Skip to content
New issue

Have a question about this project? Sign up for a free GitHub account to open an issue and contact its maintainers and the community.

By clicking “Sign up for GitHub”, you agree to our terms of service and privacy statement. We’ll occasionally send you account related emails.

Already on GitHub? Sign in to your account

_struct_conn group missing #4

Open
BobHanson opened this issue Apr 24, 2016 · 4 comments
Open

_struct_conn group missing #4

BobHanson opened this issue Apr 24, 2016 · 4 comments

Comments

@BobHanson
Copy link

Just notice that although we have all the bonding between amino acids and all the bonding within groups, we are missing the very important ones in _struct_conn, particularly in 1BLU

I believe this may be because the "metalc" type is being skipped. This is an important type to include.

metalc1 metalc ? B SF4 . FE1 ? ? ? 1_555 A CYS 53 SG ? ? A SF4 101 A CYS 53 1_555 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 2.189 ?

same for 1hho:

metalc1 metalc ? A HIS 87 NE2 ? ? ? 1_555 D HEM . FE ? ? A HIS 87 A HEM 143 1_555 ? ? ? ? ? ? ? 1.937 ?

It is critical that we have these.

@arose
Copy link
Contributor

arose commented Apr 25, 2016

We currently rely on mmcif files and the chemical component dictionary to get bond information. We felt that the metal bond given in the archive are currently not good enough, so we did not include them.

@BobHanson
Copy link
Author

do please include them. Let the user decide if they want them or not.

On Mon, Apr 25, 2016 at 11:06 AM, Alexander Rose notifications@github.com
wrote:

We currently rely on mmcif files and the chemical component dictionary to
get bond information. We felt that the metal bond given in the archive are
currently not good enough, so we did not include them.


You are receiving this because you authored the thread.
Reply to this email directly or view it on GitHub
#4 (comment)

Robert M. Hanson
Larson-Anderson Professor of Chemistry
Chair, Department of Chemistry
St. Olaf College
Northfield, MN
http://www.stolaf.edu/people/hansonr

If nature does not answer first what we want,
it is better to take what answer we get.

-- Josiah Willard Gibbs, Lecture XXX, Monday, February 5, 1900

@arose
Copy link
Contributor

arose commented Aug 9, 2016

The Chimera team also expressed interest to have those bonds.

@arose
Copy link
Contributor

arose commented Aug 9, 2016

The question boils down to whether we absolutely stick to clean and consistent data for whole-archive analyses or allow some data (like "metal bonds") that is only good for a number of structures and then filter it out at the API level.

Sign up for free to join this conversation on GitHub. Already have an account? Sign in to comment
Projects
None yet
Development

No branches or pull requests

2 participants