[gmx-users] Re: gmx-users Digest, Vol 46, Issue 79

sudheer babu sudheer.pbm07 at gmail.com
Tue Feb 26 03:46:54 CET 2008


Thank you for very much for your invaulable suggestions to Justin and Sona.

On Tue, Feb 26, 2008 at 3:54 AM, <gmx-users-request at gromacs.org> wrote:

> Send gmx-users mailing list submissions to
>        gmx-users at gromacs.org
>
> To subscribe or unsubscribe via the World Wide Web, visit
>        http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
> or, via email, send a message with subject or body 'help' to
>        gmx-users-request at gromacs.org
>
> You can reach the person managing the list at
>        gmx-users-owner at gromacs.org
>
> When replying, please edit your Subject line so it is more specific
> than "Re: Contents of gmx-users digest..."
>
>
> Today's Topics:
>
>   1. Re: problem about Pr.mdp (Justin A. Lemkul)
>   2. Pressure Coupling for DPPC Bilayers (Sona Aramyan)
>   3. Harmonic dihedral restraints (Robert Johnson)
>   4. TFE in molecular dynamic (Luisa Calvanese)
>   5. TFE in molecular dynamic (Luisa Calvanese)
>   6. Re: Harmonic dihedral restraints (David Mobley)
>   7. Re: Harmonic dihedral restraints (Robert Johnson)
>
>
> ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
> Message: 1
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 06:13:49 -0500
> From: "Justin A. Lemkul" <jalemkul at vt.edu>
> Subject: Re: [gmx-users] problem about Pr.mdp
> To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
> Message-ID: <1203938029.47c2a2ed31e04 at webmail.vt.edu>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Quoting sudheer babu <sudheer.pbm07 at gmail.com>:
>
> > Thanks Mr.Mark for your reply,
> > I am not getting any error, but after Position restrain step, when I see
> the
> > structure of *pr_protein_popc_out.gro in VMD the POPC tails are tilting
> > towards backwards(like pulling). It looks there is gap inbetween two
> > membrane layers, middle part of the protein appears without covering
> POPC
> > moledules, but water and protein structure are fine.
> > Can you pls tell where is the problem ? Is there in any mistake in my *
> > pr.mdp file
> > I am gving description about what steps i have done:
> > 1.The protein simulated in solution for 500ps .
> > 2. Protein inserted into POPC by using "genbox".
> > 3. Steepest gradient energy minimisation for "protein embedded in POPC
> > system"  , here strucure is fine
> > 4. Postion restrain for same system
> >  - For Protein, POPC and Water force constant -10000 I have used.
> >
> > I am mentioning my *pr.mdp file
> > title               =   popc restrained
> > define              =  -DPOSRES  -DPOSRES_LIPID  -DPOSRES_WATER
>
> Try just restraining the protein, otherwise I don't suspect you're
> accomplishing
> much by restraining every component of your system!  That's probably not
> the
> problem, however.  See below.
>
> > constraints         =  all-bonds
> > integrator          =  md
> > dt                  =  0.002    ; ps !
> > nsteps              =  10000    ; total 50 ps.
> > nstcomm             =  1
> > nstxout             =  50
> > nstvout             =  1000
> > nstfout             =  0
> > nstlog               =  10
> > nstenergy           =  10
> > nstlist               =  10
> > ns_type             =  grid
> > rlist                   =  0.9
> > coulombtype         =  PME
> > rcoulomb            =  0.9
> > rvdw                =  1.4
> > pbc                 =  xyz
> > ; Berendsen temperature coupling is on in two groups
> > Tcoupl              =  Berendsen
> > tc-grps             =  POPC   Protein   SOL_Cl
> > tau_t               =  0.1     0.1      0.1
> > ref_t               =  310     310      310
> > ; Anisotropic pressure coupling is now on
> > Pcoupl              =  berendsen
> > pcoupltype          =  anisotropic
> > tau_p                  =     1.0      1.0     1.0     1.0     1.0
> 1.0
> > compressibility     =  4.5e-5   4.5e-5  4.5e-5    0       0       0
> > ref_p                  =    1.0      1.0     1.0        1.0       1.0
> > 1.0
>
> If I remember the usage of anisotropic pressure coupling correctly, this
> might
> be the source of your problem.  You are applying 1.0 bar of pressure in
> the
> diagonal directions, which I'm guessing is the source of the distortion.
>  Try
> ref_p = 1.0 1.0 1.0 0 0 0
>
> -Justin
>
> > ; Energy monitoring
> > energygrps          =  POPC  Protein  SOL_Cl
> > ; Generate velocites is on at 300 K.
> > gen_vel             =  yes
> > gen_temp            =  310
> > gen_seed            =  173529
> >
> > Thanks in advance.
> >
>
>
>
> ========================================
>
> Justin A. Lemkul
> Graduate Research Assistant
> Department of Biochemistry
> Virginia Tech
> Blacksburg, VA
> jalemkul at vt.edu | (540) 231-9080
> http://www.bevanlab.biochem.vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justin/
>
> ========================================
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 2
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 04:49:03 -0800 (PST)
> From: Sona Aramyan <sona_aramyan at yahoo.com>
> Subject: [gmx-users] Pressure Coupling for DPPC Bilayers
> To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
> Message-ID: <478608.8855.qm at web53307.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=iso-8859-1
>
> Hello,
>
>  Would the following be a reasonable way to implement
> anisotropic pressure coupling, for a 128 DPPC /3655
> water bilayer with an aminoacid on it:
>
>  ; Pressure coupling is on
>  Pcoupl = parrinello-rahman
>  pcoupltype = anisotropic
>  tau_p = 1.0 1.0 1.0 0 0 0
>  compressibility = 4.5e-5 4.5e-5 4.5e-5 0 0 0
>  ref_p = 1.0 1.0 1.0 0 0 0
>
>
> Beforehand thank you very very much.
>
>
>
>  ____________________________________________________________________________________
> Be a better friend, newshound, and
> know-it-all with Yahoo! Mobile.  Try it now.
> http://mobile.yahoo.com/;_ylt=Ahu06i62sR8HDtDypao8Wcj9tAcJ
>
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 3
