among other things, Real Space CC for each residue. I was wondering where this raw data might be stored so that I can parse and create a graph with it. The only thing I could find was in the Refine_###_info.txt log file, but that only included values less than 0.7. I know that all of the residues / CC values can be listed through the GUI, but with ~900 residues in my ASU, this is something I do not want to do manually! Thanks! --Eddie Pryor

2 2

How to make simmulated annealing omit map
by Appu kumar 07 Dec '12

07 Dec '12

Dear Users, I am refining a enzyme structure with ligand. I want to make the simulated annealing omit map of ligand including with 4 Angestron radius around the ligand. I am seeking your valuable advice to help me out. I know how to make omit map but i have not come accross making simmulated annealing omit map. I would appreciate your help. Thank you Appu

2 1

Is this a Phaser bug or am I misinterpreting ?
by Phil Jeffrey 05 Dec '12

05 Dec '12

Phaser from CCP4 6.3.0 built via fink running on OSX 10.6.8 in 64-bit mode. This is a snippet from a much larger run, ongoing. In multiple instances the order of the LLG and the Z-score in the translation function are not in sync: (42.16, 40.23, 40.18 vs 5.14, 5.24, 4.82) and looks like the Z-scores are still shown in the peak rank order before rescoring, while the LLGs are after rescoring. SET #5 of 6 TRIAL #60 of 115 ---------------------------- Search Euler = 263.0 82.1 85.7, Ensemble = ensemb3 ANNOTATION: RFZ=3.6 TFZ=3.8 PAK=0 LLG=26 LLG=30 Known MR solutions SOLU SPAC C 1 2 1 SOLU 6DIM ENSE ensemb3 EULER 30.6 65.7 246.9 FRAC 0.90 0.00 0.17 BFAC -5.14 Grid sampling: 0.825029 Angstroms Select peaks over 67.5% of top (i.e. 0.675*(top-mean)+mean) Top 360 translations before clustering will be rescored Calculating Likelihood for TF SET #5 of 6 TRIAL #60 of 115 0% 100% |=========================================================================| DONE Scoring 1 randomly sampled translations Generating Statistics for TF SET #5 of 6 TRIAL #60 of 115 0% 100% |==| DONE Top Peaks With Clustering ------------------------- # Rank of the peak after rescoring search points (#) Rank of the peak before rescoring search points LLG Log-Likelihood Gain Z-Score Number of standard deviations of LLG above the mean FSS Fast Search Score Select all peaks There were 159 peaks # (#) Frac X Frac Y Frac Z LLG Z-score Split #Group raw/top 1 6 0.842 0.923 0.779 +42.16 5.14 0 2 52.58/ 52.58 2 3 0.369 0.865 0.553 +40.23 5.24 37 2 53.18/ 53.18 3 10 0.743 0.937 0.261 +40.18 4.82 48 2 50.69/ 50.69 #SITES = 159: OUTPUT TRUNCATED TO 3 SITES

2 1

Re: [phenixbb] log files for refinement (was: completeness using Intensities vs. structure factor)
by Pavel Afonine 05 Dec '12

05 Dec '12

Hi Yarrow, thanks for sending log files. Completeness reported in log files reflects the content of input MTZ data files: *32.log:* (...) F-obs: (...) Miller array info: (...)/reflectionsFreeR_1.38A.mtz:F_New(+),SIGF_New(+),F_New(-),SIGF_New(-),systematic_absences_eliminated Observation type: xray.amplitude Type of data: double, size=325598 Type of sigmas: double, size=325598 Number of Miller indices: 325598 Anomalous flag: True Unit cell: (64.3967, 68.0966, 103.663, 90, 96.1167, 90) Space group: P 1 21 1 (No. 4) Systematic absences: 0 Centric reflections: 4910 Resolution range: 43.7941 1.3786 Completeness in resolution range: 0.901282 Completeness with d_max=infinity: 0.901259 (...) and *35.log:* (...) I-obs: (...) Miller array info: (...)/reflectionsFandIFreeR_1.38A.mtz:IMEAN_New,SIGIMEAN_New,systematic_absences_eliminated Observation type: xray.intensity Type of data: double, size=181940 Type of sigmas: double, size=181940 Number of Miller indices: 181940 Anomalous flag: False Unit cell: (64.3967, 68.0966, 103.663, 90, 96.1167, 90) Space group: P 1 21 1 (No. 4) Systematic absences: 0 Centric reflections: 4910 Resolution range: 43.7941 1.3786 Completeness in resolution range: 0.992202 Completeness with d_max=infinity: 0.992164 (...) The numbers above are reported before anything else is done, that is they reflect exactly what's in input MTZ files. Somehow you managed to loose ~10% of data when converting Iobs into Fobs. How did you do this conversion? In theory this is possible since French&Wilson Iobs->Fobs conversion may result on some number of reflections lost. Note, when phenix.refine does IMEAN->Fobs conversion (35.log file) this does not result in ~10% loss. So based on looking at log files I can say it's not phenix.refine that manipulated your data or reported it wrong. You lost reflections at previous steps. Pavel On 12/4/12 4:57 PM, Yarrow Madrona wrote: > Hi, > > Here are the log files for refinement you asked for. > > 35.log is refined with Intensities. The MTZ file has a slightly different > name but it is the same MTZ. One had Intensities taken out of it because I > didn't think I needed them any longer. > > 32.log is refined with structure factors. Intensities were removed. > > Thanks for your help! > > -Yarrow > > >

