[gmx-users] FW: non-intergral charge for L-alanine molecules?
Hu Zhongqiao
zhongqiao_hu at nus.edu.sg
Mon Jun 18 13:29:14 CEST 2007
By the way, I just tried D-alanine with the residue name DALA. In this case, D-alanine doesn’t flip to L-alanine. So it seems that the order CA-N-C-CB is different from CA-C-N-CB. It seems that I havent totally understand the defintion and sign of improper angle.
Zhongqiao
-----Original Message-----
From: Hu Zhongqiao
Sent: 2007年6月18日 7:03 PM
To: 'gmx-users at gromacs.org'
Subject: RE: non-intergral charge for L-alanine molecules?
Thanks a lot, Mark Abraham and David,
I thought the atom charge of an ALA molecule was same as those in ALA residue of a protein molecules. That's wrong.
Now I can use pdb2gmx -ter to set zwitterion-type ALA.
About ffG43a1, I want to ask a question which is a little ambiguous to me.
According to what someone said in mailing list, the force fields of D-amino acids and L-amino acids are same. One just needs set different coordinates for them and use the same force field. In fact I am not sure for this. But when I used the ALA residue name for both D- and L- alanine .pdb files and do energy minimization, the D-alanine quickly flip to L-alanine. So it seems I am missing something.
I check ffG43a1.rtp and only difference for ALA and DALA is
ALA
[ impropers ]
; ai aj ak al gromos type
CA N C CB gi_2
DALA
[ impropers ]
; ai aj ak al gromos type
CA C N CB gi_2
I don’t know what is the real difference for the order CA-N-C-CB and CA-C-N-CB. It is said that the improper angle is the angle between i, j, k and j, k, l. So I think the order CA-N-C-CB and CA-C-N-CB makes no difference, right? I hope I am not right so that I can change something to make sure that D-alanine does not flip to L-alanine. Anyone can give a somehow detailed clarification for this,
Zhongqiao
Mark Abraham wrote:
>> I want to simulated transport of D- and L- alanine molecules. First I
>> tried using ffg43a1 force field, but D-analine will quickly flip to
>> L-alanine during energy minimization (I dont know why).
>
> I guess either you gave it the wrong enantiomer to start with, or your
> minimization step was too large and you happened to induce a flip with
> one force field and not the other. There's nothing about any force
> field that will cause preference for one enantiomer over another.
>
In Gromos there is: the angle for the improper dihedral.
>> Alternatively, I
>> tried oplsaa force fields. That's OK without flip from D- to L-. But
>> one problem is that when I used
>>
>> pdb2gmx -f L_alanine.pdb -p L_alanine.top -o L_alanine.gro -ff oplsaa
>>
>> The produced L_alanine.top showed that L_alanine molecule has
>> non-integral charge, which is obvioulsy unrealisitc.
>>
>
>> I found that charges of atoms in L_alanine molecule are different
>> from charges of corresponding atoms in ALA residue. I want to ask
>>
>> (1) why L_alanine molecule has non-integral charge? Is it right?
>> (2) why identical atoms in L_alanine and ALA residue have different
>> charges?
>
> Would you expect a carbon and oxygen in a mid-chain residue to have
> the same partial charge as a carbon and oxygen in a terminal carboxyl group?
>
> You should read chapter five of the manual thoroughly, and in
> particular the section about termini databases.
>
> Then, when you use pdb2gmx to try to create a zwitterion, choose the
> options that allow you to make one.
>
> Mark
>
For OPLSAA you can choose special Zwitterion termini. Rerun pdb2gmx with the -ter flag.
--
David.
________________________________________________________________________
David van der Spoel, PhD, Assoc. Prof., Molecular Biophysics group, Dept. of Cell and Molecular Biology, Uppsala University.
Husargatan 3, Box 596, 75124 Uppsala, Sweden
phone: 46 18 471 4205 fax: 46 18 511 755
spoel at xray.bmc.uu.se spoel at gromacs.org http://folding.bmc.uu.se
++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++++
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users
mailing list