 |
 |
I agree. It cannot be said too often that the object of refinement is not to minimise the R-factor! (& while I'm at it, freeR has nothing to do with model bias (which is largely imaginary anyway, only a problem with low resolution molecular replacement)) Phil On 19 Oct 2009, at 17:07, Ed Pozharski wrote: >>> My resolution is 1.6A although I have cut it to 1.8A to bring the >>> R-factor down. I've been performing restrained refinement in refmac5 >>> using the default settings. The solvent content is 40% > > This sounds fundamentally wrong. Even the "Rmerge reduction by > cutting > resolution" practice is questionable due to strong dependence of the > Rmerge on redundancy, but to cut resolution to get better Rfactor in > refinement... Nobody throws away the lower concentration (and thus > noisier) data in Bradford assay, although I am sure that the > appropriate > "R-factor" would definitely go down.