[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ccp4bb]: Re: [o-info] R-sym I/sigI etc...
*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
*** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
Thanks everybody, but I am not done yet....
The overall discussion is very useful. WE all agree weak data can be very
useful.... but..
Lots of suggestions as to how I can prove my resolution with my maps and
refinement etc..etc.. I know I can do that. But I dont think I need to in
a crystallization paper. I am just quoting what I see from my crystals.
If I say everything about the structure, then why have a crystallization
section in ACTA -D. I will write my structure paper and just mention in
passing - that my crystals were grown with PEG4000 @pH6.0 - let the next
person (if somebody ever does) who wants to try reproducing figure it out.
Now prove that the data was useful - while I
can prove that very well (now that I have the full structure refined);
maps improve (I can see my ligand much better). My crystal is anisotropic
and the average I/sigI is just completely meaningless. etc...etc..
So the take home message - only publish crystallization paper after you
have full structure - or publish with good numbers (even if tweaked), when
you cannot solve the structure!! I suppose many of the powerful ACTA-D
editorial people I hope are seeing these messages - I wonder if that was
the purpose of the crystallization communications....
Unless, I see a strong reason to fight - I am planning to cut off data
from this crystal form. We had data in 2 crystal forms and only one is
in question. What I am willing to say in the bulletin board, but not in
my CYRSTALLIZATION PAPER - is that without multiple crystal averaging, we
would not have been able to solve the structure for now.
Will wait a week - cool down a bit more before I respond to the referee.
Thanks for all the support. More flames/suggestions/support welcome.
Rams.
--
S. Ramaswamy
Department of Biochemistry.
University of Iowa.