On Wed, 4 Apr 2007, Paul Driscoll wrote:
> Actually (and this is an aside to the general thread) what my post-doc wanted
> to do was pick all the peaks in the 3D spectrum irrespective of what is in
> the root 2D spectrum, even if this did generate more picked peaks than should
> theoretically be present. This desire might go against the generally accepted
> approach; the mind set being that they would rather over-pick a spectrum than
> underpick it, I think.
Updated
http://www.ccpn.ac.uk/ccpn/software/ccpnmr-analysis/faq/how-to-pick-peaks-in-a-3d-spectrum
to include this possibility. In my experience, this is making work for
yourself in the long run though. With analysis's tools (Link Peak Lists)
for directed peak picking it is almost certainly quicker to go this route
than to pick the whole 3D in a oner unless you have tuned your peak
picking parameters very nicely (and if anyone finds the magic numbers
please let us all know!). Use of an initialised HSQC and Link Peak Lists
leaves you nicely set up to use the sequential assigment tool Link
Sequential Spin Systems.
> [Actually I am more than a little frustrated that my guys don't put these
> questions to the user-group directly. I wonder how many other potential users
> are getting discouraged from CCPN-analysis by not realising or taking
> advantage of the freely given help that is out there?]
They are not alone. We should not underestimate peoples' unwillingness to
expose themselves. If you have a question though, ask it. This list is a
friendly one! Perhaps the list should be mentioned in the analysis
startup text?
--
Dr. Brian O. Smith ---------------------- B Smith at bio gla ac uk
Division of Biochemistry & Molecular Biology,
Institute Biomedical & Life Sciences,
Joseph Black Building, University of Glasgow, Glasgow G12 8QQ, UK.
Tel: 0141 330 5167/6459/3089 Fax: 0141 330 8640