1 0

completeness using Intensities vs. structure factor
by Yarrow Madrona 05 Dec '12

05 Dec '12

Hi, (Phenix v.1.8.1-1168) I recently refined a structure using experimental Intensities and compared it to the same structure refined with calculated structure factors. I know if you provide intensities Phenix.refine will convert to structure factors. I am not sure if it runs truncate or what. Anyway, I get this in the log file which matches my completeness in the scala log file: Completeness in resolution range: 0.992202 Completeness with d_max=infinity: 0.992164 When I run using structure factors (Truncate run in Scala) I get the following: Completeness in resolution range: 0.901282 Completeness with d_max=infinity: 0.901259 Perhaps Scala did not merge anomolous and non-anomolous data? This does not may a whole lot of sense to me. Is some data thrown out? Can someone explain? Thank you. -- Yarrow Madrona Graduate Student Molecular Biology and Biochemistry Dept. University of California, Irvine Natural Sciences I, Rm 2403 Irvine, CA 92697

4 5

parameters for averaged kick maps
by Jose M de Pereda 04 Dec '12

04 Dec '12

Dear all, I would like to compare averaged kick maps obtained using different “kick sizes”. Is it possible to define the kick size and the number of kicks in phenix.refine and/or phenix.maps? In phenix.refine, the “ordered_solvent” section has keywords to control the generation of kick maps: kick_map { kick_size = 0.5 number_of_kicks = 100 } But, it seems to me that these can not be used during the generation of maps or maps’ coefficients. Related with this issue, does phenix.refine always use the same kick size or does it adjust it ad hoc (e.g. based on ML error estimates)? Thanks a lot, Jose -- ------------------------------------------------------------ Jose M de Pereda, PhD Instituto de Biologia Molecular y Celular del Cancer (IBMCC) Spanish National Research Council - University of Salamanca Campus Unamuno s/n E-37007 Salamanca, Spain Phone: +34-923-294817 Fax: +34-923-294795 http://xtal.cicancer.org/ ------------------------------------------------------------

1 0

table 1
by So Jay 04 Dec '12

04 Dec '12

Hi, I was using generate table 1 utility in phenix-1.8.1-1168. The data was processed with HKL2000 and model was refined using Autobuster. In the table I find two entries for Multiplicity and R-sym were blank.I was wondering if there is any particular reason for this. ThanksJay

2 2

Similar 2Fo-Fc maps, very different e/A^3 levels (absolute levels)
by Sam Stampfer 04 Dec '12

04 Dec '12

Dear Phenix group, I am trying to decide which electron density map to use for rebuilding my structure in Coot. Both 2Fo-Fc maps appear quite similar at the 1 sigma level but the absolute electrons per cubic Angstrom (e/A^3) is very different. When contoured at 1.00 rmsd in coot, these are the e/A^3 levels (Coot calls them absolute levels): Map #1 2Fo-Fc: 0.0044 e/A^3 Map #2 2Fo-Fc: 0.0832 e/A^3 Map #1 was generated using a twinning operator that is typically required for this crystal form. Map #2 was generated without the twinning operator and it tends to have slightly better 2Fo-Fc density, and there is a bit more density (or noise?) in the Fo-Fc map. The structure was refined in Phenix and gave a similar Rfree regardless of whether a twinning operator was used. What does it mean to have this 20-fold difference in electrons per cubic Angstroms for my maps? Which map should I use? Thanks for your help! -Sam PS: The Fo-Fc map in Map#2 also contours at a much higher absolute e/A^3 level.

4 5

pseudotranslation and twinning problem
by Rajeshwer Sankhala 03 Dec '12

03 Dec '12

I am new to crystallography. I have collected data for 26 kDa protein with a maximum resolution of 2.25A in I 41 space group. I have a poor model for molecular replacement (~15-20% identical). When i did xtriage run, it suggested -h,k,-l twinning law and indicated about pseudo-translation. Now when i am running Phaser for molecular replacement i am getting very low LLG (less than 100) and TFZ score (5-6). Can anyone suggest which parameters or setting i should use to improve my LLG score and get a best model for refinement. Thanks Raj

2 1

dev-1227: problem reading in tls parameters from refmac or tlsmd
by Boaz Shaanan 02 Dec '12

