 |
 |
Well - i would always do the final refinement to the highest resolution with CC1/2 > 0.5 There may be other problems with the data - completeness low for current standards .. Does multiplicity fall off with resolution etc? Is there considerable anisotropy? both sets of R factors look surprisingly high.. but see above for possible reasons.. Eleanor On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 at 14:49, Sam Tang <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > Dear all > > Hello again > > Thanks a lot for the numerous input. > > I received a dataset which was processed to 2.4A but refined to 3A -- this > was the background I raised this question in the first place. Then I looked > at the aimless statistics. At 2.4A the high resolution bin CC1/2 0.626, > I/sigI 2.0, Completeness 84.6, Multiplicity 1.7 (P1 spacegroup). I suspect > the reason for the refinement resolution limit to be set at 3 A was simply > due to better Rw/Rf (0.236/0.294 at 3A; 0.284/0.341 at 2.4A). > > Based on these information am I justified to say that data quality at 2.4 > A was suboptimal? In this case do you think refining at a (much) lower > resolution is acceptable? > > Best regards > > Sam > > On Fri, 5 Jul 2019 at 13:43, Sam Tang <[log in to unmask]> wrote: > >> Hello everyone >> >> Sorry for a naive question. Is there any circumstances where one may wish >> to refine to a lower resolution? For example if one has a dataset processed >> to 2 A, is there any good reasons for he/she to refine to only, say 2.5 A? >> >> Thanks! >> >> Sam Tang >> > > ------------------------------ > > To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: > https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1 > ######################################################################## To unsubscribe from the CCP4BB list, click the following link: https://www.jiscmail.ac.uk/cgi-bin/webadmin?SUBED1=CCP4BB&A=1