view article
Figure 2
Comparison of STD and HS data collection methods with a TTR crystal complexed with a chlorinated ligand. (a) Snapshot of the TTR crystal with the positions 1, 4 and 7 of the STD data collections (std1, std4 and std7), and traces of the HS scans between positions 2 and 3 (hs2-3) and between positions 5 and 6 (hs5-6) marked. (b) Plots of the B-factor as a function of batch number, which show less decay in the HS data collections (hs2-3 and hs5-6) compared with STD data collections (std1, std4 and std7). For std7, which was collected at 100% flux, the scaling fails after frame 110. (c) Plots of 〈I/σI〉 versus resolution. (d, e) Automatically built and traced electron density contoured at 1.5 standard deviations for the hs2-3 (top) and std1 (bottom) data sets, respectively. The detail in the hs2-3 map is clearly superior to the std1 map. (f, g) Plots of Rmeas and CC1/2 versus resolution.

Journal logoJOURNAL OF
SYNCHROTRON
RADIATION
ISSN: 1600-5775
Volume 24| Part 1| January 2017| Pages 42-52
https://doi.org/10.1107/S1600577516018488
Follow J. Synchrotron Rad.
Sign up for e-alerts
E-alerts
Follow J. Synchrotron Rad. on Twitter
Twitter
Follow us on facebook
Facebook
Sign up for RSS feeds
RSS