- phenixbb - phenix-online.org

Autobuild in specific area
by Zhang Foggy 13 Sep '14

13 Sep '14

Hi, All, I am trying to use Autobuild to build a protein-protein complex model. I obtained partial phase solution (protein-A) through MR, and can see some density of protein-B near protein-A. I would like to use Autobuild to build protein-B model into this area. I load data file, initial density map file, sequence file (both of protein A and B), and protein A model, and run Autobuild. However, The "rebuild-in-place" function confused me a lot, no matter I set it to True or False. When I set to True, it only rebuilt protein A model without adding any additional residues; while I set it to False, it deleted the input protein-A model, and rebuilt a new one... Could somebody tell me how to build the protein B model with keeping the input protein A model in Autobuild? Thanks. Foggy

1 0

phenix rosetta installation
by Dan Lin 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

Hi all: This is kind of a silly problem, but I'm trying to get phenix.rosetta_refine running on my computer and I am having some difficulty getting rosetta.build_phenix_interface to run. I'm getting a permission denied error in the os.symlink(python_lib, lib_link_name) line in rosetta_build_phenix_interface.py script and presumably I could fix this by changing the write permissions to wherever this points to, but I don't know where. Could anybody point me towards the folder that needs to fixed? Thanks, Dan

2 1

restraints for dna planarity
by John Lee 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

Hi, I'm refining a low resolution structure of a dna-protein complex (3.7A) & wondering if someone could help me with setting restraints in Phenix to maintain the base-pair planarity of the dna? With the restraints I have, even with a reference model, I'm getting 'puckering' of the base-pairs. Although the h-bonding distances seem to hold over time, I can't seem to find a way to keep the planarity intact. Thanks in advance for your help. -John

3 2

Phenix-Rosetta integration tests fail with Rosetta MPI on RHEL 6.3
by Sina Masoud-Ansari 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

Hi there, I'm wondering anyone has managed to successfully run Phenix with Rosetta MPI on Red Hat Enterprise Linux 6.3 or similar? I currently have a non-MPI build of Rosetta that passes all of the tests in phenix_regression.wizards.test_command_line_rosetta_quick However when running these tests with the MPI build of Rosetta the following tests fail: Running test_relax ------------------------------------------------------------ Numbers do not match: 6 1 Relaxed solutions 6 --- Relaxed solutions 1 ------------------------------------------------------------ FAILED See log files test_relax/test_relax.log test_relax/test_relax_current.log ================================================================= Running test_relax_double ------------------------------------------------------------ Numbers do not match: 6 1 Relaxed solutions 6 --- Relaxed solutions 1 ------------------------------------------------------------ ------------------------------------------------------------ Numbers do not match: 6 1 Relaxed solutions 6 --- Relaxed solutions 1 ------------------------------------------------------------ FAILED See log files test_relax_double/test_relax_double.log test_relax_double/test_relax_double_current.log ================================================================= Running test_relax_no_sol ------------------------------------------------------------ Numbers do not match: 6 1 Relaxed solutions 6 --- Relaxed solutions 1 ------------------------------------------------------------ FAILED See log files test_relax_no_sol/test_relax_no_sol.log test_relax_no_sol/test_relax_no_sol_current.log I have attempted to attach an archive of the logs. I'm working with Rosetta 3.5, more recent versions of Rosetta fail other tests in phenix_regression.wizards.test_command_line_rosetta_quick , please see https://www.rosettacommons.org/node/3721 for details. Rosetta 3.5 was compiled with GCC 4.4.6 using OpenMPI 1.6.4 Any help or advice is appreciated. -- Sina Masoud-Ansari Centre for eResearch 409.G21 24 Symonds Street University of Auckland e: s.ansari(a)auckland.ac.nz p: +64 9 3737599 ext 89369 w: http://www.eresearch.auckland.ac.nz

3 4

phenix refine geometry restraints
by George Devaniranjan 12 Sep '14

12 Sep '14

Hi, I was trying to restrain the N-CA-C angle to 110.0 I updated the .def file as follows: angle { action = *add atom_selection_1 = name N atom_selection_2 = name CA atom_selection_3 = name C angle_ideal = 110.0 sigma = 2 I got the following: Sorry: More than one atom selected: "name N" Number of selected atoms: 86 I tried using N in quotes and it doesn't work either but the example in the website had this(below), what am I doing wrong? resname ALA and (name ca or name c or name n or name o) Thank you

