- phenixbb - phenix-online.org

Re: [phenixbb] source of fobs for refinement after AutoSol
by Tom Terwilliger 09 Jul '09

09 Jul '09

Hi James, Yes, that is correct. However if you want...you can just go on to AutoBuild and build a new model from scratch and generate a set of free R flags there, supplying your data as data=mydata.sca. I would recommend this anyway because AutoBuild makes a much better model than AutoSol, and including the model from AutoSol doesn't necessarily help (and can make it worse if the AutoSol model is really incomplete, such as from secondary- structure-only model-building). I use the AutoSol model-building just to see if things are going well and then I throw that model away. This is also the default when you use "after_autosol=True" in AutoBuild and when you run the AutoBuild GUI after running AutoSol. It is convenient to use the data and freeR in in exptl_fobs_phases_freeR_flags_*.mtz from AutoSol but you don't have to. The key of course is: once you refine a model and want to use that model further...you must use the set of free R flags used in that original refinement from then on. If you throw away that model and start from scratch you can also make a new set of free R flags. The hexdigest REMARK in your PDB file from phenix.refine helps you make sure that this is done correctly. All the best, Tom T On Jul 9, 2009, at 8:35 AM, James Whittle wrote: > Dear Tom: > > Ok. Thanks for the quick response! > > I should run then run AutoSol again to get this file, and it will > have the HL coefficients in it? > > --James > > > On Jul 9, 2009, at 10:13 AM, Tom Terwilliger wrote: > >> Hi James, >> >> As you are expecting, in AutoSol the file >> exptl_fobs_phases_freeR_flags_*.mtz normally contains the >> experimental Fobs and free R flags for refinement, along with >> phases and HL coefficients from the experimental phasing. >> >> However if an anisotropy correction is applied to the data, then by >> default no refinement is done in AutoSol and no >> exptl_fobs_phases_freeR_flags_*.mtz file is created. This is to >> ensure that refinement is not carried out against anisotropy- >> corrected data (you want to refine against the original data, and >> have phenix.refine apply an anisotropy correction as part of >> refinement). >> >> If you supply >> >> input_refinement_file=my_data.sca >> >> then my_data.sca will be used for refinement and an >> exptl_fobs_phases_freeR_flags_*.mtz will be created. Note that >> my_data.sca can be identical to your input data file if you want. >> I am guessing that in your case an anisotropy correction was >> applied to the data in this way. >> >> I hope that helps! >> -Tom T >> ps. I am thinking of changing the default to make >> input_refinement_file automatically defined if an anisotropy >> correction is applied so that you don't have to do this... >> >> On Jul 9, 2009, at 7:55 AM, whittle wrote: >> >>> Dear all, >>> >>> I have a question regarding the output of AutoSol. >>> >>> I've run AutoSol, using the data directly from scalepack as a .sca >>> file, >>> and would like to now begin refining the structure I've built. >>> >>> There seems to be no exptl_fobs_phases_freeR_flags_*.mtz file in the >>> AutoSol directory. Isn't this the right file to use? Since it's not >>> there, is it proper to use the phaser_2.mtz file for phenix.refine? >>> >>> --James >>> >>> _______________________________________________ >>> phenixbb mailing list >>> phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org >>> http://www.phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb >> >> >> Thomas C. Terwilliger >> Mail Stop M888 >> Los Alamos National Laboratory >> Los Alamos, NM 87545 >> >> Tel: 505-667-0072 email: terwilliger(a)LANL.gov >> Fax: 505-665-3024 SOLVE web site: http://solve.lanl.gov >> PHENIX web site: http:www.phenix-online.org >> ISFI Integrated Center for Structure and Function Innovation web >> site: http://techcenter.mbi.ucla.edu >> TB Structural Genomics Consortium web site: http://www.doe-mbi.ucla.edu/TB >> CBSS Center for Bio-Security Science web site: http://www.lanl.gov/cbss >> >> >> >> >> _______________________________________________ >> phenixbb mailing list >> phenixbb(a)phenix-online.org >> http://www.phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb > Thomas C. Terwilliger Mail Stop M888 Los Alamos National Laboratory Los Alamos, NM 87545 Tel: 505-667-0072 email: terwilliger(a)LANL.gov Fax: 505-665-3024 SOLVE web site: http://solve.lanl.gov PHENIX web site: http:www.phenix-online.org ISFI Integrated Center for Structure and Function Innovation web site: http://techcenter.mbi.ucla.edu TB Structural Genomics Consortium web site: http://www.doe-mbi.ucla.edu/TB CBSS Center for Bio-Security Science web site: http://www.lanl.gov/cbss