02 Dec '12

Hi, In the TLS pulldown I tried to upload tls parameters from either refmac (.tls) or tlsmd (.tlsin) through the 'load' button, according to the suggestion in this section, but it complains about wrong format of the file. Am I doing something wrong? Thanks, Boaz Boaz Shaanan, Ph.D. Dept. of Life Sciences Ben-Gurion University of the Negev Beer-Sheva 84105 Israel E-mail: bshaanan(a)bgu.ac.il Phone: 972-8-647-2220 Skype: boaz.shaanan Fax: 972-8-647-2992 or 972-8-646-1710

3 2

Specify particular columns from data files on the command line
by Brad C. Bennett 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

Hi all (again)- I'm trying to run DEN refinement in Phenix from the command line. How do I specify certain columns from multiple data files (in my case, 2 MTZ files) to be used? For example, the Rfree flags from one and the hkl data from the other. Thanks! Brad C. Bennett Research Associate- Mark Yeager Lab University of Virginia Molecular Physiology and Biological Physics 320 Snyder Building 480 Ray C. Hunt Drive Charlottesville, VA 22908 Email: bcb3b(a)virginia.edu Lab phone: 434-243-2520

2 2

DEN refinement
by Morten Groftehauge 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

Hi guys, Two quick questions about DEN refinement: 1) If gamma refines to 0 does that mean that I should run DEN refinement again with the output model? Or should I do a refinement and then another DEN? Since gamma = 0 the refinement should be allowed a possibility of moving the structure further towards the reference restraints in my mind. 2) If gamma refines to 1 it means that my reference model is inappropriate, right? Not really much of a question, I know. And I know that DEN refinement is in beta but it would be nice if you outputted the optimal gamma and weight for the refinement to the GUI. Actually it would be nice if the did that for geometry weights and xray weights too when one optimizes them. Cheers, Morten -- Morten K Grøftehauge, PhD Pohl Group Durham University

3 2

Error starting Phenix on Linux
by Brad C. Bennett 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

Hi all- After installing the latest version and release of Phenix (1.8.1-1168) onto our Linux workstation and setting the environment for bash, I get the following error upon trying to launch Phenix from the command line: ImportError: libjpeg.so.62: cannot open shared object file: No such file or directory I've never seen this before (previous versions of Phenix have run fine on this machine) and don't know what this file is exactly and where it should be located. Anyone come across this and know if there is a fix (or if I'm just doing something stupid!). Thanks! Brad C. Bennett Research Associate- Mark Yeager Lab University of Virginia Molecular Physiology and Biological Physics 320 Snyder Building 480 Ray C. Hunt Drive Charlottesville, VA 22908 Email: bcb3b(a)virginia.edu Lab phone: 434-243-2520

2 2

Call for submissions for the Computational Crystallography Newsletter (CCN) January 2013
by Nigel Moriarty 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

Folks Calling for articles and short communications of interest to structural biologists. The deadline for publication in the January 2013 issue is 31 December, 2012 but if you can send me drafts before the 15th of December we can get started on generating proofs. The Computational Crystallography Newsletter (CCN) is an electronic newsletter for structural biologists, and is published online every 6 months. Feature articles, meeting announcements and reports can be submitted to me at any time for consideration. Submission of text by email or word-processing files using the CCN templates is requested. Past newsletters and the template are available at www.phenix-online.org/newsletter. Cheers Nigel -- Nigel W. Moriarty, PhD Building 64R0246B, Physical Biosciences Division Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory Berkeley, CA 94720-8235 Phone : 510-486-5709 Email : NWMoriarty(a)LBL.gov Fax : 510-486-5909 Web : CCI.LBL.gov

1 0

choosing Rfree set with NCS and twinning
by vincent Chaptal 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

Dear phenixbb, I am using the "reflection file editor" in phenix 1.8.1-1168 to generate my test set (with the GUI). I have NCS so I ticked the box "assign test set in thin resolution shells". I also have twinning, and want to have my Rfree not biased by twin related reflections. I guess the option "use lattice symmetry to generate test set" is the one I should use for this purpose? I couldn't find much information online about this option. No log file has been generated so I can't check what happened. I am supposing xtriage is ran in the background and if a twin law is found, then used to generate the test set. My output from xtriage is: Statistics depending on twin laws ----------------------------------------------------------------- | Operator | type | R obs. | Britton alpha | H alpha | ML alpha | ----------------------------------------------------------------- | -k,-h,-l |PM| 0.249| 0.272| 0.246| 0.200| ----------------------------------------------------------------- And indeed if I check in mtzdmp the output mtz, reflections in the test set are related by (-k, -h, -l); disclaimer: I only checked in the plane (h,k,0). I would like to be sure my Rfree is generated correctly. Alternatively, what would happen when multiple twin laws are available? Is the most probale used? Is it possible to specify the editor which law to use? Thank you for your help. Vincent -- Vincent Chaptal, PhD Institut de Biologie et Chimie des Protéines Drug-resistance modulation and mechanism Laboratory 7 passage du Vercors 69007 LYON FRANCE +33 4 37 65 29 01 http://www.ibcp.fr

