Updates on Validation and SQUEEZE Ton Spek Utrecht University Bruker User Meeting Jacksonville (FL), Jan 19, 2016.

Slides:



Advertisements
Similar presentations
The MISSYM Family: Software for the detection of Missed or Pseudo Symmetry A.L.Spek Utrecht University The Netherlands.
Advertisements

Crystal Structure Validation A Tool to distinguish GOOD and reliable single crystal studies from BAD and UGLY reports. Ton Spek National Single Crystal.
PLATON, New Options Ton Spek, National Single Crystal Structure Facility, Utrecht, The Netherlands. Delft, Sept. 18, 2006.
PLATON TUTORIAL A.L.Spek, National Single Crystal Service Facility,
Structure Comparison, Analysis and Validation Ton Spek National Single Crystal Facility Utrecht University.
CIF, PLATON-2014, SHELXL-2014, VALIDATION & SQUEEZE
Alexander J. Blake, School of Chemistry The University of Nottingham, Nottingham UK Refinement on weak or problematic small molecule data using SHELXL-97.
Introduction to protein x-ray crystallography. Electromagnetic waves E- electromagnetic field strength A- amplitude  - angular velocity - frequency.
An Update on Current and New Structure Analysis Tools in PLATON Ton Spek, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research, Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
PLATON Validation and Analysis Tools Ton Spek National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Sevilla, 14-Dec-2010.
Disorder.
PLATON/CheckCIF Issues Ton Spek Utrecht University The Netherlands Bruker User Meeting UCSD, La Jolla, March 22-24, 2012.
Twinning. Like disorder but of unit cell orientation… –In a perfect single crystal, unit cells are all found in the same orientation. We can consider.
Small Molecule Example – YLID Unit Cell Contents and Z Value
© 2011 Adobe Systems Incorporated. All Rights Reserved. Adobe Confidential. Kiran Kaja | Accessibility Engineer Ensuring Accessibility in Document Conversion.
PLATON/SQUEEZE Ton Spek Bijvoet Center Utrecht University, The Netherlands. PLATON Workshop Chicago, 24-July-2010.
Structure Outline Solve Structure Refine Structure and add all atoms
Data Collection and Processing Using APEX2, SHELXTL and the Bruker PHOTON 100 Kevin J. Gagnon
A Brief Description of the Crystallographic Experiment
The PLATON Toolbox Ton Spek National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Kyoto, 20-Aug-2008.
Automatic Detection of Poor or Incorrect Single Crystal Structures A.L.Spek Utrecht University The Netherlands.
Structure Validation Challenges in Chemical Crystallography Ton Spek Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Madrid, Aug. 26, 2011.
Software Tools for the Analysis of Z’ > 1 Structures A.L.Spek, Utrecht University, National Single Crystal Service Facility The Netherlands. BCA-Meeting,
Data Flow SADABS sad.hkl sad.abs sad.prp name.ins name.hkl SAINTXPREPSMARTSHELX n.xxx p4p n.raw n._ls m.p4p copy to sad.p4p.
CheckCIF/PLATON Crystal Structure Validation
Data Flow SADABS sad.hkl sad.abs sad.prp name.ins name.hkl SAINTXPREPSMARTSHELX n.xxx p4p n.raw n._ls m.p4p copy to sad.p4p.
The System-S Approach to Automated Structure Determination: Problems and Solutions Ton Spek National Single Crystal Service Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
3. Crystals What defines a crystal? Atoms, lattice points, symmetry, space groups Diffraction B-factors R-factors Resolution Refinement Modeling!
Automated Crystal Structure Validation Ton Spek, National Single Crystal Facility, Utrecht University, Utrecht, The Netherlands Platon Workshop Chicago,
PLATON, AN OVERVIEW Ton Spek National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Platon Workshop Chicago, 24-July-2010.
The Crystallographic Information File (CIF) Description and Usage Ton Spek, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research Utrecht University Sevilla, 14-Dec
SYSTEM-S The Challenge of Automated Structure Determination Ton Spek National Single Crystal Service Utrecht University, The Netherlands.