2 3

source of fobs for refinement after AutoSol
by whittle 09 Jul '09

09 Jul '09

Dear all, I have a question regarding the output of AutoSol. I've run AutoSol, using the data directly from scalepack as a .sca file, and would like to now begin refining the structure I've built. There seems to be no exptl_fobs_phases_freeR_flags_*.mtz file in the AutoSol directory. Isn't this the right file to use? Since it's not there, is it proper to use the phaser_2.mtz file for phenix.refine? --James

2 1

2010 Gordon Conference on Diffraction Methods
by Andrew Leslie 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

The Gordon Research Conference on Diffraction Methods in Structural Biology will be held at Bates College in Lewiston, Maine, from July 18-23, 2010. As in the past, the program will include the latest developments in methodology covering all aspects of macromolecular crystallography, from crystallisation to model refinement and validation. We are currently preparing a preliminary program for the meeting, and would welcome suggestions for particular topics (with or without speakers). Please Email your suggestions to Andrew Leslie (andrew(a)mrc-lmb.cam.ac.uk) or Ana Gonzalez (ana(a)slac.stanford.edu). Andrew and Ana

1 0

map output by phenix.refine
by 丁玮 02 Jul '09

02 Jul '09

Hi Pavel, Thank you for responding to my question so eloquently. But there are still something confusing me. First of all, when I used coot to open the "_map_coeffs.mtz", only two maps were displayed in the window,not four? Second, how to choose the maps coefficients? In phenix documentation, we konw that any specified coefficients can be set, for example: 2mFo-DFc, 2.7mFo-1.3DFc, Fo-Fc, 3Fo-2Fc. but it do not tell us why we should choose different coefficients. Thanks a lot. dream830106

2 1

GUI problems
by Phil Evans 01 Jul '09

01 Jul '09

Hi I've just installed the Linux 64-bit version 1.4-105 on a CentOS5 machine, and I get a lot of errors in starting up the GUI. What am I missing? Also is it possible to install both the 32-bit & 64-bit versions together: I know it works for the executables in build/intel- linux-2.6 build/intel-linux-2.6-x86_64, but does that mess up the gui? It's OK on the command line Phil

4 6

map output by phenix.refine
by Pavel Afonine 30 Jun '09

30 Jun '09

Hi Everyone, I think it's time to review this subject since it is one of the most frequently asked questions. Ironically, I think this is because we tried to make it as clear as possible -:) So, what kind of maps phenix.refine outputs by default? phenix.refine outputs two types of maximum-likelihood weighted maps (or, in other words, sigmaa-weighted maps): 2mFo-DFc and mFo-DFc. Now, as many of you noticed, the MTZ file with map coefficients "_map_coeffs.mtz" contains in fact four maps: 2mFo-DFc and mFo-DFc, and "filled" 2mFo-DFc and mFo-DFc (in fact fo-fc maps should be nearly identical; actually I have to fix it and not write identical fo-fc maps). The first two maps are computed using original Fobs (Fo), and the last two maps are computed using "filled Fobs", that is the original Fobs where missing reflections are "filled" with DFc. It is well known (I can spell a long list or references) that the data incompleteness affects the map quality, and sometimes, certain types of data incompleteness can *severely* distort maps. A possible solution (in order to reduce this negative effect) is to "model" missing Fobs somehow. One possibility is just to put in DFc in place where Fobs is missing, or as suggested by the classics, one can use <Fobs> taken in a resolution bin around a missing reflection. I even tried to use the random numbers and it was also better than doing nothing. Obviously, there is a nearly invisible line between the benefits of "filling in" missing Fobs and introducing bias. Where this line goes - is the subject of a research that to my knowledge is not done yet. Anyway, this is why phenix.refine writes out "regular" and "filled" maps: one is to give you unbiased but eventually lower quality map, and the other one is to give you a better-looking map with a risk of being biased. This way users have more options in exploring their maps (and less reasons for saying that Refmac produces better-appearing maps than phenix.refine -- see below). I have to mention that to my knowledge REFMAC always writes "filled" maps (those with missing Fobs substituted by DFc): - it is mentioned in Maria Turkenburg's thesis: http://www.ysbl.york.ac.uk/~mgwt/thesis-tth/chapter2.html#tth_sEc2.6.5 - and in Refmac docs: http://www.ccp4.ac.uk/html/refmac5/keywords/xray-general.html "Missing Data: For those reflections where the FP are missing, mFo is set equal to dFc. (...)". Correct me if I'm missing something. Please let me know if I wasn't clear in my attempt to explain this. I will update the phenix.refine documentation accordingly. Pavel.

