. 2014 Jun 29;70(Pt 7):1873–1883. doi: 10.1107/S1399004714008943

Table 3. Effective anomalous resolutions of recently solved structures in our laboratories.

Structure	HA	Final No. of sites	Anomalous resolution (Å)	Methods for initial solutions	Finding HA solution		References
Structure	HA	Final No. of sites	Anomalous resolution (Å)	Methods for initial solutions	SHELXD	AutoSol	References
Gin–DNA	Os	2	11.8	SIRAS	Yes	No	Ritacco et al. (2013 ▶)
DnaB–DNA^†	Ta₆Br₁₂	24	6.68	SIRAS, SAD	Yes	No	Itsathitphaisarn et al. (2012 ▶)
YfbU^†	W₁₂	8	6.20	SIRAS, SAD	Yes	No	Wang & Wing (2014 ▶)
BVDV sE2	U	8	6.07	SAD	Partial	Yes	This study
PAN ENE^†	Ir	8	5.73	SIRAS, MAD	Yes	No	Mitton-Fry et al. (2010 ▶)
Gin^†	Hg	2	5.73	SIRAS, SAD	Yes	No	Ritacco et al. (2014 ▶)
Gly switch	Ir	11	5.39	SAD, MAD	Partial	No	Butler et al. (2011 ▶)
c-di-GMP	Ir	10	3.30	SAD, MAD	Yes	Yes	Smith et al. (2009 ▶)

^†

In these four cases, the percentage of finding correct or partially correct solutions in SHELXD runs using the SIRAS method was much higher than in the corresponding runs using the SAD method, by as much as 60-fold. However, the corresponding PHENIX AutoSol runs failed to find any correct solutions using either the SIRAS or SAD methods.