[sharp-discuss] One question about sharp and the other phasing mathods

[Clemens Vonrhein]

--gE7i1rD7pdK0Ng3j
Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii
Content-Disposition: inline
Content-Transfer-Encoding: quoted-printable

Dear Zhiyong,

first: could you please subscribe to this discussion list before
sending messages? Otherwise they are not getting through immediately
(and I have to approve/reject them by hand each time).

Regarding differences: the best thing is to read the various papers
about the programs. For SHARP this would be

    La Fortelle, E. de & Bricogne, G. (1997) Methods in
    Enzymology, Macromolecular Crystallography, volume
    276, pp. 472-494, edited by R. M. Sweet and C. W.
    Carter, Jr. New York: Academic Press.

Regarding performance/results: did you use SHARP or autoSHARP? What
kind of experiment (MAD, SAD, SIR(AS), MAD+native, ...) did you do?
What were the messages/warnings that autoSHARP gave? How did the
refinement in SHARP behave? Have you tried both hands? ...


The current method for finding heavy atom sites in autoSHARP is
probably less powerful than using e.g. SHELXD (or SnB or Solve or
=2E..). So if the sites found by autoSHARP are not very good (or just
plain wrong): you can easily use any set of sites found by another
program and input these (in fractional coordinates) through the use of
a *.hatom file: see

  http://www.globalphasing.com/sharp/manual/autoSHARP1.html#datafiles

(in the next release you can use e.g. SHELXD PDB files directly).

Without more information about your data and the exact runs you've
done it is very difficult to tell exactly where you could improve
things in SHARP/autoSHARP.

Hope that helps (a bit).

Cheers

Clemens

On Mon, May 12, 2003 at 04:37:13PM +0800, Lou Zhiyong wrote:
> Dear Sir,
> I am a fresh user of SHARP. After I have finished some work in SHARP, I=
=20
> found the result of one data set(50-2.8) which gotten in SHARP is not as=
=20
> good as which gotten in solve/resolve.
> But some others told me that SHARP is more powerful than solve/resolve.
>=20
> Could you do me a favor to tell me the difference of SHARP, SOLVE,=20
> SHELX, and the other phasing mathods which having been used now. In=20
> general, what is the resolution range of data of each mathod, and the=20
> evaluation of each mathod.
>=20
> Thank you very much!
>=20
> Best Regards,
> Zhiyong Lou
>=20
>=20
> _______________________________________________
> sharp-discuss mailing list
> sharp-discuss@globalphasing.com
> http://www.globalphasing.com/mailman/listinfo/sharp-discuss

--=20

***************************************************************
* Clemens Vonrhein, Ph.D.     vonrhein AT GlobalPhasing DOT com
*
*  Global Phasing Ltd.
*  Sheraton House, Castle Park     Tel: +44-(0)1223-353033
*  Cambridge CB3 0AX, UK           Fax: +44-(0)1223-366889
*--------------------------------------------------------------
* BUSTER Development Group      (http://www.globalphasing.com)
***************************************************************

--gE7i1rD7pdK0Ng3j
Content-Type: application/pgp-signature
Content-Disposition: inline

-----BEGIN PGP SIGNATURE-----
Version: GnuPG v1.2.1 (GNU/Linux)

iD8DBQE+v2SL4f+nTPEF25QRAvojAJwKJ6PFYi6vlFa7cK/E29JwvmTuZACdEqNe
Day0aqdHoMc8pbcsOKNx6IE=
=J+Nd
-----END PGP SIGNATURE-----

--gE7i1rD7pdK0Ng3j--