1 0

the different between 2mFo-DFc and mFo-DFc map
by 丁玮 30 Jun '09

30 Jun '09

hi,everybody, By phenix.refine outputde two likelihood-weighted maps: 2mFo-DFc and mFo-DFc.When they were displayed in coot, There is a vast difference between them, why? Thanks dream830106 　　　　　　　　dingding830106(a)sina.com 　　　　　　　　　　2009-06-30

2 1

Autobuild requires more then 24 hrs to run on 32 cpu?
by Tatyana Sysoeva 30 Jun '09

30 Jun '09

Hello! I am trying to use Autobuild wizard and it seems that it takes longer time that I expected. That's why I have next questions: 1. What is "usual" time range estimate for Autobuild run with default parameters if my model has 7 chains with 284 aa in each? (if I'm running Autobuild on a single machine it does not finish in 3 days or on cluster with usage of 32 processors - in 24 hours) 2. Do I use phenix comman correctly for using several machines at once? I used /phenix-1.4-89, command line *phenix.autobuild data=e239a.hkl seq_file=seq.dat model=model.pdb nproc=32* In 24 hrs, which is my limit on cluster time, I get next things - AutoBuild_run_1_1_/AutoBuild_run_1_1.log ends with *Setting up to build 5 models to be combined into final model #1 NOTE: input model will be rebuilt in place: nothing will be added or deleted. Building 5 models ... Running up to 32 jobs in parallel... Splitting work into 5 jobs and running 32 at a time with csh in /home2/tas354/phenix_runs/20090610/1/AutoBuild_run_1_/TEMP0 Starting job 1... Starting job 2... Starting job 3... Starting job 4... Starting job 5...* AutoBuild_run_1_1_/TEMP0/AutoBuild_run_1_N.log ends with *Copying refined_pdb_in.pdb to composite_model.pdb in AutoBuild_run_1_/TEMP0 Beginning merge with current best model: refined_pdb_in.pdb Merging models: composite_model.pdb refine_1.pdb Refining model: Build_composite_3.pdb Model: AutoBuild_run_1_/TEMP0/Build_composite_refined_3.pdb R/Rfree=0.23/0.25 Rebuilding side chains from Build_composite_refined_3.pdb* or with error * TRIED resolve_extra_huge ...but not OK ******************************************************************************** Failed to carry out AutoBuild_build_cycle: ******************************************************************************** * Should I change parameters of the Autobuild which will dramatically reduce time for computations or should I ask for extension of my time for letting the programs to run as it is? I would give more details if it is needed I just could not think of some other right now. And I would appreciate any advices and suggestions! Thank you Tanya

2 2

phenix.refine simulated annealing modes
by Alejandro Buschiazzo 29 Jun '09

29 Jun '09

Dear Phenix users, I can't find information on the precise meaning of the different modes to perform SA during refinement; some choices are self-explanatory (such as "every_macro_cycle" or "second_and_before_last"), but what about "once" or "first_half"? (in my particular case, I want to perform only one simulated annealing routine on the second macro_cycle: can I use "once"? but, where should I define at which cycle to perform it?) Thank you for your help, Best, -- Alejandro Buschiazzo, PhD Research Scientist Laboratory of Protein Crystallography Pasteur Institute of Montevideo Mataojo 2020 Montevideo 11400 URUGUAY Phone: +5982 5220910 int. 120 Fax: +5982 5224185

2 1

questoin about AutoBuild
by crystallogrphy 28 Jun '09

28 Jun '09

Deal All, After I tried 9 runs of AutoSol from my MAD data by changing parameters (resolution, heavy atom numbers), I got 9 results, named as: AutoSol_run_1_ to AutoSol_run_9_. I found #9 and #7 have the lowest Rfree, so I want to pick the model from these two runs. However, when I use "phenix.autobuild after_autosol", the resulting AutoBuild files tell me that the program picked the result from #5 of AutoSol, not the lastest #9. Does anyone know how can I specify the exact number of AutoSol to run autobuild? I also tried this command "phenix.autobuild data=resolve_3.mtz model=overall_best.pdb seq_file=zntb-sd.seq"under the directory of AutoSol_run_9_, but failed with the following word: ******************************************************************************** Failed to carry out AutoBuild_build_cycle: Initial phenix refinement of AutoBuild_run_2_/TEMP0/NO_LIG_NO_WAT_overall_best_edited.pdb with exptl_fobs_phases_freeR_flags.mtz failed...quitting... See AutoBuild_run_2_/LAST.LOG for more information Please resolve the R-free flags mismatch. ******************************************************************************** Does anyone know where is wrong? Qun Wan Department of Pharmacology, Case Western Reserve University 10900 Euclid Avenue, Cleveland, OH 44106 email: qunwan1(a)gmail.com lab phone: 216-368-3337

2 1