Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2021 Dec 30.
Published in final edited form as: Nat Struct Mol Biol. 2020 Aug 24;27(11):1009–1016. doi: 10.1038/s41594-020-0481-x

Table 1:

Cryo-EM data collection, refinement and validation statistics

Dip1–Arp2/3–actin
(EMD-21502, PDB 6W17)
Inactive Arp2/3 complex (EMD-21503, PDB 6W18)
Data collection and processing
Magnification x92,000 x120,000
Voltage (kV) 200 200
Electron exposure (e2) 36.35 44.34
Defocus range (μm) −1.00 – −1.75 −0.70 – −1.30
Pixel size (Å) 1.12 0.8757
Symmetry imposed C1 C1
Initial particle images (no.) 3,500,000 3,336,981
Final particle images (no.) 110,433 112,170
Map resolution (Å) 3.9 4.2
 FSC threshold 0.143 0.143
Map resolution range (Å) 3.5 – 5.5 3.9 – 6.0
Refinement
Initial models used PDB 3DWL, PDB 3J8I PDB 3DWL
Model resolution (Å) 3.92 4.45
 FSC threshold 0.5 0.5
Model resolution range (Å) 2.3 – 4.0 3.7 – 4.5
Map sharpening B factor (Å2) −45.12 −116.22
Model composition
 Non-hydrogen atoms 27,399 12,727
 Protein residues 3,483 1,854
 Ligands 6 Mg2+, 2 ATP, 4 ADP, 5 Phalloidin Mg2+, 2 ATP
B factors (Å2)
 Protein 102.53 51.05
 Ligand 92.30 82.27
R.m.s. deviations
 Bond lengths (Å) 0.004 0.004
 Bond angles (°) 0.967 0.983
Validation
MolProbity score 1.65 1.42
Clashscore 5.63 4.67
EMRinger score 1.39 1.29
Poor rotamers (%) 0.00 0.00
Ramachandran plot
 Favored (%) 95.00 96.96
 Allowed (%) 5.00 3.04
 Disallowed (%) 0.00 0.00
CaBLAM outliers (%) 4.2 3.8