Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Feb 28.
Published in final edited form as: Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2020 Aug 31;27(11):1017–1023. doi: 10.1038/s41594-020-0490-9

Table 1:

Cryo-EM data collection, refinement and validation statistics

Pre-GAP complex (EMD-21686, PDB 6JW2) Post-GAP complex (EMD-21687, PDB 6WJ3)
Data collection and processing
Magnification 29,000 36,000
Voltage (kV) 300 200
Electron exposure (e2) 59 60.5
Defocus range (μm) −0.8 to −2.3 −1.0 to −2.5
Pixel size (Å) 0.8522 1.137
Symmetry imposed C1 C1
Initial particle images (no.) 1,419,155 2,309,565
Final particle images (no.) 129,553 106,659
Map resolution (Å) 3.2 3.9
 FSC threshold 0.143 0.143
Map resolution range (Å) 2.6–11 3.4–11
Refinement
Initial model used PDB 6NZD PDB 6WJ2
Model resolution (Å) 3.5 4.4
 FSC threshold 0.5 0.5
Map sharpening B factor (Å2) −32.9 local amplitude scaling
Model composition
 Non-hydrogen atoms 8,909 8,912
 Protein residues 1,167 1,168
 Ligands 1 GDP; 1 XTPγS (L8S); 1 Mg2+ 1 GDP; 1 XDP (U3J)
B factors (Å2, min / max / avg)
 Protein 38.89 / 226.58 / 87.85 54.13 / 204.34 / 103.71
 Ligand 49.91 / 65.12 / 57.44 96.98 / 113.93 / 105.46
R.m.s. deviations
 Bond lengths (Å) 0.002 0.002
 Bond angles (°) 0.454 0.484
Validation
MolProbity score 1.91 1.76
Clashscore 3.83 7.82
Poor rotamers (%) 2.81 0.00
Ramachandran plot
 Favored (%) 94.05 95.20
 Allowed (%) 5.95 4.71
 Disallowed (%) 0.00 0.09