Re: [ccp4bb]: B factors

[Edward Berry <eaberry@lbl.gov>]

***  For details on how to be removed from this list visit the  ***
***          CCP4 home page http://www.ccp4.ac.uk         ***



Edward Berry wrote:
> I would also be interested in the current opinion(s). Speaking for
> myself, I think that 80 or 100 is a very reasonable average atomic B
> for structures diffracting to low resolution, and the relative scarcity
> of such high B-factors in the PDB is due to questionable practices used
> in the past which did not preserve the overall B-factor information
> present in the original data.
> 
Not that I think the overall B is all that important-
the relative atomic B's still tell you which regions are relatively
well or poorly ordered, there are other statistics better suited for
judging the quality of a structure, and the isotropic B-factor is not
a very realistic model in any case when the disorder results from
correlated anisotropic disorder of different groups of atoms in the
model.

Ed