2 1

DNA double helix with many molprobity bad clashes
by Benda, Christian 30 Nov '12

30 Nov '12

Hi, I am refining a protein-DNA complex at around 3 A with a standard b-form dsDNA. R-factors are around 24/20 (kinda low for the resolution). Originally, I placed the DNA using coot and now, after several rounds of refinement in phenix, I get a long list of bad clashes from molprobity validation (in phenix) that covers the whole length of the DNA and almost exclusively lists hydrogens from the ribose moiety (whether or not in contact with protein). My question is, - why is phenix.refine not taking care of these clashes (i.e. optimizes the structure such that they go away)?. Am I giving experimental contribution to high a weight (I have "optimize x-ray/stereochemistry" checked)? - if so, can I (and how) restrain geometry for the DNA a little more but leave the protein alone (and does that make sense)? thanks for any help Christian

4 4

phenix.erraser error
by Russell Chan 29 Nov '12

29 Nov '12

Hi, I'm currently trying to use the new command, phenix.erraser, to refine my RNA structure. I generated a ccp4 map and removed the R-free flags, however it generates an error after its starts its first round of minimization. The command I use is: phenix.erraser <mypdb>.pdb <mymap>.ccp4 The error generated is: ################################### Starting SWA_rebuild_erraser.py... Output pdb will be...precursor_chi_erraser.pdb Create temporary directory /home/Russ/Desktop/erraser_test/precursor_chi_erraser_temp/... fixed_res_final in Rosetta pdb file = [] cutpoint_final in Rosetta pdb file = [1, 2, 3, 4, 12, 15, 19, 20, 21, 25, 30, 37, 38, 49, 54, 58, 68, 69, 72, 79, 83, 84, 105, 108, 109, 122, 124, 125, 130, 133, 134, 137, 140, 143, 146, 158, 160, 161, 168, 170, 176, 179, 187, 189, 201, 204, 205, 216, 217, 228, 237, 239, 241, 245, 246, 268, 269, 273, 279, 283, 292, 293, 302, 305, 309, 311] extra_res_final in Rosetta pdb file = [] Starting whole-structure minimization 1... ******************* ERROR ENDING *************** Command 'phenix.python /home/sbgrid/programs/x86_64-linux/phenix/1.8.1-1168/phenix-1.8.1-1168/phenix/phenix/erraser/full_struct_slice_and_minimize.py -binary_name linuxgccrelease -map /home/<Russ>/Desktop/erraser_test/erraser_map.ccp4 -map_reso 2.0 -new_torsional_potential True -pdb minimize_0.pdb -out_pdb minimize_1.pdb > minimize_1.out 2> minimize_1.err' returned non-zero exit status 1 ******************* ERROR ENDING *************** Any help would be greatly appreciated! Thanks, Russell

2 1

Re: [phenixbb] [COOT] CCP4 - Coot in Applications
by Nathaniel Echols 28 Nov '12

28 Nov '12

---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: Paul Emsley <pemsley(a)mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk> To: PHENIX user mailing list <phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org> Cc: Date: Wed, 28 Nov 2012 17:08:50 +0000 Subject: Re: [phenixbb] [COOT] CCP4 - Coot in Applications On 28/11/12 15:03, Antony Oliver wrote: > > Ok - annoying thing…. > > 1) using /Applications/coot.app/Contents/Resources/script to launch Coot from the command line (terminal window) works IF you don't have X11 open already. > 2) if you DO have X11 open, coot pretty much always crashes with the aforementioned "invalid window errors". It is not clear to me if you are, or are not using Bill Scott's binary... (it's the one I recommend for Macintosh). Paul.

