Results
  model coordinates only   fit to EM map   vs reference structure   vs other models   Comparative Analyses
         help
  Geometry Scores   ADPs Histogram   Accuracy Estimate
 
Target: 
Filter by method: ab-initio  optimized cryoEM model       fully automated partially automated, with some manual steps     
Per residue ProQ score
(0.8; 1.0) (0.6; 0.8) (0.4; 0.6) (0.2; 0.4) (0.0; 0.2) N/A
#     Model     Method     ProQ   
    ab-initio/
    optimized		     auto/
    man.
1. T0104EM041_2_A ab-initio auto 0.87   
2. T0104EM025_1_A optimized auto 0.90   
3. T0104EM073_1_A optimized auto 0.89   
4. T0104EM073_2_A optimized auto 0.90   
5. T0104EM060_1_A ab-initio man. 0.87   
6. T0104EM010_1_A ab-initio man. 0.89   
7. T0104EM027_1_A ab-initio man. 0.89   
8. T0104EM028_1_A ab-initio man. 0.88   
9. T0104EM035_1_A ab-initio man. 0.88   
10. T0104EM041_1_A ab-initio man. 0.89   
11. T0104EM054_1_A ab-initio man. 0.58   
12. T0104EM054_2_A ab-initio man. 0.70   
13. T0104EM060_2_A ab-initio man. 0.88   
14. T0104EM082_1_A ab-initio man. 0.91   
15. T0104EM082_2_A ab-initio man. 0.91   
16. T0104EM090_1_A ab-initio man. 0.86   
17. T0104EM091_1_A optimized man. 0.90   
EMDataResource
Sponsored by the US National Institute of General Medical Sciences (NIH/NIGMS)
Please address any questions or queries to:
© 2015-2021