Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2019 Oct 1.
Published in final edited form as: J Struct Biol. 2018 Jul 5;204(1):90–95. doi: 10.1016/j.jsb.2018.07.003

Figure 3.

Figure 3

Results for the GroEL case. (a) Resolution estimates for the reconstructions for the different iterations: halfsets (blue/red) and interset (yellow). The dashed gray curve indicates the resolution limits used for alignment. For iterations 1, 2 and 6, I aligned the particles globally (borient), while refining orientations, magnifications and defocus per particle during the other iterations (brefine). D7 symmetry was imposed during alignment and reconstruction. (b) Map sharpened against the carbon electron scattering cross section (bampweigh), colored according to the estimated local resolution (blocres, kernel = 28Å, FSC0.3). (c) Comparison of the FSC curves for resolution limited alignment (halfset FSC for set 1 in red), independent sets (interset FSC in yellow), and relative to the published map (green) (Vulovic et al., 2013). The vertical dashed line indicates the resolution limit used in the final alignment (7 Å). (d) Validation by coherence: Resolution estimates with different numbers of randomly selected particles (blue) compared to aligned noise (gray) with error bars for 10 determinations at each point (Heymann, 2015).