[Date Prev][Date Next][Thread Prev][Thread Next][Date Index][Thread Index]
[Send comment to list secretary]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]
Re: Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1
- To: "coredmg@iucr.org" <coredmg@iucr.org>
- Subject: Re: Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1
- From: "Bollinger, John C via coreDMG" <coredmg@iucr.org>
- Date: Mon, 17 Oct 2022 22:18:12 +0000
- Accept-Language: en-US
- ARC-Authentication-Results: i=1; mx.microsoft.com 1; spf=passsmtp.mailfrom=stjude.org; dmarc=pass action=none header.from=stjude.org;dkim=pass header.d=stjude.org; arc=none
- ARC-Message-Signature: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; c=relaxed/relaxed; d=microsoft.com; s=arcselector9901;h=From:Date:Subject:Message-ID:Content-Type:MIME-Version:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-ChunkCount:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-0:X-MS-Exchange-AntiSpam-MessageData-1;bh=XFhjXdDT6i13X/qS0BqN2W+sVakQ+Qi1Ch11GNbrMi4=;b=OeXNA6CslIIWcUm2rafMoN+b8atcTqjnXNeGWyXWF4um/TfP0IMXRIahvH5ifBUKgmrm2OUdkQh6G5YKXNKWio8k1CZMsDbiem3kfibnFET/J/0d9bURTmcvUkmWd3/3if/P9t4mTkgtgAJXYFrB/Sm+USd7+xmchO+LuxF1F7ApZV2G+nvI7b0/eva5/FhRCLabZ3yeeuelcwTAW80n26si7pPERslU9NDBc754rqPfbkvV7a4nWDEPD7Ug8R349VMujhaMjH1FR2YPXslQA8pK+1y9OeCEVxhFR4c+KKeWeuGqTOti6eAr7/2j/ZfLsDgjXqk4gOZrH+aIsVpEBQ==
- ARC-Seal: i=1; a=rsa-sha256; s=arcselector9901; d=microsoft.com; cv=none;b=RRfTj6cOuLSOer7bLexn0SRRhGxRxU/pDvaR2jePDW8skiJUss/tLQlDlH5HbTfdcWr4o7YX286mAxb4I8kPkPh/X3dZjmDfP4jw2PhZijvTlauZsuWFeRV5PpcRGzdSqkgL97f/gsZuV9FEwT6DcaS1TpHhfb31QRu4kRmpiXVfuapazFpiluYDHpM3KvywHEHsBIp362+4Z/Tpl12KdO1mujUmpQ3ego7F70Eqb34FJheNa9rNakkY8xURw4O5WZ9ME8T1Gd5XL9EKhB9WYe3hwA0pJPAgOn8gPpQ2Sffdfv2D7b1DL64AJp8WcbXwmyp6pO7oUzQQuCjPbP+Ybw==
- Cc: "Bollinger, John C" <John.Bollinger@STJUDE.ORG>
- In-Reply-To: <CAF_YUvVJnqehHZLR6pML=UA-n1j4oAmABciUhB4Ek9R+G+G7QA@mail.gmail.com>
- References: <CAF_YUvVJnqehHZLR6pML=UA-n1j4oAmABciUhB4Ek9R+G+G7QA@mail.gmail.com>
Hi Bob,
Yes, when a moiety is disordered about a symmetry element with multiplicity 2, such as a 2-fold rotation axis, there will be half as many per unit cell as there would ordinarily be for a moiety at a general position of the space group -- much the same as if
it were ordered (and therefore symmetric) around the symmetry element. Analogous applies for disorder around higher-symmetry positions.
I believe the specific semantics of negative disorder group numbers is drawn from the SHELX system. In computing the connection list for an atom with a negative disorder group number, SHELX considers only the given coordinates of other atoms, if any, in that
group, plus all symmetry copies of atoms belonging to group 0. That is, symmetry copies of other atoms in the same group are not considered, unlike for disorder groups with positive numbers.
I'm afraid I'm not happy with the suggested revision. I would prefer to see the original definition augmented rather than replaced, because "disordered about a special position" is precise and meaningful to me, even though I acknowledge that its meaning may
be less clear to some. Perhaps something like this would be a suitable improvement:
====
[...] Sites belonging to the same group are simultaneously occupied, but those belonging to different groups are not.
