 |
 |
It'll depend on your data, but you'd probably be better off using the inflection (rather than peak) and remote datasets for dispersive difference maps. This signal is usually fairly weak to begin with, and not using the infection datasets weakens it further. Pete FWIW - my understanding is that "dispersive" is often used to distinguish differences in f' from Bijvoet differences (in f'') during MAD, at least when treating MAD as MIRAS. Jacob Keller wrote: > Dear Crystallographers, > > it seems to me that for clearly identifying/characterising anomalous > scatterers for a solved structure, one could make a map using two > datasets: one at the f" peak, one low energy remote. One would then > use the signal both from the Bijvoet differences in the peak dataset > plus the differences between the peak and low-energy datasets, which I > think I have seen called "dispersive" differences. I guess this would > be like a MAD map, but using pre-existing model phases--is there such > an animal in the software, or would it even be helpful? > > Jacob Keller >