1 0

Re: [phenixbb] [COOT] CCP4 - Coot in Applications
by Antony Oliver 28 Nov '12

28 Nov '12

Ok - annoying thing…. 1) using /Applications/coot.app/Contents/Resources/script to launch Coot from the command line (terminal window) works IF you don't have X11 open already. 2) if you DO have X11 open, coot pretty much always crashes with the aforementioned "invalid window errors". >>> Nov 23 12:17:02 coot-real[80005] <Error>: kCGErrorIllegalArgument: CGSGetSurfaceBounds >>> Nov 23 12:17:02 coot-real[80005] <Error>: kCGErrorFailure: Set a breakpoint @ CGErrorBreakpoint() to catch errors as they are logged. >>> Nov 23 12:17:02 coot-real[80005] <Error>: kCGErrorIllegalArgument: CGSBindSurface: Invalid window 0x8da >>> Nov 23 12:17:02 coot-real[80005] <Error>: kCGErrorIllegalArgument: CGSBindSurface: Invalid window 0x8da >>> Nov 23 12:17:02 coot-real[80005] <Error>: kCGErrorIllegalArgument: CGSBindSurface: Invalid window 0x8da Ideas and suggestions welcome. I guess I could make sure that X11 is not running each time I invoke a script or run coot from the command line - but it's not exactly ideal. --> NB: Running Mac OS X, 10.7.5 - Lion. Please excuse the cross bulletin board posting, but I really do use quite a range of software across all program suites - and this method of delivering coot causes problems for many of the plugins/scripts (phenix and buster for example). With thanks, Antony. --- Dr Antony W Oliver Senior Research Fellow CR-UK DNA Repair Enzymes Group Genome Damage and Stability Centre Science Park Road University of Sussex Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9RQ email: antony.oliver(a)sussex.ac.uk tel (office): +44 (0)1273 678349 tel (lab): +44 (0)1273 677512 On Nov 27, 2012, at 11:32 AM, Antony Oliver wrote: > Thanks Charles - that seems to work..! > > Tony. > > --- > Dr Antony W Oliver > Senior Research Fellow > CR-UK DNA Repair Enzymes Group > Genome Damage and Stability Centre > Science Park Road > University of Sussex > Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9RQ > > email: antony.oliver(a)sussex.ac.uk > tel (office): +44 (0)1273 678349 > tel (lab): +44 (0)1273 677512 > > On Nov 26, 2012, at 10:19 AM, Charles Ballard wrote: > >> You could give >> >> /Applications/coot.app/Contents/Resources/script >> >> a go. >> >> Charles >> >> On 23 Nov 2012, at 12:20, Antony Oliver wrote: >>

2 1

coordinate refinement and maps
by Subhani Bandara 27 Nov '12

27 Nov '12

Hi all, I am refining a protein with metal-ligand complexes. Is it possible to refine only y coordinates for an atom (on two fold) while keeping X and Z fixed using Phenix? Also is there a way to calculate something like anomalous difference-difference map (Anomalous Fobs - Anomalous Fcalc) to identify any additional atoms bound at metal sites. Thanks in advance for the help! Subhani

6 9

cif file for modified peptide
by Feldkamp, Michael Dennis 27 Nov '12

27 Nov '12

I would like to generate a cif file for a peptide that is FITC labeled at the N-terminus and also contains an unnatural amino acid (dichloro phenylalanine). I've used phenix.elbow in the past to generate cif files for small molecule ligands but when I've run it I only get a cif file for the FITC. Any insight would be greatly appreciated, Michael Feldkamp

2 1

MR_Rosetta prerefine
by Heather Condurso 26 Nov '12

26 Nov '12

Dear all, I am using mr_rosetta to run prerefinement of various starting models that all have pretty low sequence homology to my protein of interest (~15%). I ran it using the simple script from the manual: phenix.mr_rosetta \ seq_file=seq.dat \ search_models=coords1.pdb \ run_prerefine=True \ number_of_prerefine_models=1000 Its working fairly well, but obviously taking a long time to make 1000 models. Is there a log or score file somewhere that lists all of the rosetta scores as it is running? Right now all the pdb files in each different run have the format S_"original model name"__0001.pdb no matter what run it resulted from. Is there a way to make it unique for example with the actual run number in place of 0001? This makes it difficult to compare files in pymol. Thanks, Heather Condurso UF-Department of Chemistry condurso(a)ufl.edu

2 2

Difficult MR with TNCS
by Ian Slaymaker 26 Nov '12

26 Nov '12

Dear Phenix Community, I am having difficulties solving a protein-DNA complex structure and was hoping for some ideas or strategies. My data diffracts to 3A and depending on how I index my data fits well into I4 or P4. I have also been exploring everything in lower space groups. My MR model has 64% identity to my unsolved protein. The crystal protein is 24kD and runs as a monomer or sometimes a dimer. Xtriage strongly suggests that there is tNCS due to a strong patterson peak at 0.5, 0.5. 0.5. Using the phaser GUI, when I search around P4, I get very promising statistics (TFZ = 20's and LLG ~2000), and oddly, in these cases phaser places two subunits on top of each other (despite default packing limitations) with the protein beta sheet cores overlapping, and rotated 180 degrees of each other. The density looks believable, but obviously something is very wrong. The crystal packing would be feasible if another subunit were placed, but I have been able to coax phaser to find a complete solution. It would rather place it overlapping than in available spaces. My questions: 1) does this suggest that there is some form of twinning going on? 2) sometimes phaser (phenix GUI) tells me it is adjusting for tNCS and sometimes it says its NOT (even when there is an even number of subunits being searched for), is this a bug or deliberate? 3) I have tried using phaser from the command line in MR_AUTO mode with the keywords TNCS_USE ON TNCS PATT PERCENT 88 TNCS_NMOL 2 or 4 but dont see any indication that the TNCS adjustments are being made and I have not been able to repeat my phaser GUI results this way. 4) What is a good strategy for tackling this particular problem? Right now I am just chugging through my list of possible space groups, compositions and resolution ranges, but need to look through each possible solution individually because of the misleading statistics and so is very inefficient and time consuming. Thank you for any help or comments. Ian

