Skip to main content
. 2021 Sep 16;297(4):101202. doi: 10.1016/j.jbc.2021.101202

Table 2.

Cryo-EM data collection, refinement, and validation statistics

Data collection, refinement, and validation Sb45+S-6P (1-up, 2-down) Sb45+S-6P (2-up, 1-down)
EMDB ID EMD-24105 EMD-24106
PDB ID 7N0G 7N0H
Data collection and processing
 Magnification 130,000 130,000
 Voltage (kV) 300 300
 Electron exposure (e/Å) 56 56
 Defocus range (μm) −0.7 to −2.0 −0.7 to −2.0
 Pixel size (Å/pixel) 0.526 (1.052 binned) 0.526 (1.052 binned)
 Raw micrographs (No.) 9725 9725
 Extract particles (No.) 1,447,993 1,447,993
 Selected 2D particles (No.) 662,994 662,994
 Refined particles (No.) 417,460 417,460
 Particles for final map (No.) 214,171 60,062
 Symmetry imposed C1 C1
 Map resolution (Å) 3.02 3.34
 FSC threshold 0.143 0.143
Refinement
 Initial model used 6XKL, 7KGJ 6XKL, 7KGJ
 Model composition
 Atoms 29,062 27,974
 Residues 3592 3469
 Ligands (NAG) 73 64
 Overall B-factor (Å2)
 Protein (min/max/mean) 36.8/589.6/157.0 24.2/485.3/157.0
 Ligands (min/max/mean) 55.3/340.1/129.9 51.8/358.8/144.5
 RMSDs
 Bond length (Å) 0.003 0.005
 Bond angle (°) 0.548 0.972
 CC (mask/volume/peaks) 0.84/0.84/0.77 0.83/0.83/0.77
 Validation
 MolProbity score 1.62 1.71
 Clashscore 7.71 8.26
 Poor rotamers 0.00 0.00

We did not use sharpened maps, and autosharpening by PHENIX did not improve the CC, so we kept the unsharpened maps for the refinement.