Re: [phenixbb] Restraining altloc related atoms during refinement
I have my doubts about supporting NCS restraints of alternative conformations; the two seem to be mutually exclusive. But maybe I don't understand your situtation.
Here are some more details on the refinement situation: it is possible for a piece of duplex DNA to be positioned in two conformations in the crystal, and it appears that both conformations are occupied with roughly the same occupancy. The sequence is not completely palindromic, so at some positions a different base is present depending on the random orientation of the DNA. However, the phosphate and ribose atoms occupy the same positions regardless of the orientation, and I want to enforce this.
I can see that NCS restraints of backbone atoms only are useful, even if the residue names are different. The trouble is that atoms in two chains need to be matched unambiguously while allowing for chain breaks. I could try to simply remove the requirement that the residue names have to match and go by residue sequence number + insertion code only. Would that work in your case?
Yes, that sounds like it would work.
A potential downside is that people have to be careful excluding non-matching sidechain atoms.
Perhaps it could be that there is an
override option after an error message.
Thanks for your help.
-John
--
John Pascal, PhD ph 215.503.4596
Assistant Professor fx 215.923.2117
Thomas Jefferson University
Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
233 South 10th Street, BLSB 804
Philadelphia, Pennsylvania 19107
----- Forwarded message from [email protected] -----
Date: Thu, 20 May 2010 11:54:33 -0400
From: John Pascal
Hi John,
Here are some more details on the refinement situation: it is possible for a piece of duplex DNA to be positioned in two conformations in the crystal, and it appears that both conformations are occupied with roughly the same occupancy. The sequence is not completely palindromic, so at some positions a different base is present depending on the random orientation of the DNA. However, the phosphate and ribose atoms occupy the same positions regardless of the orientation, and I want to enforce this.
I see; this is what Nat was guessing. Could you send me (not the list) the pdb file of this structure?
Yes, that sounds like it would work.
A potential downside is that people have to be careful excluding non-matching sidechain atoms.
Perhaps it could be that there is an override option after an error message.
Sounds like we need two new options, match_conformers=True and match_resid_only=True. Ralf
participants (2)
-
John Pascal
-
Ralf W. Grosse-Kunstleve