1 0

Re: [phenixbb] Question about refinement group definition
by Shota Nakamura 21 Nov '12

21 Nov '12

中村昇太 Pavel Afonine <pafonine(a)lbl.gov>: >Hi Carsten, > >some keywords have type "multiple" and some not. In your example, >rigid_body has type multiple, that is you can specify as many of them as >you want: > >rigid_body = chain A >rigid_body = chain B >rigid_body = chain C > >and that means you will be refining three rigid bodies. Same applied to >tls, and many others. > >anisotropic is not multiple, so it can be only one. I recall I had >reasons to make it this way when implementing it but it was long long >time ago, so I forgot what it was. > >To see all attributes for all parameters: >phenix.refine --show-defaults=all.all > >which will yield a long hard to digest list. > >Pavel > >On 11/20/12 6:25 PM, Schubert, Carsten [JRDUS] wrote: >> Hello all, >> >> I have a question about the parameter definition for refinement groups (hope I picked the right term here). How does the definition and handling of refinement groups vary from the "refine.sites.rigid_body" scope to the "refine.adp.anisotropic" scope? For instance: >> >> refine { >> strategy = *individual_sites individual_sites_real_space *rigid_body \ >> *individual_adp group_adp tls *occupancies group_anomalous >> sites { >> individual = None >> torsion_angles = None >> rigid_body = chain A >> rigid_body = chain B >> } >> adp { >> individual { >> isotropic = None >> anisotropic = chain A >> anisotropic = chain B >> >> } >> >> would refine chains A and B as separate rigid groups, whereas only chain B would be refined anisotropically. >> Is this an intended behavior? >> >> BTW "anisotropic = chain A or chain B" refines both chains as expected. >> >> Cheers, >> >> Carsten >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> phenixbb mailing list >> phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org >> http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb > >_______________________________________________ >phenixbb mailing list >phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org >http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb

1 0

radiation damaged residues occupancy refinement
by Mikalai Lapkouski 20 Nov '12

20 Nov '12

Hello, I have a 1.2A model with the signs of radiation damage, judged by the negative peaks around the carboxyls (atoms CD, OE1 and OE2) of glutamates probably due to decarboxylation. I wan to refine occupancy of those atoms to account for negative density. What is the proper way of doing it? I tried to set the occupancy for those atoms 0.8 and refine individually. But obviously occupancies for those atoms are individually refined to different values which I dont think is the right way. Is there a way of how to refine occupancies for those atoms so that they remain identical after refinement (say all have 0.6)? Or is there another procedure of how to deal with refinement of radiation damaged side-chains? Any suggestions, please? Thank you Nick

2 4

Job history recovery
by Damian Niegowski 20 Nov '12

20 Nov '12

Hello all, I have run into a problem with the Job History tab in the GUI. For one project there is a listing of 16 jobs but when I try going into Job History there is nothing. The .phenix directory for that project is present and all other directories of the individual jobs are there. Is there a way to "restore" the job history from existing parameter files? Regards, Damian Damian Niegowski Ph.D. Institute of Medical Biochemistry and Biophysics Karolinska Institutet Scheeles väg 2 171 77 STOCKHOLM e-mail: damian.niegowski(a)ki.se phone: 0046 8 524 876 33 fax: 0046 8 736 04 39

2 1

Refining Anomalous Groups
by Brennan Bonnet 20 Nov '12

20 Nov '12

Hi All, I am trying to use phenix.refine to refine partially occupied xenon sites using the Anomalous Groups selection under "Refinement settings". My list of anomalous scatters initially consisted of 22 peaks as located by HySS. Some of these were removed as they originated from S atoms from Met and Cys residues and a few others were removed after previous refinement steps due to having zero occupancy. My remaining sites consist of my xenons (hopefully) and other metals such as Mg or Zn which are mixed in and look like partially occupied xenon sites. My problem is that when I try to define the 11 remaining sites for the "refine anomalous groups" selection the software complains: Invalid combination: F-obs not anomalous, but refinement of 11 f_double_prime values requested (11 scatterers): Please provide anomalous reflection data or fix all f_double_prime values (see refinement.refine.anomalous_scatterer.group input blocks) I can't figure out exactly what I need to change to make it work and can't find a guide anywhere. Do I need to provide additional data or is the syntax for the sites incorrect maybe? Please help! ~Brennan~

