[gmx-users] problem in analyzing
Justin A. Lemkul
jalemkul at vt.edu
Sat Dec 20 13:03:29 CET 2008
> I want to analyze md. This md took 10 ns(10000 ps) for a protein with 206
> residue and 2 Mn plus about 17000 molecule solvent as water.
> then I construct extra group containig Protein+2 Mn with make_ndx comand.
> I did g_rmsf for extracting the average structure of the new group rmsd
> equilibrated section :
> g_rmsf -n p+mn.ndx -s md300.tpr -f md300.trr -b 9000 -e 10000 -ox e.pdb
> then I did procheck to evaluate e.pdb, the summery of ramachandran was:
> 83.3% core 15.2% allow 0.5% gener 1% disall G-factor= -0.75
> for improving this result I did energy minimization with steepest descent
> and cg. the parameter for steep is emtol=1000 the ramachandran result was:
> 82.8% core 15.7% allow 0% gener 1.5% disall G-factor= -0.3
> steep emtol=10:
> 76% core 22.1% allow 0.5% gener 1.5% disall G-factor= -0.47
> after performing cg nstcgstep= 9000 emtol=1 nstep=0.01 the result was
> 76% core 21.6% allow 1% gener 1.5% disall G-factor= -0.48
> it seems that the results get worse after doing EM.
> my question is why performing EM worse this result?
Realize that an "average structure" may have no physical significance at all:
> what could I to improve ramachandran result, is it better to do md for
> longer time(according to 206 residue)?
Maybe, maybe not. You might be better off analyzing your result with something
like g_cluster to group structures by RMSD clustering to get a sense of the
prevailing structures in the simulation.
> another question is whether incresing tempreture from 300 to 500 or greater
> affect procheck result or not? besids changing temprature and nstep
> parameter in md.mdp with chaning in which parameter can we improve md
Depending on your protein's stability, it may just unfold, and that's probably
not what you're after.
> thank's for replying.
Justin A. Lemkul
Graduate Research Assistant
Department of Biochemistry
jalemkul[at]vt.edu | (540) 231-9080
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users