- phenixbb - phenix-online.org

ML with Twinning?
by Keller, Jacob 16 Dec '15

16 Dec '15

Is Phenix able yet to use the ML target function with twinned data? Is it in the works? All the best, Jacob Keller ******************************************* Jacob Pearson Keller, PhD Looger Lab/HHMI Janelia Research Campus 19700 Helix Dr, Ashburn, VA 20147 email: kellerj(a)janelia.hhmi.org *******************************************

3 3

differences in refinement stats between phenix-dev-2219 and -1.9-1692
by Ezequiel Noguera 16 Dec '15

16 Dec '15

Thank you very much, Pavel. I don't save H's when I modify the model in coot (the input PDB file that I sent you was the output from coot). I did the refinement again, now in version 2247, without NCS. I got the same results, higher R factors and RMS deviations for the newer version. I got better results when I used "update waters" (both in Rfactors and RMS). Below, I list the statistics for refinement without updating waters. Significant differences remain. Could it be any difference in settings of default parameters between versions? version: dev-2247 Start: r_work = 0.1687 r_free = 0.2011 bonds = 0.046 angles = 1.321 Final: r_work = 0.1753 r_free = 0.2040 bonds = 0.030 angles = 0.593 version: 1.9-1692 Start: r_work = 0.1651 r_free = 0.2018 bonds = 0.013 angles = 1.409 Final: r_work = 0.1663 r_free = 0.2017 bonds = 0.011 angles = 1.321

2 5

Re: [phenixbb] -differences in refinement stats between phenix-dev-2219 and -1.9-1692
by Pavel Afonine 13 Dec '15

13 Dec '15

Hi Ezequiel, just to make it clear: torsion-angle NCS, Optimize X-ray/stereo weight are *not* the default settings, therefore you did customize the refinement parameters. At this resolution (1.3A) you do not need to use NCS restraints. Also, you say you used "Automatically add H's" however the PDB file you sent me does not contain any H atoms. Furthermore, the PDB file header says H are present: REMARK MODEL CONTENT. REMARK ELEMENT ATOM RECORD COUNT OCCUPANCY SUM REMARK C 1275 1047.00 *REMARK H 2029 1649.00 * REMARK O 559 488.50 REMARK N 315 263.00 REMARK S 6 6.00 REMARK Cu 4 2.89 REMARK TOTAL 4188 3456.39 So overall this make an impression that something has gone wrong. Way forward: 1) Take the file you sent me; 2) Add H atoms: phenix.reduce model_no_h.pdb > model_with_h.pdb 3) Use new file with H atoms added to run refinement. The only setting different from defaults should be "Optimize X-ray/stereo weight". Perhaps you can also enable automated water update. I just did all this myself and got nicely refined model with Final: r_work = 0.1624 r_free = 0.1939 bonds = 0.010 angles = 1.030 Corresponding PDB and MTZ are sent in a separate email that goes to you only (off mailing list). Pavel On 12/6/15 07:59, Ezequiel Noguera wrote: > Hi Pavel, thank you very much for your help. I attach the data. I > didn´t customize parameters. The refinement stategy of the last job > was: XYZ coords, Real-space, Individual B-factors, torsion-angle NCS, > Optimize X-ray/stereo wght and X-ray/ADP wght, Automatically add H's > and correct N/Q/H errors. > > > Hi Ezequiel, > > deviations are not unexpected in general but not that large as you > report, so I wonder what's going on.. Could you please send me input > data and model files, as well as any ligand files you used. If you > customized some parameters, telling what were those would be helpful too. > > Please send all files off-list to my email directly. > > Thanks, > Pavel > > >> Hello, I'm working in a refinement that I started some time ago. I >> noted that repeating the same refinement task using a newer version >> of phenix, the refinement statistics Before and After refinement are >> different from values of the old version (I used "restore job" from >> the Job history to repeat the same task in the two versions installed >> in the same PC). Any explanation? I'm worried about the rms >> deviation. Thanks in advance. >> >> new version: >> R-work: start=0.1697, final=0.1761 >> R-free: start=0.2011, final=0.2053 >> Bonds: start=0.046, final=0.029 >> Angles: start=1.321, final= 0.631 >> >> old version: >> R-work: start=0.1651, final=0.1657 >> R-free: start=0.2018, final=0.2009 >> Bonds: start=0.013, final=0.013 >> Angles: start=1.409, final= 1.411

