Dear Ed,
Thankyou for this and apologies for late reply.
If one has chemical evidence for the presence of residues but these residues are disordered I find the delete atoms option disagreeable. Such a static disorder situation should be described by a high atomic displacement parameter, in my view. (nb the use of ADP is better than B factor terminology).
Yours sincerely,
John
Prof John R Helliwell DSc
On 29 Mar 2011, at 22:43, Ed Pozharski <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> The results of the online survey on what to do with disordered side
> chains (from total of 240 responses):
>
> Delete the atoms 43%
> Let refinement take care of it by inflating B-factors 41%
> Set occupancy to zero 12%
> Other 4%
>
> "Other" suggestions were:
>
> - Place atoms in most likely spot based on rotomer and contacts and
> indicate high positional sigmas on ATMSIG records
> - To invent refinement that will spread this residues over many rotamers
> as this is what actually happened
> - Delet the atoms but retain the original amino acid name
> - choose the most common rotamer (B-factors don't "inflate", they just
> rise slightly)
> - Depends. if the disordered region is unteresting, delete atoms.
> Otherwise, try to model it in one or more disordered model (and then
> state it clearly in the pdb file)
> - In case that no density is in the map, model several conformations of
> the missing segment and insert it into the PDB file with zero
> occupancies. It is equivalent what the NMR people do.
> - Model it in and compare the MD simulations with SAXS
> - I would assumne Dale Tronrod suggestion the best. Sigatm labels.
> - Let the refinement inflate B-factors, then set occupancy to zero in
> the last round.
>
> Thanks to all for participation,
>
> Ed.
>
> --
> "I'd jump in myself, if I weren't so good at whistling."
> Julian, King of Lemurs
|