<html xmlns:v="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:vml" xmlns:o="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:office" xmlns:w="urn:schemas-microsoft-com:office:word" xmlns:m="http://schemas.microsoft.com/office/2004/12/omml" xmlns="http://www.w3.org/TR/REC-html40"><head><meta http-equiv=Content-Type content="text/html; charset=iso-8859-1"><meta name=Generator content="Microsoft Word 14 (filtered medium)"><style><!--
/* Font Definitions */
@font-face
{font-family:SimSun;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:SimSun;
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
@font-face
{font-family:Calibri;
panose-1:2 15 5 2 2 2 4 3 2 4;}
@font-face
{font-family:"\@SimSun";
panose-1:2 1 6 0 3 1 1 1 1 1;}
/* Style Definitions */
p.MsoNormal, li.MsoNormal, div.MsoNormal
{margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
a:link, span.MsoHyperlink
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:blue;
text-decoration:underline;}
a:visited, span.MsoHyperlinkFollowed
{mso-style-priority:99;
color:purple;
text-decoration:underline;}
p.MsoPlainText, li.MsoPlainText, div.MsoPlainText
{mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text Char";
margin:0in;
margin-bottom:.0001pt;
font-size:11.0pt;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
span.PlainTextChar
{mso-style-name:"Plain Text Char";
mso-style-priority:99;
mso-style-link:"Plain Text";
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
.MsoChpDefault
{mso-style-type:export-only;
font-family:"Calibri","sans-serif";}
@page WordSection1
{size:8.5in 11.0in;
margin:1.0in 1.0in 1.0in 1.0in;}
div.WordSection1
{page:WordSection1;}
--></style><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapedefaults v:ext="edit" spidmax="1026" />
</xml><![endif]--><!--[if gte mso 9]><xml>
<o:shapelayout v:ext="edit">
<o:idmap v:ext="edit" data="1" />
</o:shapelayout></xml><![endif]--></head><body lang=EN-US link=blue vlink=purple><div class=WordSection1><p class=MsoPlainText><a name="_MailEndCompose">Hi Nat, Kelly, Kay and J�rgen,<o:p></o:p></a></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>I also prefer the I422 with 1 mol/ASU since all the analysis pointed to higher symmetry. I will refine with I422 and report back. <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>__________________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>The xtriage log for I422 data says high combined Z-score: <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>� The quarter of Intensities *least* affected by the anisotropy correction show<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>��� <I/sigI>���������������� :�� 3.45e+00<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>��� Fraction of I/sigI > 3�� :�� 4.09e-01���� ( Z =���� 4.02 )<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>� The quarter of Intensities *most* affected by the anisotropy correction show<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>��� <I/sigI>���������������� :�� 1.54e+00<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>��� Fraction of I/sigI > 3�� :�� 7.20e-02���� ( Z =��� 12.06 )<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'><o:p> </o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>The combined Z-score of��� 12.71 indicates that there probably is significant<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>systematic noise amplification that could possibly lead to artefacts in the<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText><span style='font-size:10.0pt'>maps or difficulties in refinement<o:p></o:p></span></p><p class=MsoPlainText>______________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Thanks,<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Tongqing<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Tongqing Zhou, Ph.D.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Staff Scientist<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Structural Biology Section<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Vaccine Research Center, NIAID/NIH<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Building 40, Room 4609B<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>40 Convent Drive, MSC3027<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Bethesda, MD 20892<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>(301) 594-8710 (Tel)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>(301) 793-0794 (Cell)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>(301) 480-2658 (Fax)<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>******************************************************************************<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>The information in this e-mail and any of its attachments is confidential and may contain sensitive information. It should not be used by anyone who is not the original intended recipient. If you have received this e-mail in error please inform the sender and delete it from your mailbox or any other storage devices. National Institute of Allergy and Infectious Diseases shall not accept liability for any statements made that are sender's own and not expressly made on behalf of the NIAID by one of its representatives.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>******************************************************************<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>-----Original Message-----<br>From: Nathaniel Echols [mailto:nechols@lbl.gov] <br>Sent: Tuesday, May 08, 2012 1:25 PM<br>To: PHENIX user mailing list<br>Subject: Re: [phenixbb] UPDATE-- Difficult dataset and refinement--P422? I422?Twinning?</p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>On Tue, May 8, 2012 at 10:08 AM, Kelly Daughtry <<a href="mailto:kddaught@bu.edu"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>kddaught@bu.edu</span></a>> wrote:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> 1. Is it really twinned since including twin-law in refinment gave <o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>>> much better numbers?<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>> I would say, it likely is twinned<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Actually, Xtriage says not:<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>The results of the L-test indicate that the intensity statistics behave as expected. No twinning is suspected.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>The symmetry of the lattice and intensity however suggests that the input space group is too low. See the relevant sections of the log file for more details on your choice of space groups.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>Twinned refinement can be deceptive because it often lowers the R-factors even if twinning isn't present - Garib Murshudov warns about this in his talks on the subject.<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><o:p> </o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>-Nat<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>_______________________________________________<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText>phenixbb mailing list<o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="mailto:phenixbb@phenix-online.org"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>phenixbb@phenix-online.org</span></a><o:p></o:p></p><p class=MsoPlainText><a href="http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb"><span style='color:windowtext;text-decoration:none'>http://phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb</span></a><o:p></o:p></p></div></body></html>