 |
 |
Dear Yafang, You should not do it. R-merge is not a criterion one should use to make such decisions, particularly after the refinement is finished. It was extensively discussed here, including answers to one of your previous posts. If you have a problem with reviewers please post their specific concerns on-line, so CCP4 community can help you to prepare an answer. Unfortunately, in spite of extensive literature on the subject, the "R-merge" argument is still regularly used by both PIs and reviewers, and people who are on its receiving end are not always in the best position to argue. Therefore, I propose to prepare a semi-generic, collective answer to such reviewers/PIs, or if this is too much effort, at least to share reviews and answers. There is no ethical issue here as reviewers usually wish to remain anonymous. I am attaching one of the reviews we got and the answer to it. It was written just before CC1/2 was introduced, so we could not discuss it. We also did not discuss anisotropy (cubic crystals) or the power of NCS-averaging. It would be great, if other people could add it with their "answers to the reviewers". Dominika Yafang Chen wrote: > Hi All, > I have a structure at 2.45A which has been well refined. However, since the > R-merge at the last shell is above 1 (although I/sigmaI at the last shell > is more than 2), we now decide to cut back the resolution to about 2.6A. Is > there a way to do this based on the well-refined model instead of doing the > MR and refinement all over again? Thank you so much for your help! Best, Yafang Dominika Borek, Ph.D. *** UT Southwestern Medical Center 5323 Harry Hines Blvd. *** Dallas, TX 75390-8816 214-645-6378 (phone) *** 214-645-6353 (fax)