Structure Validation in Chemical Crystallography Ton Spek, Bijvoet Centre for Biomolecular Research, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. CCP4-Leeds, 5-Jan
Structure Validation in Chemical Crystallography Principles and Application Ton Spek, National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht University SAB-Delft,
Reflection Data Analysis Tools in PLATON Problem from Bruker Discussion List: Triclinic or Monoclinic? Ni-complex In P-1,Z'=2: a = b = c =
PLATON and STRUCTURE VALIDATION Ton Spek National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Goettingen, 13-Oct-2007.
Introduction to Macromolecular X-ray Crystallography Biochem 300 Borden Lacy Print and online resources: Introduction to Macromolecular X-ray Crystallography,
Methods in Chemistry III – Part 1 Modul M.Che.1101 WS 2010/11 – 10 Modern Methods of Inorganic Chemistry Mi 10:15-12:00, Hörsaal II George Sheldrick
BALBES (Current working name) A. Vagin, F. Long, J. Foadi, A. Lebedev G. Murshudov Chemistry Department, University of York.
New Structures for Old: A Cautionary Tale of Fraud in Small Molecule Crystallography Jim Simpson Department of Chemistry University of Otago.
Twinning Non-merohedral twinning Merohedral twinning.
On the Proper Reporting and Archival of Crystal Structure Data Ton Spek Utrecht University, NL (ACA2015-Philadelphia)
PLATON, A set of Tools for the Interpretation of Structural Results Ton Spek National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht University,The Netherlands.
Structure Validation Ton Spek, Bijvoet Centre Utrecht University The Netherlands PLATON Course, Utrecht, April 18, 2012.
PLATON TUTORIAL A.L.Spek, National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
NUI, Galway X-Ray Diffraction Best Practice P. McArdle Feb Saving the X-ray Tube 2.Getting the most from your data 3.Large Unit Cell Parameter Problem.
Ton Spek Utrecht University The Netherlands IUCr-Montreal Aug 11, 2014
Crystallographic Databases I590 Spring 2005 Based in part on slides from John C. Huffman.
Phasing Today’s goal is to calculate phases (  p ) for proteinase K using PCMBS and EuCl 3 (MIRAS method). What experimental data do we need? 1) from.
1. Diffraction intensity 2. Patterson map Lecture
The PLATON/TwinRotMat Tool for Twinning Detection Ton Spek National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Delft, 29-Sept-2008.
PLATON, A Multipurpose Crystallographic Tool Ton Spek, National Single Crystal Service Facility, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
The PLATON Toolbox History and Applications Ton Spek Utrecht University, The Netherlands. Bruker User Meeting, UCSD La Jolla, March 22-24, 2012.
PLATON/SQUEEZE Ton Spek Bijvoet Center Utrecht University, The Netherlands. PLATON Course Utrecht, April 18, 2012.
Today: compute the experimental electron density map of proteinase K Fourier synthesis  (xyz)=  |F hkl | cos2  (hx+ky+lz -  hkl ) hkl.
Automated Refinement (distinct from manual building) Two TERMS: E total = E data ( w data ) + E stereochemistry E data describes the difference between.
Lecture 3 Patterson functions. Patterson functions The Patterson function is the auto-correlation function of the electron density ρ(x) of the structure.
What is Needed for Proper Structure Validation and How to Act upon Validation ALERTS Ton Spek Utrecht University The Netherlands ACA-Denver, july 26, 2016.
Dr.V.Jaiganesh Professor
The PLATON checkCIF and SQUEEZE Tools
(check)CIF, SHELXL-2014, SQUEEZE
What Makes a Crystal Structure Report Valid?
Ton Spek Utrecht University (NL) ECS4-School, Warsaw, July 2-7, 2017
Crystal Structure Validation with PLATON
1.b What are current best practices for selecting an initial target ligand atomic model(s) for structure refinement from X-ray diffraction data?
Why Crystal Structure Validation ?
The SQUEEZE Tool in PLATON and its use with SHELXL2013
OLEX2 – Disorder and Solvent Masks Louise Dawe
Ton Spek Utrecht University The Netherlands Vienna –ECM
The PLATON/TwinRotMat Tool for Twinning Detection
Presentation transcript:

