JiscMail Logo
Email discussion lists for the UK Education and Research communities

Help for CCP4BB Archives


CCP4BB Archives

CCP4BB Archives


CCP4BB@JISCMAIL.AC.UK


View:

Message:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Topic:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

By Author:

[

First

|

Previous

|

Next

|

Last

]

Font:

Proportional Font

LISTSERV Archives

LISTSERV Archives

CCP4BB Home

CCP4BB Home

CCP4BB  June 2017

CCP4BB June 2017

Options

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Subscribe or Unsubscribe

Log In

Log In

Get Password

Get Password

Subject:

Re: What are acceptable Rwork/Rfree for publication

From:

Gerard Bricogne <[log in to unmask]>

Reply-To:

Gerard Bricogne <[log in to unmask]>

Date:

Sun, 18 Jun 2017 13:58:46 +0100

Content-Type:

text/plain

Parts/Attachments:

Parts/Attachments

text/plain (94 lines)

Dear Khoa,

     You are asking a very pertinent question, that will resonate in
(too) many people's minds.

     Somehow anisotropy is very much "an inconvenient truth" in MX, as
many things have long been set up and operated on the basis of having
resolution be a single number and of all statistics being calculated
in spherical shells, throwing in everything that has an HKL associated
with it. We are repeatedly told that resolution *has* to be a single
number, because the title of a Nature paper only has room for one
number - if that isn't a case of the tail wagging the dog, I don't
know what is ;-) . 

     There are more serious contexts in which the requirement for a
single number can be a more complex issue, such as contractual
arrangements where the achievement of certain milestones and the 
remuneration attached to them depend on reaching a certain resolution.
Here, whoever writes and/or accepts resolution criteria of this kind
will simply have to undergo further education and learn about that
inconvenient fact called anisotropy. Probably - especially in the case
of membrane protein structures - it is the highest resolution limit
that matters; but you can't have good completeness to that highest
resolution, by the very definition of anisotropy! Therefore, some
quality criteria that are compatible in the case of isotropic data can
become contradictory for anisotropic data, and force absurd decisions
to be made that result in the discarding of perfectly good data in
order to get back to a pseudo-isotropic situation.

     Your question is very timely as well, as we are about to announce
a new version of the STARANISO server in which we have made an effort
to address these questions. You say you have used the UCLA server: it
is a fine resource, that has served the community for over a decade,
but there are limitations in its treatment of anisotropy, especially
in low-symmetry cases. Your structure is in C2, and if you look at the
example of a C2 structure at 

     http://staraniso.globalphasing.org/anisotropy_about.html

and especially at the picture at 

     http://staraniso.globalphasing.org/pereda.png

you will see that anisotropy can be such that it cannot be described
as separate effects along the individual crystallographic axes: in
this case, the principal directions are along the bisectors and not
along the axes, and a product of separate corrections along the two
axes would do a very bad job indeed. This is why I think you should
submit your data to the STARANISO server as well. You may also find
the interactive 3D display of the local average of I/sig(I) quite
informative about possible infelicities in your dataset.

     Returning to a broader perspective, one thing should be clear:
there cannot be any good reason, based on downstream considerations
(such as what the PDB is prepared to accept, or there being room for
only a single number in manuscript titles and outsourcing contracts),
for throwing away data that are, as judged by a 3D local average of
I/sig(I), significantly above noise. The mission of data processing is
to capture every bit of information present in the raw images, without
any censorship originating from what may happen further downstream as
a result of anisotropy. All entities concerned (PDB, reviewers, legal
departments) will simply have to change their mental habits in order
to accommodate the inconvenient existence of anisotropy, as it is here
to stay :-) . In fact it has always been there, but has become harder
to ignore.


     With best wishes,
     
          Gerard.

--
On Sun, Jun 18, 2017 at 11:52:34AM +0000, Khoa Pham wrote:
> Dear Gerard,
> 
> Thank you very much for your suggestions. 
> We actually analyzed anisotropy of the data using UCLA-DOE LAB Diffraction Anisotropy Server https://services.mbi.ucla.edu/anisoscale/. The question is that if the data cut in the anisotropically way, should it be deposited to the pdb.
> 
> Sincerely,
> 
> Khoa Pham

-- 

     ===============================================================
     *                                                             *
     * Gerard Bricogne                     [log in to unmask]  *
     *                                                             *
     * Global Phasing Ltd.                                         *
     * Sheraton House, Castle Park         Tel: +44-(0)1223-353033 *
     * Cambridge CB3 0AX, UK               Fax: +44-(0)1223-366889 *
     *                                                             *
     ===============================================================

Top of Message | Previous Page | Permalink

JiscMail Tools


RSS Feeds and Sharing


Advanced Options


Archives

April 2024
March 2024
February 2024
January 2024
December 2023
November 2023
October 2023
September 2023
August 2023
July 2023
June 2023
May 2023
April 2023
March 2023
February 2023
January 2023
December 2022
November 2022
October 2022
September 2022
August 2022
July 2022
June 2022
May 2022
April 2022
March 2022
February 2022
January 2022
December 2021
November 2021
October 2021
September 2021
August 2021
July 2021
June 2021
May 2021
April 2021
March 2021
February 2021
January 2021
December 2020
November 2020
October 2020
September 2020
August 2020
July 2020
June 2020
May 2020
April 2020
March 2020
February 2020
January 2020
December 2019
November 2019
October 2019
September 2019
August 2019
July 2019
June 2019
May 2019
April 2019
March 2019
February 2019
January 2019
December 2018
November 2018
October 2018
September 2018
August 2018
July 2018
June 2018
May 2018
April 2018
March 2018
February 2018
January 2018
December 2017
November 2017
October 2017
September 2017
August 2017
July 2017
June 2017
May 2017
April 2017
March 2017
February 2017
January 2017
December 2016
November 2016
October 2016
September 2016
August 2016
July 2016
June 2016
May 2016
April 2016
March 2016
February 2016
January 2016
December 2015
November 2015
October 2015
September 2015
August 2015
July 2015
June 2015
May 2015
April 2015
March 2015
February 2015
January 2015
December 2014
November 2014
October 2014
September 2014
August 2014
July 2014
June 2014
May 2014
April 2014
March 2014
February 2014
January 2014
December 2013
November 2013
October 2013
September 2013
August 2013
July 2013
June 2013
May 2013
April 2013
March 2013
February 2013
January 2013
December 2012
November 2012
October 2012
September 2012
August 2012
July 2012
June 2012
May 2012
April 2012
March 2012
February 2012
January 2012
December 2011
November 2011
October 2011
September 2011
August 2011
July 2011
June 2011
May 2011
April 2011
March 2011
February 2011
January 2011
December 2010
November 2010
October 2010
September 2010
August 2010
July 2010
June 2010
May 2010
April 2010
March 2010
February 2010
January 2010
December 2009
November 2009
October 2009
September 2009
August 2009
July 2009
June 2009
May 2009
April 2009
March 2009
February 2009
January 2009
December 2008
November 2008
October 2008
September 2008
August 2008
July 2008
June 2008
May 2008
April 2008
March 2008
February 2008
January 2008
December 2007
November 2007
October 2007
September 2007
August 2007
July 2007
June 2007
May 2007
April 2007
March 2007
February 2007
January 2007


JiscMail is a Jisc service.

View our service policies at https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/policyandsecurity/ and Jisc's privacy policy at https://www.jisc.ac.uk/website/privacy-notice

For help and support help@jisc.ac.uk

Secured by F-Secure Anti-Virus CataList Email List Search Powered by the LISTSERV Email List Manager