Hi,
The peaks closer to 118.1 (one hncaco peak is at 117.9, all the others
are at 118.1 and 118.2). I may be wrong, but I don't think it's a
referencing issue, otherwise would I not see this feature with every
spin system? If I look in Data Analysis:Measurement Lists, the HN
chemical shift for that spin system is 118.1, which is what I expect.
Therefore, this is shift averaging?
The (i+1) residue has a HN chemical shift of 117.2, perhaps it is taking
some of these peaks as well?
Pryank
Wayne Boucher wrote:
> Hello,
>
> If you look at the peaks in the spin system are they at (well, near) 118.1
> or instead 117.4? So is the shift averaging screwing up or is the
> referencing of one or more of the spectra out?
>
> Wayne
>
> On Fri, 17 Apr 2009, Dr. Pryank Patel wrote:
>
>
>> Hi All,
>> Apologies if this relatively minor issue has come up in the past, but I have
>> not been able to find anything relevant in the archives so far.
>>
>> While conducting a backbone assignment, I have noticed an inconsistency in
>> the "Link Sequential Spin Systems" popup, in the spin systems table, in terms
>> of the position of one of my spin systems compared with the position of that
>> spin system in the hsqc. It seems to be off by 0.7ppm in the 15N dimension
>> (117.4ppm instead of 118.1ppm). The result is that when I click on this spin
>> system, with a hncocacb spectra as the query spectra, the query window goes
>> to 117.4ppm, for which there are no peaks for that spin system.
>>
>> Should I be concerned? Is there any way to trace where it seems to be getting
>> this information from? Should I be checking all of the spin systems for
>> inconsistencies?
>>
>> Best wishes,
>> Pryank
>>
>>
|