Print

Print


Hi,

Thanks for those who replied to this thread.
I have been trying all the means that people suggested: search protein
alone, DNA alone. However, both not working out.
One thing Ray Brown suggested "MR works if the molecules have identical
sequences". So I just played around with the following way: 1) use the
chainsaw editted model in MR; 2) mutate the protein sequence back to my
protein and refine the solution in Coot; 3) use the partially refined
protein-DNA as the new search model and run Phaser again then I get the
following results for the two copies in ASU:
RFZ=6.5 TFZ=10.7 LLG=903 RFZ=6.2 TFZ=17.4 LLG=1130.
After one round of rigid body and restraint refinement in Refmac5, the Rfac
and Rfree drops from 0.50/0.51 to 0.46/0.51. I did not refine the DNA
sequences yet.

I am not sure if this way I can further refine the structure, or do I bring
two much bias into the structure. Please correct me if any. Thanks.

Best,
Hubing




On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 11:31 PM, <[log in to unmask]> wrote:

> I have also tried for years to solve a protein-DNA complex without sucess.
> If you have a lot more DNA than protein in the AU then MR will not work. You
> always get a good RFZ score but you cannot solve the translation if the
> DNA molecules are forming long stacks. With a plausible packing you will of
> course get model phases and a nice map but refinement will not work and you
> will get stuck at 40-50% Rf.
>
> You may have a chancewith MR if you only have a small DNA and a much bigger
> protein molecule or if the search models and the molecules have identical
> sequences.
>
> To solve this structure you probably have to do Se-labeled protein and SAD
> etc. or collect anomalous from metal ions if present.
>
> Cheers.
>
> Ray Brown
>
>  ------------------------------
> *From:* Hubing Lou <[log in to unmask]>
>
> *To:* [log in to unmask]
> *Sent:* Thu, July 21, 2011 6:39:49 AM
> *Subject:* Re: [ccp4bb] Phaser and Molrep gave different solutions
>
> I was worried as well with the low TFZ score. Usually successful cases with
> score >8. I am still puzzled why Phaser and Molrep gave different solutions.
> Does this mean molecular replacement do not work out in this case so more
> crystals have to be prepared?
>
> A little more information might be helpful to dissolve the problem here.
> The model I used is a protein-DNA complex. The protein was Chainsaw editted
> but the DNA sequence was directly borrowed from the original model.
>
> Best,
> Hubing
>
> On Thu, Jul 21, 2011 at 3:30 PM, Vellieux Frederic <
> [log in to unmask]> wrote:
>
>> Hi,
>>
>> It's not a bad idea to read the Phaser manual for molecular replacement;
>> see http://www.phaser.cimr.cam.ac.uk/index.php/Molecular_Replacement
>>
>> Soon after the start, in a table on the right hand side, there is: TFZ
>> score < 5, have I solved it ? No.
>>
>> Hence with a TFZ score of 3.8 you do not have a solution using Phaser.
>>
>> Fred.
>>
>> Hubing Lou wrote:
>>
>>>  Dear all,
>>>
>>> I am stuck in a molecular replacement case and looking for advices.
>>> I have been working on a protein-DNA complex structure.
>>> Data was processed by HKL2000 to 2.6Ang and some of the data statistics
>>> are shown below:
>>>
>>> Space group: P21,
>>> Unit Cell: 54.73, 104.91, 78.40, 90, 100.2, 90
>>> Redundancy: 2.8 (2.7)
>>> Completeness: 94.8 (93.1)
>>> Linear R-fac: 0.051 (0.442)
>>>
>>> Data quality was checked by Phenix.xtriage and there's no problem. I then
>>> prepared a model by Chainsaw. Our protein shares only 30% of sequence
>>> similarity with the model, but structurally they are in the same group and
>>> almost identical in apo form. Matthrews Coeff indaced two monomers in AU. I
>>> then ran Phaser in "automated search" mode and there's a solution with RFZ
>>> score 4.8, TFZ score 3.8. The electron density map was not bad with DNA
>>> double helix clearly seen. However Refmac5 couldn't get Rfree lower than
>>> 50%.
>>>
>>> I then changed to MolRep, ran "self rotation function" first then used
>>> the first 10 peaks for translation search. Again there's a solution but it
>>> is different from that from Phaser. I attached a picture here. Checking in
>>> coot, the packing is the same. But, the refinement couldn't get Rfree lower
>>> than 50%.
>>>
>>> I have tried to include NCS, TLS refinement in Refmac, both not working.
>>> Hope someone out there can help.
>>> Thanks very much for your time.
>>>
>>> Hubing
>>>
>>>
>>> ------------------------------**------------------------------**
>>> ------------
>>>
>>>
>>>
>>
>