PHASER-TFZ scores with ensembles higher?
Dear Phaser users, I recently tried to solve two difficult MR jobs by using ensembles in PHASER. With ENSEMBLES in this case I mean aligned structures prepared for PHASER by Phenix.ENSEMBLER. In both case I got solution with rather high TFZ-score (> 8), which I couldn't get wit individual structure, but was not able to refine them. My question is, whether using ensembles would increase the Z-Score without really improving phases. In other words, if there is another cut-off for the "Phaser solved it" Z-score, when using ensemble in contrast to single structures... Regards, Jan -- Dr. Jan Gebauer AG Prof. Baumann Institut für Biochemie / Uni-Köln Otto-Fischer-Str. 12-14 / 50674 Köln Fon: +49 (221) 470 3212 Fax: +49 (221) 470 5066 http://px.uni-koeln.de/
Dear Jan,
If you send the logfile (preferably off-list to avoid cluttering mailboxes) I can have a look to see whether it seems convincing. Having a Z-score greater than 8 is usually a very good sign, particularly with recent versions of Phaser that account for the statistical effects of translational NCS (before which it was possible to get a very high Z-score for a spurious solution). Some other things we like to see are that no potential solutions with comparable or higher Z-scores were rejected by the packing tests, and that the refined LLG after placing the first molecule is greater than 60.
There are certainly cases where there's an unambiguous solution but the phases are too poor to get anywhere with refinement. This is a really active area of research. For a good fraction of such cases, phenix.mr_rosetta increases the convergence radius enough that you can get over the refinement barrier (method and examples in DiMaio et al, 2001: http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3365536/). There's also Tom Terwilliger's morphing procedure (phenix.morph_model), and using the right refinement protocol can also help tremendously, such as the DEN refinement from Axel Brunger's group (also implemented in phenix) and jelly-body refinement implemented by Garib Murshudov in Refmac.
If that's not enough, then you'll need additional phase information, either from experimental phasing or, if you have multiple crystal forms of the same molecule, multi-crystal averaging.
The short answer is that you can solve the molecular replacement problem without actually solving the structure. However, if the LLG is higher (which almost always goes together with a higher Z-score) the phases will also be better, but they may still not be good enough.
Regards,
Randy Read
On 28 Jun 2013, at 08:02, Jan Gebauer
Dear Phaser users,
I recently tried to solve two difficult MR jobs by using ensembles in PHASER. With ENSEMBLES in this case I mean aligned structures prepared for PHASER by Phenix.ENSEMBLER. In both case I got solution with rather high TFZ-score (> 8), which I couldn't get wit individual structure, but was not able to refine them.
My question is, whether using ensembles would increase the Z-Score without really improving phases. In other words, if there is another cut-off for the "Phaser solved it" Z-score, when using ensemble in contrast to single structures...
Regards, Jan -- Dr. Jan Gebauer AG Prof. Baumann Institut für Biochemie / Uni-Köln Otto-Fischer-Str. 12-14 / 50674 Köln Fon: +49 (221) 470 3212 Fax: +49 (221) 470 5066
http://px.uni-koeln.de/ _______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
------ Randy J. Read Department of Haematology, University of Cambridge Cambridge Institute for Medical Research Tel: + 44 1223 336500 Wellcome Trust/MRC Building Fax: + 44 1223 336827 Hills Road E-mail: [email protected] Cambridge CB2 0XY, U.K. www-structmed.cimr.cam.ac.uk
Dear Jan, I leave the it for the more knowledgeable to answer your question about the effect of ensembles on TFZ. It is, however, not uncommon that a solution with an ensemble is difficult to refine (at least with a single model), esp. when none of the ensemble members are good models (which you have verified). In this case, you may get better results by building a "chimera" model (recombining parts of the ensembles that match the electron density best) and use that one for refinement. We have implemented an automatic procedure for phaser.MRage output using Tom Terwilliger's phenix.combine_models program, and this could be modified to work with Phaser output as well. Let me know if this were potentially useful for you now. BW, Gabor On Jun 28 2013, Jan Gebauer wrote:
Dear Phaser users,
I recently tried to solve two difficult MR jobs by using ensembles in PHASER. With ENSEMBLES in this case I mean aligned structures prepared for PHASER by Phenix.ENSEMBLER. In both case I got solution with rather high TFZ-score (> 8), which I couldn't get wit individual structure, but was not able to refine them.