1 0

autosolve density modification question
by Scott Horowitz 10 Dec '15

10 Dec '15

Hi, a quick question: if when running autosolve on SAD data, if I set the parameter build = false, will that disable all model building, including any model building that would be a part of the density modification process? I'm especially curious about the case if build = false, but mask_type = histograms. I am currently assuming that the histogram matching does not use model building as part of it, and would like to know if this interpretation is correct. Thanks, Scott -- Scott Horowitz, Ph.D. Research Associate Howard Hughes Medical Institute University of Michigan Department of Molecular, Cellular, and Developmental Biology Bardwell lab 830 N. University Ave, Room 4007 Ann Arbor, MI 48109 phone: 734-647-6683 fax: 734-615-4226

4 4

Phenix dev-2247 fails to start
by Chen Zhao 07 Dec '15

07 Dec '15

Dear developers, I am now having some troubles initiating the most updated nightly built dev-2247. I have to use this version because it is supposed to have a bug fixed based on my bug report in November. My machine is running Debian 7 with kernel version 3.2.0-4-amd64. And the pheinx installation file I downloaded is the 64 bit linux version for CentOS 5. The symptom is that after I called phenix from a terminal window, there is an error message saying "local 'en_GB' cannot be set" (which is always the case and which does not seem to matter). After that, phenix GUI did not start at all, but ps command shows two python2.7 processes running. Running phenix from command line seems to work fine. Before switching to this version I was running the stable version 1.10.1-2155, and have no problem. Is there any simple fix? If not, I will probably just stick to the command line version for the moment. Thanks a lot, Chen

4 3

differences in refinement stats between phenix-dev-2219 and -1.9-1692
by Ezequiel Noguera 06 Dec '15

06 Dec '15

Hello, I'm working in a refinement that I started some time ago. I noted that repeating the same refinement task using a newer version of phenix, the refinement statistics Before and After refinement are different from values of the old version (I used "restore job" from the Job history to repeat the same task in the two versions installed in the same PC). Any explanation? I'm worried about the rms deviation. Thanks in advance. new version:R-work: start=0.1697, final=0.1761R-free: start=0.2011, final=0.2053Bonds: start=0.046, final=0.029Angles: start=1.321, final= 0.631 old version:R-work: start=0.1651, final=0.1657R-free: start=0.2018, final=0.2009Bonds: start=0.013, final=0.013Angles: start=1.409, final= 1.411

2 1

Trends In Initial Crystallization Screening (Reminder)
by Mustafa Koksal 30 Nov '15

30 Nov '15

Dear members of the crystallography community, I would like to assess the tendency/trend in our community to outsource initial crystallization screening experiments. Here, outsourcing refers to sending your protein/DNA/RNA sample to a service provider, who will set up crystallization experiments, take images of crystallization drops at various time points, make images available to you, and, if you require, send you the plate to retrieve any crystals. To do assessment, I prepared a short-answer questionnaire, which contains 10 questions and should take less than 5 minutes to complete. I especially encourage the new PIs and young researchers to complete the questionnaire. Could you please fill out the questionnaire at the following link? https://tr.surveymonkey.com/r/BVNCPVV In case you are unwilling to click links in e-mails, I also included the questions here. Please reply with answers in private to: mustafakoksal(a)iyte.edu.tr Thank you very much for your contribution. Mustafa Questionnaire: 1. Have you outsourced initial crystallization screening experiments in any of your projects before? Yes No 2. If you did, what format and type of experiment you used (choose all that apply)? 96 well/plate 384 well/plate 1536 well/plate Sitting Drop Hanging Drop Microbatch Other (please specify) 3. If you did, what price did you pay per 96-conditions? 4. If you did not, what prevented you from outsourcing (choose all that apply)? It is costly Shipping a sample is hard Privacy concerns I prefer to do it in my lab I do not think it is advantageous I do not have enough sample Other (please specify) 5. Would you be interested in outsourcing initial crystallization screening experiments in future? Yes No 6. If you are interested, which method would you prefer (choose all that apply)? Sitting Drop Hanging Drop Microbatch Counter Diffusion Other (please specify) 7. If you are interested, up to what price would you be willing to pay per 96-conditions? $1 $2 $3 $4 $5 $6 $8 $10 $12 $15 $20 $25 $30 $50 8. If you are interested, what would be your minimum-maximum throughput (# of 96-condition experiments per month)? Note: a 1536-condition experiment is 16 x 96-condition experiments? 1 - 2 2 - 4 4 - 8 8 - 12 12 - 16 16 - 32 32 - 64 32 - 128 More than 128 9. How much sample would you be willing to sacrifice per screening 96-conditions (please specify in micrometers)? 10. Do you have any other comments? End of Questions -- Mustafa Koksal Postdoctoral Fellow University of Pennsylvania Department of Chemistry Roy and Diana Vagelos Laboratories Office: 2090 IAST Office Phone: (215) 898-2227 Mobile Phone: (267) 319-6443 Mail Address: 231 S. 34th St, Philadelphia 19104, USA --