3 5

Phaser
by Morten Groftehauge 19 Nov '12

19 Nov '12

Hi guys, I was trying out the new Parallel Phaser (dev-1214) and using a model prepared by Rosetta covering 25% of the total structure (32% identity to the homology model), NCS = 2. 5 models actually but not really relevant since the program spontaneously stopped running after a couple of hours (I love what it's supposed to do though!). My question is about the log however. In the Parallel Phaser log it says: Expected LLG and Resolution Limits ---------------------------------- Expected LLG target: 120.00 Expected LLG achieved: 120.0 Resolution of All Data: 2.38 Resolution limited by eLLG target: 4.83 This resolution WILL NOT be used as the default The expected LLG achieved is greater than 120 (eLLG target) but when I tried to recreate that run in the regular Phaser-MR I get this message in the log Expected LLG and Resolution Limits ---------------------------------- Expected LLG target: 120.00 Expected LLG achieved: 49.7 Resolution of All Data: 2.38 Resolution limited by eLLG target: 2.38 This resolution WILL NOT be used as the default The expected LLG achieved is less than 60 (half eLLG target) FTF rescoring WILL be performed due to low expected LLG signal Deep search will be performed from the start I think the second result looks more realistic (unfortunately) but I still don't understand why the difference? Cheers, Morten PS Seems like there's a memory leak in 1214 and 1207 when I run the Phaser step of MR_Rosetta. Does this sound right? Definitely in 1207 but it seems like it's still there in 1214. -- Morten K Grøftehauge, PhD Pohl Group Durham University

4 6

SASTBX server
by Tanner, John J. 19 Nov '12

19 Nov '12

I apologize if this is an inappropriate post for phenixbb… Has anyone had trouble with the SASTBX server lately? I have been getting this error since Friday when calculating shapes and P(r). Server error! The server encountered an internal error and was unable to complete your request. Error message: Premature end of script headers: cctbx_web.cgi If you think this is a server error, please contact the webmaster<mailto:[email protected]>. Error 500 sastbx.als.lbl.gov<http://sastbx.als.lbl.gov/> Fri Nov 16 07:56:37 2012 Apache/2.2.17 (Unix) PHP/5.3.4

3 2

fwd: West Coast Protein Crystallography Workshop
by Nathaniel Echols 18 Nov '12

18 Nov '12

(There will probably be several people from our group attending this year.) ---------- Forwarded message ---------- From: "Williams, John Charles" <jwilliams(a)coh.org> To: "phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org" <phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org> Cc: Date: Sun, 18 Nov 2012 08:15:19 -0800 Subject: West Coast Protein Crystallography Workshop All, Wayne Hendrickson will be the keynote speaker for the West Coast Protein Crystallography Workshop, scheduled for March 17th - March 20th at the Monterey Plaza and Spa. Registration will open up Dec 1st. Hope to see you there! Best, John Williams WCPCW Organizer

1 0

v1.8.1 installation hangs
by Alex Theodossis 18 Nov '12

18 Nov '12

Hi, I'm attempting to install the latest version of phenix on mac 10.5.8, using the command line installer. Installation proceeds well until towards the end, where it hangs on: precompiling .py files I can leave it for up to an hour without any further progress, but upon typing: ctrl+c The installation comes back to life and proceeds to completion. Can anyone advise as to what might be causing this and on how reliable this installation is going to be? Thanks in advance.

2 1

Alternate conformation occupancies sum more than 1
by Mikalai Lapkouski 15 Nov '12

15 Nov '12

Hello, I was refining the 1.2 A structure. After refining occupancies there are several residues with alternate conformers for which the sum of the occupancies is greater than one. For example: GLY A 197 O Occupancy sums to 1.14 MET B 17 CB Occupancy sums to 1.03 TYR B 142 CD1 Occupancy sums to 1.04 TYR B 142 CZ Occupancy sums to 1.01 GLY B 197 O Occupancy sums to 1.23 The density is defined nicely for them, do you know what can be the problem of why the sum could be more than 1? Thank you Mikalai

2 1

Restraints file for a new amino acid residue
by Agnes Thiane Pereira Machado 14 Nov '12

14 Nov '12

Hi We are trying to refine a protein structure with a (covalently) modified residue. The colosest discussion to our problem is: http://www.phenix-online.org/pipermail/phenixbb/2010-August/015629.html We ran: phenix.elbow --residue SSC ourmodel.pdb And read the due cif file at phenix refinement. The residue by itself is OK, but we were not able to perform the peptide bond between C and N. How to complete the .cif file such that it has due restraints for the peptide bond with this modified residue? Agnes

3 6

Off topic: Anomalous signal
by ash.k＠aol.com 14 Nov '12

14 Nov '12

Dear all, I am sorry for this off topic question in the bb. I have good looking but poorly diffracting (3.8-4 A) crystals of SeMet derivative. Mass spec confirmed that Se incorporation is 100% and I got a very good energy scan for Se too. I properly selected the peak, inflection and remote wavelengths for the data collection. But, I do not see anomalous signal in the data collected. Processing in HKL2000 does not show any resolution dependance of Chi square and also xtriage says that the anomalous resolution limit is only up to 8-9A. Is it something usual for the kind of diffraction I am getting or something else is going on? I have 5/200 methionine residues in the sequence. Worst case I can think of is that all the Met side chains are disordered ! Any help would be highly appreciated.. AK

