Problem in reducing R-factor
Hi all, I am solving a crystal structure at 1.3Å. Completeness of the data-set and Figure of merit at this resolution are 99.5% and 0.62 respectively. Structure has two molecules per asymmetric unit. I used TLS parameters and NCS restraints. WXC_scale and WXU_scale are 0.50 and 1.0 respectively. Rwork and Rfree are 18.09 and 19.62 respectively. I tried with reducing WXC_scale and WXU scale to 0.25 and 0.30 respectively but it did not help. Please suggest me if I need to change some parameters. I shall be grateful for your help. Thanking you, Bishal Singh Graduate student University of Heidelberg, Germany
What if you don't use NCS with your rfactor
Jürgen
......................
Jürgen Bosch
Johns Hopkins Bloomberg School of Public Health
Department of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology
Johns Hopkins Malaria Research Institute
615 North Wolfe Street, W8708
Baltimore, MD 21205
Phone: +1-410-614-4742
Lab: +1-410-614-4894
Fax: +1-410-955-3655
http://lupo.jhsph.edu
On Oct 11, 2013, at 9:19, "Singh, Bishal"
Hi all, I am solving a crystal structure at 1.3Å. Completeness of the data-set and Figure of merit at this resolution are 99.5% and 0.62 respectively. Structure has two molecules per asymmetric unit. I used TLS parameters and NCS restraints. WXC_scale and WXU_scale are 0.50 and 1.0 respectively. Rwork and Rfree are 18.09 and 19.62 respectively. I tried with reducing WXC_scale and WXU scale to 0.25 and 0.30 respectively but it did not help. Please suggest me if I need to change some parameters. I shall be grateful for your help.
Thanking you, Bishal Singh Graduate student University of Heidelberg, Germany _______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
Hi,
I am solving a crystal structure at 1.3Å.
I would expect Rwork~0.15-0.17, Rfree~0.17-0.19 at this resolution (numbers obtained using phenix.r_factor_statistics).
Completeness of the data-set (...) at this resolution are 99.5%
Completeness reported as single number (as opposed to completeness reported vs resolution) isn't really very informative..
Structure has two molecules per asymmetric unit. I used TLS parameters and NCS restraints.
Resolution limit for using NCS is roughly about 2A. So turning OFF NCS is clearly a good idea. However, effect of using torsion NCS should vanish at this resolution. So I am particularly interested to know if turning NCS off helps or shows any effect at all.
Rwork and Rfree are 18.09 and 19.62 respectively.
If it is really 1.3A resolution then R-factors could be better.
I tried with reducing WXC_scale
If you choose to do it manually then at this resolution you should rather try increasing this value, as the target is T = wxc_scale * wxc * Tdata + wc * Trestraints . If none of the above helps please send me data and model files and I will try suggesting optimal refinement strategy. Pavel
What happens if you try refining protein atoms (but not waters) with
individual anisotropic B-factors instead of TLS? It isn't guaranteed to
work at 1.3Å, but it usually does (in my hands, anyway).
Also make sure you have explicit hydrogens added; this will have a
significant effect at this resolution. And turn on the water update if you
haven't already.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 6:19 AM, Singh, Bishal
Hi all, I am solving a crystal structure at 1.3Å. Completeness of the data-set and Figure of merit at this resolution are 99.5% and 0.62 respectively. Structure has two molecules per asymmetric unit. I used TLS parameters and NCS restraints. WXC_scale and WXU_scale are 0.50 and 1.0 respectively. Rwork and Rfree are 18.09 and 19.62 respectively. I tried with reducing WXC_scale and WXU scale to 0.25 and 0.30 respectively but it did not help. Please suggest me if I need to change some parameters. I shall be grateful for your help.
Thanking you, Bishal Singh Graduate student University of Heidelberg, Germany _______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
I'm *thinking* (not doing it right now) to make phenix.refine do something of this sort automatically if the resolution is really 1.3A (and not in fact say 1.5 or so but data file has a couple of reflections nearing 1.3A, which would tend people claim it is 1.3A resolution!) and r-factors are not too far to expected ones given *actual* data resolution. Of course "1.3A" in this case is going to be a range between 1 and 1.5A in terms of data quality. Pavel On 10/11/13 8:39 AM, Nathaniel Echols wrote:
What happens if you try refining protein atoms (but not waters) with individual anisotropic B-factors instead of TLS? It isn't guaranteed to work at 1.3Å, but it usually does (in my hands, anyway).