2 1

lose the jobs history when update/install phenix new version
by caio reis 26 Nov '15

26 Nov '15

Hi, my name is Caio, I do Ph.D in biomolecular physics at University of Sao Paulo, Brazil, and I am writing to know if anyone knows if I'm gonna lose my job history in Phenix, if I update my version to the newest one. I work with many proteins and structures (MR, autobuild, phenix.refine, etc), so as I can better manage my jobs and archives using and consulting my job history in Phenix interface. I also want to know, if I can use de openmp without having to compile phenix again...because I don't want to lose my job history (in case it can be lost when Phenix is updated/installed again/compiled). Thank you in advance.

2 1

RapiData 2016
by Smith, Clyde 26 Nov '15

26 Nov '15

The 2016 RapiData Course on Data Collection and Structure Solution will take place at the Stanford Synchrotron Radiation Lightsource (SSRL) from April 24-29 2016. The aim of the course is to educate and train scientists in data collection and processing methods at synchrotron beamlines, using state-of-the-art software and instrumentation. The course will comprise hands-on experiments at the SSRL beamlines, software tutorials, and lectures on sample preparation, data collection and reduction, phasing and complementary methods. For a more complete description of the course goals and format see http://smb.slac.stanford.edu/rapidata-2016/about.html The deadline for applications is January 4th 2016. To apply follow this link: http://smb.slac.stanford.edu/rapidata-2016/registration.html Several scholarships are available from the International Union of Crystallography to cover partial travel and subsistence for Latin-American students, postdocs and junior faculty. Additional funds may be also be awarded to other participants without restrictions on a per need basis. The instructions to apply for these scholarships can be found in the application page. RapiData 2016 will take place immediately after Crystallization: Focus on Micro and Nano Crystals and High Throughput Methods (April 19-22 2016), also at SSRL. Together, the two courses will cover most aspects of crystal structure determination and we encourage participation in both. For information about the Crystallization course see http://smb.slac.stanford.edu/news/cryst_focus_on/cryst_focus_on_2016/ or contact the organizers: Vivian Stojanoff (vivian.stojanoff(a)gmail.com) or Silvia Russi (srussi(a)slac.stanford.edu) The Organizing Committee of RapiData 2016 shall observe the basic policy of non-discrimination and affirms the right and freedom of scientists to associate in international scientific activity without regard to such factors as ethnic origin, religion, citizenship, language, political stance, gender, sex or age, in accordance with the Statutes of the International Council for Science. At this course no barriers will exist which would prevent the participation of bona fide scientists. Ana Gonzalez and Clyde Smith

1 0

error when running phenix_rosetta_refine
by Wei Wang 19 Nov '15

19 Nov '15

Hi, I just experienced an error when using phenix_rosetta_refine. It appeared after "Generating 5 models". I'd appreciate any help on solving this. Generating 5 models on 3 processors... DEBUG dumping error message ERROR: Rosetta exited with status 1 stderr output: Traceback (most recent call last): File "/Applications/phenix-1.10.1-2155/modules/phenix/phenix/rosetta/xray_target.py", line 203, in compute_target tfx_r = self.target_functor(compute_gradients=compute_gradients) File "/Applications/phenix-1.10.1-2155/modules/cctbx_project/mmtbx/refinement/targets.py", line 247, in __call__ compute_gradients=compute_gradients)) File "/Applications/phenix-1.10.1-2155/modules/cctbx_project/cctbx/xray/target_functors.py", line 58, in __call__ compute_gradients=compute_gradients) RuntimeError: cctbx Internal Error: /Users/builder/slave/phenix-nightly-mac-intel-osx-x86_64-10_9/modules/cctbx_project/cctbx/xray/targets.h(498): CCTBX_ASSERT(f_calc.size() == f_obs.size()) failure. ERROR: error computing X-ray target

1 0