2 1

refinement for non-standard DNA base
by John Cheong 11 Sep '14

11 Sep '14

Hi, I have 5-fluoro-Uracil in my DNA:protein complex. I modeled 5-F-dU into the map, ran eLBOW for geometry file and did refinement. After the refinement, 5-F-dU is not connected to the neighboring nucleotides and the phosphate oxygens are rotated to wrong positions. Can anyone teach me how to refine with non-standard DNA base ? Any help or advice would be appreciated. John

2 1

Occupancy refinement of anomalous scatters
by Chen Zhao 09 Sep '14

09 Sep '14

Hi all, I have a question about the occupancy refinement of the anomalous scatters. This is because when I went through all the HA sites, I found that some of them has too high B factor and too high occ. I manually adjusted the occ and fed the model into refinement, but the B factor and occ came back to around their original level again. It seems that those have a stronger peak in the anomalous difference Fourier map has a higher occupancy after refinement, but this does not necessarily equals to a strong density peak in 2Fo-Fc map (some of them even disappear after refinement), and this might be related to their high B factor. Am I doing something wrong in the refinement? I am basically using phenix.refine default setting, but with TLS+isotropic B factor refinement and occupancy refinement of a small region (5-8 residues). The resolution is 3 A, and the refinement is already at the final stage. I am still at the learning stage and your input will be greatly appreciated. Thank you! Sincerely, Chen

2 1

Refinement and Density modification
by Ashu S 09 Sep '14

09 Sep '14

Dear all, I am working on a 3.6A Se SAD data. Autosol followed by autobuild gave a decent map (as expected at this resolution) with a moderate trace. After building poly ala trace and assigning few resides in and around Se positions when I refine the model, all the sharp features of the electron density map are lost. For example, a nice looking helical density becomes a tube. I presume that this happens because wilson B is high (~110 A2) and the map requires modification, sharpening etc. Is there a way to get the map with similar sharp features after model building and refinement as auto build gives? How could I follow exactly the same steps of density modification etc which auto build does? Thanks, Ashu

2 1

Refinement and Density Modification
by Ashu S 08 Sep '14

08 Sep '14

Dear all, I am working on a 3.6A Se SAD data. Autosol followed by autobuild gave a decent map (as expected at this resolution) with a moderate trace. After building poly ala trace and assigning few resides in and around Se positions when I refine the model, all the sharp features of the electron density map are lost. For example, a nice looking helical density becomes a tube. I presume that this happens because wilson B is high (~110 A2) and the map requires modification, sharpening etc. Is there a way to get the map with similar sharp features after model building and refinement as auto build gives? How could I follow exactly the same steps of density modification etc which auto build does? Thanks, Ashu

1 0

refine anomalous
by Andreas Förster 08 Sep '14

08 Sep '14

Dear all, I've solved a structure from a SAD dataset collected at 1.54 Å. The structure contains a good number of sulfurs and also what I think is a potassium ion. To verify, I chose a refinement strategy including "Anomalous groups". This worked well in an important way - R values down by 2 percentage points - but the refined f' and f" values are way off. I start out with these parameters in *.eff: anomalous_scatterers { group { selection = (name SD or name SG) f_prime = 0.319342 f_double_prime = 0.557592 refine = *f_prime *f_double_prime } group { selection = name K f_prime = 0.365562 f_double_prime = 1.06736 refine = *f_prime *f_double_prime } } What I get back is: Anomalous scatterer group: Selection: "(name SD or name SG)" Number of selected scatterers: 15 f_prime: -1.15797 f_double_prime: 0.00577091 refine: f_prime f_double_prime Anomalous scatterer group: Selection: "name K" Number of selected scatterers: 1 f_prime: -4.41689 f_double_prime: 0.00271946 refine: f_prime f_double_prime I thought I'd get close to the book values for S and would be able to identify the other anomalous scatterer by the refined f'/f" values. Naiveté or stupidity? Thank you. Andreas -- Andreas Förster Crystallization and X-ray Facility Manager Centre for Structural Biology Imperial College London

2 1