Updates on Validation and SQUEEZE Ton Spek Utrecht University Bruker User Meeting Jacksonville (FL), Jan 19, 2016

Structure Validation 20 Years The introduction of the CIF standard for data archival made automatic checking for missing experimental data, inconsistencies and unusual structure possible. Structure validation provides authors, referees and readers with a list of possibly interesting issues with a structure report that might need to be addressed. Currently about 500 tests have been implemented in checkCIF and that number is still increasing on the basis of newly detected issues with supplied CIF’s. ALERTS are not necessarily errors and often points at interesting structural features to be discussed.

Some Validation Issues A CIF essentially archives the authors interpretation of the underlying experimental diffraction data. Archived reflection data are needed for meaningful evaluation of unusual results and test calculations. Archival of Fo/Fc data (FCF) already solves part of this issue (side effect of its use: detection and prove of cases of serious fraud cases in Acta Cryst. E) Recently: embedding of refinement instructions (res) and unmerged reflection data (hkl) in the CIF IUCr/checkCIF and hkl deposition are now also part of the CSD deposition and archival procedures.

Some Recently Added New Tests Detailed inspection of difference density maps can be very helpful for the detection of problems A new automatic test can be implemented, once it is clear what to look for. Two recent tests were introduced to catch errors in an ‘invented structure’ that passed last years checkCIF version without serious ALERTS. The devious structure was created by Natalie Johnson, Newcastle, UK and presented as a poster during the 2015 ECM Congress in Rovinj, Croatia.

Structure Designed by Natalie Johnson to Beat checkCIF P R1 = wR2 = S = < rho < 0.47 eA-3 AgKa radiation No Voids No unusual contacts Normal difference density range No significant ALERTS (Aug. 2015) But: Every ‘crime’ leaves its trac es

Expected difference map density <= Unusual Actual difference map Density Difference map density in the CH2 plane The CH2 hydrogen atoms at calculated positions are definitively not in F(obs)

NATALIE YLID How ‘Natalie’ was created YLID

  No H-density No Density on Bonds CURRENT VALIDATION REPORT FOR ‘NATALIE’

Diffraction Images Sometimes, the availability of an unmerged reflection file is not sufficient to evaluate unresolved or unusual issues with a structure. In such a case, access to the diffraction images might be needed Info about weak but important unindexed reflections might be relevant or info about streaks etc. Standard archival of info related the integration process into the CIF might be helpful. The following structure report offers an example

Polymorph I (P-1) Polymorph II (C2/c) Paper reporting two polymorphs taken from the same sample

Part -1, 60% Part -2, 40% - Whole Molecule Disorder Model over -1 site - No significant ALERTS - R = 0.052, wR2 = 0.124, S = Residual Density to 0.24 eA-3 - Unusual C11-C11a = 1.70 A, C21-C21a = 1.60 A -Not ALERTED because of PART -1 & PART -2 on asymmetric units. -Regular (but forbidden by PART) C11 – C21a distance. Is there a better model ?

The Disordered Solvent Problem The calculated structure factor Fc can be spit into two parts: Fc = Fc(model) + Fc(solvent) Fc(solvent) can be parametrized with an (elaborate) disorder model and refined along with the other model parameters. Fc(solvent) can also be approximated with the SQUEEZE tool and used as a fixed contribution to the structure factors in the refinement. In simple cases, the first approach is preferred

