As mentioned there is no I/sigmaI rule. Also you need to specify (and
correctly calculate) <I/sigmaI> and not <I>/<sigmaI>.
A review of similar articles in the same journal will show what is typical
for the journal. I think you will find that the <I/sigmaI> cutoff varies.
This information can be used in your response to the reviewer as in, "A
review of actual published articles in the Journal shows that 75% (60 out of
80) used an <I/sigmaI> cutoff of 2 for the resolution of the diffraction
data used in refinement. We respectfully believe that our cutoff of 2
should be acceptable."
-----Original Message-----
From: CCP4 bulletin board [mailto:[log in to unmask]] On Behalf Of
Roberto Battistutta
Sent: Thursday, March 03, 2011 5:30 AM
To: [log in to unmask]
Subject: [ccp4bb] I/sigmaI of >3.0 rule
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
|