Thank you very much, Elaine! This works well for this and other pdbs (just tested on 3 different docking ensembles). Probably there is some bug related to the missed residues in the pdb (which were recognized as sub-models in each sub model :-) ). I also could not understand completely why it was like this.. Cheers, Enrico Il giorno lun 1 ago 2022 alle ore 18:35 Elaine Meng <meng@cgl.ucsf.edu> ha scritto:

Hi Enrico, I haven't figured out why this doesn't work on your example (omitted since mailing to the list):

close #1 & ~ #1.5

However, this works:

delete #1 & ~ #1.5

Also if you didn't have other models (#2 etc.) that you were trying to keep you could just use

delete ~#1.5

I hope this helps, Elaine ----- Elaine C. Meng, Ph.D. UCSF Chimera(X) team Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry University of California, San Francisco

...

On Aug 1, 2022, at 6:39 AM, Enrico Martinez <jmsstarlight@gmail.com> wrote:

Hello Elaine, I just faced the same problem that has been indicated in this topic Thi time I am dealing with the monomeric multi-model complex obtained from docking. Here is the example of a pdb file consisted of 80+ docking poses. To keep only the 1.5 sub-modeli've tried to use close #1 & ~ #1.5 but this produced nothing, while for other pdbs it works fine. Could you tell me what's wrong with it? Many thanks in advance Cheers Enrico