[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
Re: [ccp4bb]: ligands in a 2-fold axis
*** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
*** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
On Tuesday 03 December 2002 08:49, Eleanor J. Dodson wrote:
> *** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
> *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
>
> Rongsheng Jin wrote:
> > *** For details on how to be removed from this list visit the ***
> > *** CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk ***
> >
> > Hi there,
> >
> > My protein crystallized in the P21212 space group. It forms a homo-dimer
> > around the crystallographic 2-fold axis. There is one small molecule
> > ligand binds to each protomer. The interesting thing is that the 2-fold
> > axis goes through the middle of the ligand molecules, although the
> > ligand itself is not perfectly 2-fold symmetric. It ends up with two
> > ligands overlap with each other while the 2-fold axis goes in the middle.
> > Does anybody know how to do the refinement (CNS?) without reducing to the
> > p21 space group?
> >
> > Thanks,
> >
> > Rongsheng
>
> First - if this is happened your spacegroup is not P21212 - it is P21
> with an NCS axis relating the two protein molecules..
>
Eleanor may be right, and you should definitely try processing the data in
P21 to see if that generates an unambiguous orientation for your ligand. But
it is also possible to have a higher symmetry spacegroup with statistical
disorder for the pseudo-symmetric ligand. This is what happened for the
complex of the Shiga-like toxin B-subunit with the "starfish" inhibitor that
we published a couple of years ago. The starfish molecule has pseudo-2-fold
symmetry and it sits on a crystallographic 2-fold axis. But the part where
the symmetry breaks down is not involved in binding contacts or in crystal
packing contacts. If you have an asymmetric ligand but it doesn't induce any
asymmetry in the protein and isn't involved in crystal packing contacts, it's
not unexpected that it will be oriented randomly in the crystal lattice. In
such a case, the higher symmetry space group is just as well justified as the
lower symmetry space group. Higher symmetry is then a better choice because
it involves fewer parameters.
--
Randy J. Read
Department of Haematology, University of Cambridge
Cambridge Institute for Medical Research Tel: + 44 1223 336500
Wellcome Trust/MRC Building Fax: + 44 1223 336827
Hills Road E-mail: rjr27@cam.ac.uk
Cambridge CB2 2XY, U.K. www-structmed.cimr.cam.ac.uk