=Here is the log file. Thanks.
Jianghai
On Dec 14, 2006, at 12:50 PM, Pavel Afonine wrote:
Hi Jianghai,
could you please send us .log file from your refinement run, so we can analyze what's going on.
In general, "bad" B-factors can be:
- misplaced model;
- inadequate TLS model (= domains chosen for TLS do not correspond to the reality).
If you are using like 2 months old or older version of phenix.refine, you may want to get the latest CCI APPS since we made lots of improvements. Just goto http://www.phenix-online.org/download/cci_apps/
Pavel.
Jianghai Zhu wrote:The resolution is 2.5 A. The wilson B is about 50. I know B factor of the backbone is lower than that of the sidechian. But a B factor like 4 is definitely wrong.
Jianghai
On Dec 14, 2006, at 12:11 PM, Peter Zwart wrote:
4) The refinement (TLS + ML + B individual) went through, I gotreasonable R, Rfree, rmsdBOND, rmsdANGLE. But the B factors arepretty low. The B factor of the backbone is much lower than the sidechain, some have numbers like 4. Some metal atoms also have Bfactors around 4. What did I do wrong?
What is the resolution of your data?
Backbone B-s usually are lower than the main chain.
What is the Wilson B value reported by phenix.refine?You could re-refine and randomize all B-values and see what happens (Ihave to get back to you to to get the exact command for this). Maybe itis useful to obtain a copy of the latest verison of phenix.refine bydownloading cci_apps from our server http://www.phenix-online.org.
If your B-values still come out lowish, try growing crystals that do notdiffract very well, that usually does the trick.
HTH
Peter
_______________________________________________phenixbb mailing list
_______________________________________________ phenixbb mailing list [email protected] http://www.phenix-online.org/mailman/listinfo/phenixbb_______________________________________________phenixbb mailing list
=