Also make sure you have explicit hydrogens added; this will have a significant effect at this resolution. And turn on the water update if you haven't already.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 6:19 AM, Singh, Bishal
mailto:[email protected]> wrote: Hi all, I am solving a crystal structure at 1.3Å. Completeness of the data-set and Figure of merit at this resolution are 99.5% and 0.62 respectively. Structure has two molecules per asymmetric unit. I used TLS parameters and NCS restraints. WXC_scale and WXU_scale are 0.50 and 1.0 respectively. Rwork and Rfree are 18.09 and 19.62 respectively. I tried with reducing WXC_scale and WXU scale to 0.25 and 0.30 respectively but it did not help. Please suggest me if I need to change some parameters. I shall be grateful for your help.
Thanking you, Bishal Singh Graduate student University of Heidelberg, Germany _______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] mailto:[email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
_______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
Hi Nat and Phenix community, For high resolution structures, below 1.5 Å, is there a set of rules for best practices for refinement? I've been toying with different parameters and found that the weighting didn't make a huge difference, which is probably expected, with a 1.3 Å dataset. Do stereochemical/ADP weights have any effect? With weighting Rwork 0.1573 Rfree 0.1806 RMS (bonds) 0.0073 RMS(angles) 1.468 Clashscore: 6.1 Ramachandran: 100 Ramachandran outliers: 0 Rotamer outliers: 0 CC ~0.94 Without weighting- Rwork: 0.1603 Rfree: 0.1840 RMS (bonds) 0.0049 RMS(angles) 1.272 Clashscore: 7.6 Ramachandran favored: 100 Ramachandran outliers: 0 Rotamer outliers: 0 CC ~0.94 For the particular data set I'm working with, I'm refining directly against anomalous data, more specifically against 12 Iodines. Refining the f' and f" has worked well, generating a beautiful density map. Refining against the model with hydrogens increased the Rfree/Rwork values by about 2 points. From what I've read previously I thought refining hydrogens in a non-"riding" model was only valid below ~1.0 Å. The previous phenix notes http://www.phenix-online.org/presentations/latest/pavel_phenix_refine.pdf , slide 23 has the combination of anisotropic B-factors with TLS refinement for atoms. This combination worked well for reducing the Rfree/Rwork values by a few points. For water, I assume that at this resolution there is a combination of anisotropic (big banana looking density) and isotropic waters and that one cannot simply rely entirely on the water_update option. Partial occupancy has been hit or miss, during one refinement it will appear that there is density for an alternative conformation. After adding the alternative conformation the density will disappear or show that no density should be there. In other instances refinement of the partial occupancies has worked well. The twin law has worked great, usually dropping Rfree/Rwork values by 5 points or so. I apologize if any of this is common knowledge and shows my relative inexperience when it comes to best practices for crystal refinement. Ryan Spencer University Of California, Irvine Nowick Research Group -----Original Message----- From: [email protected] [mailto:[email protected]] On Behalf Of Pavel Afonine Sent: Friday, October 11, 2013 12:17 PM To: [email protected] Subject: Re: [phenixbb] Problem in reducing R-factor I'm *thinking* (not doing it right now) to make phenix.refine do something of this sort automatically if the resolution is really 1.3A (and not in fact say 1.5 or so but data file has a couple of reflections nearing 1.3A, which would tend people claim it is 1.3A resolution!) and r-factors are not too far to expected ones given *actual* data resolution. Of course "1.3A" in this case is going to be a range between 1 and 1.5A in terms of data quality. Pavel On 10/11/13 8:39 AM, Nathaniel Echols wrote:
What happens if you try refining protein atoms (but not waters) with individual anisotropic B-factors instead of TLS? It isn't guaranteed to work at 1.3Å, but it usually does (in my hands, anyway).
Also make sure you have explicit hydrogens added; this will have a significant effect at this resolution. And turn on the water update if you haven't already.
On Fri, Oct 11, 2013 at 6:19 AM, Singh, Bishal
mailto:[email protected]> wrote: Hi all, I am solving a crystal structure at 1.3Å. Completeness of the data-set and Figure of merit at this resolution are 99.5% and 0.62 respectively. Structure has two molecules per asymmetric unit. I used TLS parameters and NCS restraints. WXC_scale and WXU_scale are 0.50 and 1.0 respectively. Rwork and Rfree are 18.09 and 19.62 respectively. I tried with reducing WXC_scale and WXU scale to 0.25 and 0.30 respectively but it did not help. Please suggest me if I need to change some parameters. I shall be grateful for your help.
Thanking you, Bishal Singh Graduate student University of Heidelberg, Germany _______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] mailto:[email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
_______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
_______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb
participants (5)
-
Bosch, Juergen
-
Nathaniel Echols
-
Pavel Afonine
-
Ryan Spencer
-
Singh, Bishal