(paragraph break)
A minus prefix (e.g. '-1') is used to indicate that the group is disordered about one or more symmetry elements. In addition to not being occupied simultaneously with sites belonging to different groups, the sites of such a group also are not occupied simultaneously
with symmetry equivalents of sites belonging to the same group. That is, the group's symmetry equivalents are among its disorder complements.
====
Notes:
- "disordered about one or more symmetry elements" is both more accurate than "disordered about a [singular] special position" and probably easier to understand for the casual crystallographer.
- I prefer to stick to defining the term, as opposed to specifying how software should behave in light of the definition. We cannot anticipate all uses of CIF data, but we can hope that if our definitions are clear enough then they will equip programmers
to decide for themselves how best to use CIF data for their particular purposes.
Best regards,
John
--
John C. Bollinger, Ph.D., RHCSA
Computing and X-ray Scientist
Department of Structural Biology
St. Jude Children's Research Hospital
From: coreDMG <coredmg-bounces@iucr.org> on behalf of Robert Hanson via coreDMG <coredmg@iucr.org>
Sent: Monday, October 17, 2022 2:38 PM To: coredmg@iucr.org <coredmg@iucr.org> Cc: Robert Hanson <hansonr@stolaf.edu> Subject: Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1
Caution: External Sender. Do not open unless you know the content is safe.
Hello! It has been suggested that I address this issue with this austere group. The issue is that specifying -1 for atom_site.disorder_group has some perhaps unintended consequences.
The comment we have is this:
A minus prefix (e.g. '-1') is used to indicate sites disordered about a special position. Brian McMahon helped me understand what that is about. Basically, as I understand it now, sometimes disorder groups are based on space group symmetry. When that happens, rather than using two sets (say) of general positions to describe two different but
related disordered groups, only one general position set is required -- applying symmetry then generates the others. Thus, we don't need "group 1" and "group 2"; we only need "group -1".
Visualization software such as Mercury or Jmol should recognize this and refrain from connecting atoms that are in different symmetry-related groups (using whatever distance-related algorithms they have for that). Recently, though, I was working with
a CIF file with such a designation (see "disorder-1.cif", attached) and realized that Jmol was handling these incorrectly. I fixed that in
Jmol 14.32.77 but also noticed that Mercury 2022.2.0 also had the same issue -- it is connecting atoms across symmetry-related sets:
That fixed for Jmol, I realized another issue that is a bit curious. The important question now for me is how the
n copies of the symmetry-equivalent groups are related in a space group with
n symmetry operators. For example, in this case, seven "ghosts" are created by applying all 8 operators in the example I provided.
Brian mentioned that I should offer a change in the description. Here is my suggestion:
A minus prefix (e.g. '-1') is used to indicate that related disordered groups are symmetry equivalent
(for example, involving two orientations related by a C2 axis or an inversion center) and thus
are not listed individually in the atom_site block. In this case, software generating structures
should consider symmetry-equivalent groups derived from these sites to be separately bonded
entities.
As for rendering, I suggest that Mercury has a bug there in terms of bonding. Also with its rendering of the asymmetric unit, which for some reason is using the wrong coordinate for the chlorine atom:
As for Jmol, it is doing this correctly. But in order to do that, it has to create eight independent "alternative locations"
$ print {*}.altloc.pivot
{ "" : 6 "1" : 11 "A" : 11 "B" : 11 "C" : 11 "D" : 11 "E" : 11 "F" : 11 "G" : 11 } Which, of course, is a bit odd.
Comments?
Bob
-- Robert M. Hanson
Professor 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 We stand on the homelands of the Wahpekute Band of the Dakota Nation. We honor with gratitude the people who have stewarded
the land throughout the generations and their ongoing contributions to this region. We acknowledge the ongoing injustices that we have committed against the Dakota Nation, and we wish to interrupt this legacy, beginning with acts of healing and honest storytelling
about this place.
Email Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/emaildisclaimer Consultation Disclaimer: www.stjude.org/consultationdisclaimer |
_______________________________________________ coreDMG mailing list coreDMG@iucr.org http://mailman.iucr.org/cgi-bin/mailman/listinfo/coredmg
[Send comment to list secretary]
[Reply to list (subscribers only)]
- Follow-Ups:
- Re: Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1 (Robert Hanson via coreDMG)
- References:
- Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1 (Robert Hanson via coreDMG)
- Prev by Date: Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1
- Next by Date: Re: Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1
- Prev by thread: Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1
- Next by thread: Re: Ambiguity in atom_site.disorder_group value -1
- Index(es):