The SQUEEZE Tool SQUEEZE, as implemented in PLATON, analyses the content of solvent accessible VOID(s) in a crystal structure. (Q: are the voids empty ?). The VOID content will generally involve (heavily) disordered solvent(s) that might be difficult to parameterize meaningfully (e.g. unknown solvents). The solvent contribution to the calculated structure factors is approximated by Fourier transformation of the density in the VOID(s) as part of the least- squares refinement of the model parameters. (.fab) SQUEEZE does not refine the Fc(model)

SQUEEZE Documentation The current implementation of the SQUEEZE tool is the third generation of a method published more than 25 years ago. Interfacing with SHELXL2014 refinement resolves many earlier issues. For documentation of the recommended procedure See: A.L.Spek (2015) Acta Cryst. C71,

STATISTICS PREPARED BY THE CCDC ON SQUEEZEd or OLEX2-MASKd STRUCTURES in the CSD

The Proper use of SQUEEZE It is important that the final CIF archives both the details of the SQUEEZE calculation and the unmerged reflection data. In that way, the calculations can be reconstructed and/or alternative refinement models attempted. SHELXL2014 offers all what is needed for that. SQUEEZE uses the model parameters taken from.cif and merged observed structure factors from the LIST 4 or LIST 8.fcf to calculate solvent F(calc) on.fab. Final SHELXL refinement will be based on the CIF embedded.res,.hkl files along with the.fab file.

How to SQUEEZE with SHELXL Refine a non-solvent model with name.ins & name.hkl (Include ACTA record, NO LIST 6). 2.Run PLATON/SQUEEZE, based on name.cif & name.fcf from 1 as ‘platon –q name.cif’. 3.Continue SHELXL refinement with the files name_sq.ins, name_sq.hkl & name_sq.fab from 2 as ‘shelxl name_sq’ 4.Inspect the.lis &.lst files and Validate

Disordered Solvent + Twinning Refinement protocol with SHELXL2014 and SQUEEZE Step 1: SHELXL refinement based a name.ins (that should include ‘ACTA’, ‘LIST 8’, ‘BASF’ and ‘HKLF5’ records) and a name.hkl file [merohedral: BASF/TWIN] Step 2: Run SQUEEZE with the name.cif and name.fcf files produced in Step 1 (i.e. run: platon –q name.cif) Step 3: Continue SHELXL refinement with the files name_sq.ins, name_sq.hkl and name_sq.fab produced by PLATON in step 2  name_sq.cif & name_sq.fcf Note: The name_sq.fab file contains the solvent contribution to the SF and the details of SQUEEZE. name_sq_sqz contains an optimized diff.map peaklist.

SQUEEZE2014 Example: Coordination Compound Space Group P2 1 Z = 4, Z’ = 2 60:40 Twin Twin axis: (0 0 1) 150 K Twinabs hklf5 data Acetonitril solvate Step 1 (SHELXL2014)  R1 = 0.047, wR2 = Step 2 (SQUEEZE)  188 electrons found in unit cell Step 3 (SHELXL2014)  R1 = , wR2 = , S = Acetonitril Model: R = , wR2 = , rho(max) = 1.34 e/A-3

Final ORTEP (R = )  F-Disorder SQUEEZE RESULT

Requirements There should be no residual unresolved density in the discrete model region of the structure because of its impact on the difference map in the solvent region. Proper OMIT records should handle beamstop reflns. The data set should be reasonably complete and with sufficient resolution [i.e. sin(theta)/lambda >0.6]. Low temperature data helps a lot. There should be no unresolved charge balance issues that might effect the chemistry involved (e.g. The valency of a metal in the ordered part of the structure)

Limitations The reported electron count in the solvent region is meaningful only with the supply of a complete and reliable reflection data set. The SQUEEZE technique can not handle properly cases of coupled disorder effecting both the model and the solvent region. The solvent region is assumed not to contain significant anomalous scatterers (Friedels averaged) Designed for ‘small molecule structures’ Using SQUEEZE as part of the MOF soaking method, where the interest lies in the solvent region, can be very tricky and should be done with extreme care.

Thanks ! More info: Please send suggestions and examples (with data) of annoying issues to: