Skip to main content
. 2021 Jan 19;40(5):e105671. doi: 10.15252/embj.2020105671

Table 1.

Statistics for Cryo‐EM single particle image analysis and structure refinement.

Cryo‐EM density map CA‐CCCT (4.5Å) (EMDB‐30239) (PDB 7BY0) Asymmetric CA‐CCCT‐CNNT (EMDB‐30241) CA‐CCpep‐CNNT (EMDB‐30237) (PDB 7BXT) CA‐CCCT (6.78Å) (EMDB‐30240)
Data collection and processing
Sample CA‐CCCT‐CNNT complex CA‐CCpep‐CNNT complex CA‐CCCTcomplex
Magnification 50,000 50,000 50,000 50,000
Voltage (kV) 200 200 200 200
Electron exposure (e–/Å2 ) 100 100 100 100
Defocus range (µm) −0.3 (−7.0) −0.3 (−7.0) −0.3 (−7.0) −0.3 (−7.0)
Pixel size (Å) 1.10 1.10 1.47 1.09
Symmetry C2 C1 C2 C2
Initial particle images (n) 3,385,783 3,385,783 4,192,300 3,423,115
Final particle images (n) 38,542 3,959 118,294 39,542
Map resolution (Å) 4.5 7.8 4.2 6.78
FSC threshold 0.143 0.143 0.143 0.143
Refinement
CCmap_model 0.87 0.84
Model compositions
Nonhydrogen atoms 12,693 15,715
Protein residues 872 1,204
Nucleic acids 285 290
R.m.s. deviations
Bond lengths (Å) 0.007 0.010
Angles (°) 0.939 1.169
Ramachandran plot
Favored (%) 96.79 93.36
Allowed (%) 3.21 6.64
Outliers (%) 0.00 0.00
Model validation
Rotamer outliers (%) 0.15 0.39
Clash score 11.07 9.69
Cβ outliers (%) 0.00 0.00
CaBLAM outliers (%) 2.55 3.93

FSC, Fourier shell correlation; R.m.s. deviations, root‐mean‐square deviations.