-
Notifications
You must be signed in to change notification settings - Fork 2
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
Some crosslinking-MS entries are missing atom labels in the _ihm_cross_link_restraint
tables.
#83
Comments
@brindakv no action needed now, but we might want to update these entries in the future. PDBDEV_00000089 is unclear from the paper. Modeling details are in the Appendix 01 https://www.pnas.org/doi/10.1073/pnas.2201910120#supplementary-materials PDBDEV_00000098:
Seems like Ca-Ca (thus can be updated to https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S0969212623000321?via%3Dihub PDBDEV_0000020X series used Cb-Cb restraints:
|
Thanks @aozalevsky This can be addressed during remediation. |
@brindakv 9a3i (PDBDEV_00000203), 9a3j (PDBDEV_00000204), 9a3k (PDBDEV_00000205), 9a3l (PDBDEV_00000206), 9a3m (PDBDEV_00000207), 9a3n (PDBDEV_00000208) are still incorrect. Right now they all are 'by-residue':
but according to my previous comment they should be |
Here is one example (
PDBDEV_00000089
):If the
atomic
restraint is missing the atom label, such restraint can't be properly assessed. I don't consider this a problem because the default behavior is to ignore any missing/incomplete data. I've noticed it only because "at a glance" plots were failing. I've added a workaround for reports.The issue is just a note that we might want to address in the future. For instance, they can be updated to
by-residue
.Here is a full list of affected entries:
PDBDEV_00000089, PDBDEV_00000098, PDBDEV_00000203, PDBDEV_00000204, PDBDEV_00000205, PDBDEV_00000206, PDBDEV_00000207, PDBDEV_00000208
The text was updated successfully, but these errors were encountered: