Print

Print


I see, there is no consensus about my data. Some people say 2.4A, other 
say all. Well, I chose 2.3 A. My rule was to be a little bit below Rmerg 
100%. At 2.3A Rmerg was 98.7%
Actually, I have published my paper in JMB. Yes, reviewers did not like 
that and even made me give Rrim and Rpim etc.

Maia



Bernhard Rupp (Hofkristallrat a.D.) wrote:
> First of all I would ask a XDS expert for that because I don't know exactly
> what stats the XDS program reports (shame on me, ok) nor what the quality of
> your error model is, or what you want to use the data for (I guess
> refinement - see Eleanor's response for that, and use all data).
>
> There is one point I'd like to make re cutoff: If one gets greedy and
> collects too much noise in high resolution shells (like way below <I/sigI> =
> 0.8 or so) the scaling/integration may suffer from an overabundance of
> nonsense data, and here I believe it makes sense to select a higher cutoff
> (like what exactly?) and reprocess the data. Maybe one of our data
> collection specialist should comment on that.
>
> BR
>
> -----Original Message-----
> From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of Maia
> Cherney
> Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 9:13 AM
> To: [log in to unmask]
> Subject: Re: [ccp4bb] I/sigmaI of >3.0 rule
>
> I have to resend my statistics.
>
> Maia Cherney wrote:
>   
>> Dear Bernhard
>>
>> I am wondering where I should cut my data off. Here is the statistics 
>> from XDS processing.
>>
>> Maia
>>
>>     
>>>
>>> On 11-03-03 04:29 AM, Roberto Battistutta wrote:
>>>  
>>>       
>>>> Dear all,
>>>> I got a reviewer comment that indicate the "need to refine the 
>>>> structures
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>> at an appropriate resolution (I/sigmaI of>3.0), and re-submit the 
>>> revised coordinate files to the PDB for validation.". In the 
>>> manuscript I present some crystal structures determined by molecular 
>>> replacement using the same protein in a different space group as 
>>> search model. Does anyone know the origin or the theoretical basis of 
>>> this "I/sigmaI>3.0" rule for an appropriate resolution?
>>>  
>>>       
>>>> Thanks,
>>>> Bye,
>>>> Roberto.
>>>>
>>>>
>>>> Roberto Battistutta
>>>> Associate Professor
>>>> Department of Chemistry
>>>> University of Padua
>>>> via Marzolo 1, 35131 Padova - ITALY
>>>> tel. +39.049.8275265/67
>>>> fax. +39.049.8275239
>>>> [log in to unmask]
>>>> www.chimica.unipd.it/roberto.battistutta/
>>>> VIMM (Venetian Institute of Molecular Medicine) via Orus 2, 35129 
>>>> Padova - ITALY tel. +39.049.7923236 fax +39.049.7923250 www.vimm.it
>>>>
>>>>     
>>>>         
>>>   
>>>       
>>     
>
>
>