My question is, whether using ensembles would increase the Z-Score without really improving phases. In other words, if there is another cut-off for the "Phaser solved it" Z-score, when using ensemble in contrast to single structures...
Regards, Jan
-- ################################################## Dr Gabor Bunkoczi Cambridge Institute for Medical Research Wellcome Trust/MRC Building Addenbrooke's Hospital Hills Road Cambridge CB2 0XY ##################################################
Dear Gabor,
that sound indeed very interesting...
I haven't used MRage yet. Do you think that is more capable (at least in
some aspects) than PHASER?
Best,
Jan
Am 28.06.2013, 10:24 Uhr, schrieb Gabor Bunkoczi
Dear Jan,
I leave the it for the more knowledgeable to answer your question about the effect of ensembles on TFZ. It is, however, not uncommon that a solution with an ensemble is difficult to refine (at least with a single model), esp. when none of the ensemble members are good models (which you have verified). In this case, you may get better results by building a "chimera" model (recombining parts of the ensembles that match the electron density best) and use that one for refinement. We have implemented an automatic procedure for phaser.MRage output using Tom Terwilliger's phenix.combine_models program, and this could be modified to work with Phaser output as well. Let me know if this were potentially useful for you now.
BW, Gabor
On Jun 28 2013, Jan Gebauer wrote:
Dear Phaser users,
I recently tried to solve two difficult MR jobs by using ensembles in PHASER. With ENSEMBLES in this case I mean aligned structures prepared for PHASER by Phenix.ENSEMBLER. In both case I got solution with rather high TFZ-score (> 8), which I couldn't get wit individual structure, but was not able to refine them.
My question is, whether using ensembles would increase the Z-Score without really improving phases. In other words, if there is another cut-off for the "Phaser solved it" Z-score, when using ensemble in contrast to single structures...
Regards, Jan
-- Dr. Jan Gebauer AG Prof. Baumann Institut für Biochemie / Uni-Köln Otto-Fischer-Str. 12-14 / 50674 Köln Fon: +49 (221) 470 3212 Fax: +49 (221) 470 5066 http://px.uni-koeln.de/
Dear Jan, MRage is running Phaser code behind the surface, so the two should perform equally. However, the output format is different, and right now this prevents you from running the ensemble reduction procedure. As a workaround, you could re-run the molecular replacement with MRage, just to try it out. On the longer run, we will make it work with Phaser output, if it proves useful. BW, Gabor On Jun 28 2013, Jan Gebauer wrote:
Dear Gabor,
that sound indeed very interesting... I haven't used MRage yet. Do you think that is more capable (at least in some aspects) than PHASER?
Best, Jan
Am 28.06.2013, 10:24 Uhr, schrieb Gabor Bunkoczi
: Dear Jan,
I leave the it for the more knowledgeable to answer your question about the effect of ensembles on TFZ. It is, however, not uncommon that a solution with an ensemble is difficult to refine (at least with a single model), esp. when none of the ensemble members are good models (which you have verified). In this case, you may get better results by building a "chimera" model (recombining parts of the ensembles that match the electron density best) and use that one for refinement. We have implemented an automatic procedure for phaser.MRage output using Tom Terwilliger's phenix.combine_models program, and this could be modified to work with Phaser output as well. Let me know if this were potentially useful for you now.
BW, Gabor
On Jun 28 2013, Jan Gebauer wrote:
Dear Phaser users,
I recently tried to solve two difficult MR jobs by using ensembles in PHASER. With ENSEMBLES in this case I mean aligned structures prepared for PHASER by Phenix.ENSEMBLER. In both case I got solution with rather high TFZ-score (> 8), which I couldn't get wit individual structure, but was not able to refine them.
My question is, whether using ensembles would increase the Z-Score without really improving phases. In other words, if there is another cut-off for the "Phaser solved it" Z-score, when using ensemble in contrast to single structures...
Regards, Jan
participants (3)
-
Gabor Bunkoczi
-
Jan Gebauer
-
Randy Read