2 1

den_refine on cluster
by Michael Thompson 14 Nov '12

14 Nov '12

Hi All, Apologies if this is a naive question, but I would like to run DEN refinement and I notice the documentation says that it runs optimally on a machine with at least 30 processor cores. Is there any way to run DEN refinement on a SGE cluster as a batch job using something like run_command="qsub" as can be done with autobuild, etc.? Thanks, Mike -- Michael C. Thompson Graduate Student Biochemistry & Molecular Biology Division Department of Chemistry & Biochemistry University of California, Los Angeles miket(a)chem.ucla.edu

3 2

Simulated anneal
by Qiang Chen 14 Nov '12

14 Nov '12

Hi all, I have a 3.05Å structure. I refine it to Rwork=25.2 Rfree=28.81. I use Molprobity to check the structure. The clash score is 100th and Molprobity score is 99th. I was suggested to run simulated anneal to help reduce Rwork and Rfree. I tried Cartesian and Torsion and different seed. The best result I got is: torsion anneal, start_temp=2500,final_temp=300, random_seed=4250146. The Rwork:25.8, Rfree=31.2. I checked the new model and found that some places in a domain were not correctly traced. The density for that domain is not good and have several flexible loops. My question is: does simulated anneal always work and reduce Rwork/Rfree? At the final stage of refinement, does it necessary to use simulated anneal again? Thanks! yamei The information in this e-mail is intended only for the person to whom it is addressed. If you believe this e-mail was sent to you in error and the e-mail contains patient information, please contact the Partners Compliance HelpLine at http://www.partners.org/complianceline . If the e-mail was sent to you in error but does not contain patient information, please contact the sender and properly dispose of the e-mail.

3 2

phenix.pdbtools - renumber specific chains
by Antony Oliver 13 Nov '12

13 Nov '12

Apologies if this has been covered before - but can someone point me to a way of renumbering only specific chains (i.e. F, G, H etc). I have tried using phenix.pdbtools with either selection = "chain F or chain G or chain H" or keep "chain A or chain B or chain C or chain D" - but in both cases phenix renumbers every single residue! With thanks, Antony. --- Dr Antony W Oliver Senior Research Fellow CR-UK DNA Repair Enzymes Group Genome Damage and Stability Centre Science Park Road University of Sussex Falmer, Brighton, BN1 9RQ email: antony.oliver(a)sussex.ac.uk tel (office): +44 (0)1273 678349 tel (lab): +44 (0)1273 677512

3 3

Setting up MR_Rosetta
by Julio Lenin 08 Nov '12

08 Nov '12

Hello guys, I am currently trying to setup MR_Rosetta but I am running into some trouble. When I run the tutorial for Defensin HNP-3 from the GUI I always get an error during the ... process (see image at this dropbox link). I know that my path for phenix and rosetta are correct since I can run the phenix_regression.wizards.test_command_line_rosetta_quick and phenix_regression.wizards.test_command_line_rosetta_quick test_rosetta_rebuild. If I try to trace down the error, I can only get the same info that I got from the GUI error message (vide supra). As additional info, here are somme details of my setup: MacBookPro 4,1 running OS 10.6.8 Core2Duo 2.5 Ghz 6 Gb RAM Rosetta 3.2 compiled with flags bin mode=release Phenix 1.8.1-1168 And my input settings for the GUI run (dropbox) Now, this might just be confusing but there was one command line test that my setup failed: phenix_regression.wizards.test_command_line_rosetta test_mr_rosetta The error is kinda cryptic (see dropbox copy of the error) but it seem to be a discrepancy in the scoring results not a missing program or any other kind of misconfiguration. Of course, I might be wrong. Any advice? Best regards. -- Lenin Domínguez-Ramírez "And for all the current and rather silly emphasis on structural biology,understanding enzymes means understanding catalysis and catalysis is concerned with kinetics, not structure: as Jeremy Knowles aptly remarked, studying the photograph of a racehorse cannot tell you how fast it can run." Cornish-Bowden, 1995 Lenin Domínguez-Ramírez, PhD "What are we to think of an organism that loses practically all of its cellular water at ordinary temperatures and pressures and ceases to metabolize, but upon being rehydrated resumes all of the characteristics it previously exhibited?...we should be reluctant to call such an organism dead (unless we are willing to entertain the possibility of its resurrection) because it resumes an active life upon simple restoration of water."

3 2

Sugar refine in phenix
by Jan van Agthoven 05 Nov '12

05 Nov '12

Hi everyone, This is a basic question. I would like to refine the sugar ends of my protein. The sugar polymers are made of NAG and BMA and whenever I use phenix.ready_set and subsequently phenix.refine it results in a structure of disconnnected sugar monomers. Indeed the cif file generated by phenix.ready_set does'nt give any geometry constraints for connecting the monomers. How do create a cif file that tells phenix.refine how to refine the sugars? Thanks, Jan

2 4