I assumed that since this topic came up fairly recently, in fact 3
weeks ago (see thread starting from
[log in to unmask])" target="_blank">http:[log in to unmask]), it
wasn't just a re-run of the same question.
Perhaps the original poster could clarify whether we are talking about
unexplained -ve density in the 2Fo-Fc map or in the Fo-Fc map?
Cheers
-- Ian
On 23 November 2011 16:03, Nat Echols <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
> On Wed, Nov 23, 2011 at 7:57 AM, Ian Tickle <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>> On 23 November 2011 07:54, Careina Edgooms <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> I have a question about a 2F0-Fc difference map that I calculated with Refmac.
>>
>> On 23 November 2011 15:40, Nat Echols <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>>> The negative density around Met S could be radiation damage.
>>
>> But you wouldn't expect to see -ve density in the 2Fo-Fc map from
>> radiation damage right? The Fo-Fc map for sure.
>
> I assumed that's what the original poster meant.
>
> (and I apologize for the redundant comments, GMail groups messages by
> subject, so every time someone changes the subject line, it becomes a
> new thread, which I usually miss. That said, I thought after reading
> Garib's Refmac paper published earlier this year that it was now using
> distance-based B-factor restraints, instead of bond connectivity - is
> this correct or did I misunderstand?)
>
> -Nat
>
|