New metadata for OP - 10.1002/*, update experiment 10.1021/bi3009399

[comcon1]

@AvNeEsH71-iam you can start OP from this block:
https://github.com/NMRLipids/BilayerData/tree/main/experiments/OrderParameters/10.1002
It's one paper.

Note that, in the data files, there are NaNs for non-measured atoms. I think they should be removed. And JSON should be regenerated. @mdondrup thinks that the conventional json's NA is None, and not NaN. So, let's remove non-measured lines.

[AvNeEsH71-iam]

@comcon1

As there is no X-ray metadata but there is NMR data. Shall I add NMR data?

[comcon1]

@AvNeEsH71-iam, can you please take this experiment: 10.1021/bi3009399.

There is a single dataset here but it's improperly assigned to mapping file. Please

1. Isolate all the experiments presented in the paper
2. Use WebPlotDigitalizer or similar tools to get values of quadrupolar splitting ($\Delta\nu$)
3. Convert values to |S_CD| (quadrupolar splitting in kHz should be multiplied by 0.00784) Consult this page for details: https://nmrlipids.blogspot.com/2014/02/accuracy-of-order-parameter-measurements.html
4. Convert numbers to universal atom names. You can check any mapping file of sphingomyelin where there is SMILEIDX. Then in molecule's metadata there is a SMILE string. heavy atoms in smile string are indexed by 0 1 2 3 ... so you can see how they are connected to universal atomname M_BLABLA_M.

[comcon1]

As there is no X-ray metadata but there is NMR data. Shall I add NMR data?

Yes, we are moving to NMR data. It has its specificity. But some fields are common like somposition ones.