Hi,
What Phaser is reporting is a solution with almost no rotation (when the Euler angle beta is near zero, the rotation around the z axis is essentially the sum of the alpha and gamma angles, which is very near 360 degrees) and almost no translation, and an extremely high LLG score. So this suggests that the target crystal was isomorphous with the crystal from which the model was obtained. I think that, if you look closely at the log file, you’ll find that you have benefited from a (relatively) recent feature in Phaser, i.e. it checks first whether the model agrees with the data well without any rotation and translation and, if so, just does a rigid body refinement. Because no search was done, there are no RFZ and TFZ values.
See density for ligands that weren’t in the model is, as you suggest, pretty good evidence that the solution is right!
Best wishes,
Randy Read
-----
Randy J. Read
Department of Haematology, University of Cambridge
Cambridge Institute for Medical Research Tel: +44 1223 336500
Wellcome Trust/MRC Building Fax: +44 1223 336827
Hills Road E-mail: [log in to unmask]
Cambridge CB2 0XY, U.K. www-structmed.cimr.cam.ac.uk
> On 16 Nov 2015, at 11:40, jeorgemarley thomas <[log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
> Dear all,
>
> After running Phaser MR I got SOL file which says:
>
> RF*0 TF*0 LLG 25458 with a space group of R 3 2
>
> SOL 6DIM ENSE ensemble1 EULER 94.570 0.158 265.422 FRAC -0.00103 -0.00199 0.00123 BFAC -0.39050
> SOLU ENSEMBLE ensemble VRMS DELTA -0.1581 RMSD 0.54 #VRMS 0.36
>
> I am in doubt whether it has found the correct solution because TFZ and RFZ is not having any values. But when I open the pdb and MTZ file (after phaser) in coot, it shows perfect density of desired ligands at the active site ? What should I assume, am I going correctly? Please suggest.
>
> Thanks in advance
> Jeorge
>
>
|