Hi,
The strategy depends also on the resolution of the data, so if you could tell us that, we can give suggestions. Also the type of data, I guess X-ray diffraction?
Out of curiosity, how do model quality metrics look like (clashscore, ramachandran, etc) at this point? If you keep coordinates fixed, they won't improve in refinement.
Best wishes,
Dorothee
On Fri, Aug 7, 2020 at 2:52 PM Joey Farrell <[email protected]> wrote:
_______________________________________________Hello,
I am trying to design a set of input parameters that I will be passing through the phenix.refine function. The structures
that I am working with have already had their X,Y, and Z orthogonal Å coordinates optimised via separate protocol.
I am looking for advice on which strategies and parameter values to use with phenix.refine to improve the crystallographic R-factors
of such structures while preserving their earlier optimisation in real space.
I have been having some success using “strategy = tls+individual_adp+occupancies” (where tls = “chain A”, tls = “chain B”, etc.) as
well as adjusting the wxu_scale value until R-work and R-free are minimised. Are there other strategies or phenix.refine functionalities
that may also prove helpful with this end in mind? I believe there may be ways to further improve R-work and R-free with this software
that I am not yet aware of.
Thank you for your help!
Best,
Joey
phenixbb mailing list
[email protected]
http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
Unsubscribe: [email protected]
--
Project Scientist, Molecular Biophysics and Integrated Bioimaging
Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory1 Cyclotron Road, M/S 33R0345Berkeley, CA 94720Tel: (510) 486-5709Fax: (510) 486-5909
_______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb Unsubscribe: [email protected]