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 13:10:00 -0500
> From: "Robert Johnson" <bobjohnson1981 at gmail.com>
> Subject: [gmx-users] Harmonic dihedral restraints
> To: "Gromacs Mailing List" <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <b302c1a40802251010r2633b4deifb20b92dcb65e57e at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Hello everyone,
> I am trying to calculate the absolute free energy of binding between a
> DNA base and a nanotube. To do this, I am first calculating the free
> energy associated with restraining the base in the correct binding
> geometry in accordance with Boresch et. al. J. Phs. Chem. B., 107,
> 2003. In this paper, all restraints (1 distance, 2 angles, 3
> dihedrals) are assumed to be harmonic. In Gromacs, there already
> exists a harmonic distance restraint. Technically, the angle restraint
> (Equation 4.67 in the manual) is not harmonic. However, for small
> angle displacements it can be approximated as harmonic, so that's not
> a problem either.
>
> However, there is no harmonic dihedral restraint. A reasonable
> solution would be to use an improper dihedral (Equation 4. 59 in the
> manual) for the restraint. Is this alright, or are there any problems
> that could arise from using this? To my knowledge, exclusions are
> defined by bonds. Thus, I don't think I have to worry about the
> improper dihedral affecting the exclusions. Is this correct?
>
> Thanks,
> Bob
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 4
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:29:46 +0100
> From: Luisa Calvanese <luisacalvanese at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [gmx-users] TFE in molecular dynamic
> To: <gmx-users at gromacs.org>, gmx-users-request
>        <gmx-users-request at gromacs.org>
> Message-ID: <BAY131-W14F9C3FFF218C814CAE6DBC9180 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
>
> How become part TFE molecules in a calculation of molecular dynamics?
> _________________________________________________________________
> Scarica GRATIS la versione personalizzata MSN di Internet Explorer 7!
> http://optimizedie7.msn.com/default.aspx?mkt=it-it
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://www.gromacs.org/pipermail/gmx-users/attachments/20080225/7858d6ea/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 5
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 20:29:39 +0100
> From: Luisa Calvanese <luisacalvanese at hotmail.com>
> Subject: [gmx-users] TFE in molecular dynamic
> To: <gmx-users at gromacs.org>, gmx-users-request
>        <gmx-users-request at gromacs.org>
> Message-ID: <BAY131-W3F96F6769A90ECA8EB432C9180 at phx.gbl>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>
>
> How become part TFE molecules in a calculation of molecular dynamics?
> _________________________________________________________________
> Ti piace giocare con le lettere? Prova ABCLive!
> http://messengergiochi.it.msn.com/
> -------------- next part --------------
> An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
> URL:
> http://www.gromacs.org/pipermail/gmx-users/attachments/20080225/505d7a60/attachment-0001.html
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 6
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 11:47:18 -0800
> From: "David Mobley" <dmobley at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [gmx-users] Harmonic dihedral restraints
> To: "Discussion list for GROMACS users" <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <bc2c99750802251147j588e940j23f8a739723f6b52 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Robert,
>
> I am not sure which manual you are looking at, but in the GROMACS 3.3
> manual, equation 4.70 gives the dihedral restraint as harmonic.
>
> David
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Robert Johnson
> <bobjohnson1981 at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Hello everyone,
> >  I am trying to calculate the absolute free energy of binding between a
> >  DNA base and a nanotube. To do this, I am first calculating the free
> >  energy associated with restraining the base in the correct binding
> >  geometry in accordance with Boresch et. al. J. Phs. Chem. B., 107,
> >  2003. In this paper, all restraints (1 distance, 2 angles, 3
> >  dihedrals) are assumed to be harmonic. In Gromacs, there already
> >  exists a harmonic distance restraint. Technically, the angle restraint
> >  (Equation 4.67 in the manual) is not harmonic. However, for small
> >  angle displacements it can be approximated as harmonic, so that's not
> >  a problem either.
> >
> >  However, there is no harmonic dihedral restraint. A reasonable
> >  solution would be to use an improper dihedral (Equation 4. 59 in the
> >  manual) for the restraint. Is this alright, or are there any problems
> >  that could arise from using this? To my knowledge, exclusions are
> >  defined by bonds. Thus, I don't think I have to worry about the
> >  improper dihedral affecting the exclusions. Is this correct?
> >
> >  Thanks,
> >  Bob
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at gromacs.org
> >  http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
> >  Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before
> posting!
> >  Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
> >  www interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
> >  Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> Message: 7
> Date: Mon, 25 Feb 2008 17:24:33 -0500
> From: "Robert Johnson" <bobjohnson1981 at gmail.com>
> Subject: Re: [gmx-users] Harmonic dihedral restraints
> To: "Discussion list for GROMACS users" <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
> Message-ID:
>        <b302c1a40802251424x1cb4745eg693ac4f37da4d498 at mail.gmail.com>
> Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
> Well, the potential is of the form V=k(x1-x2)^2, but I don't see how
> it's harmonic. What you would want is the x1 and x2 to refer to
> dihedral angles. However, the potential in equation 4.70 has this
> weird phi-phi_0 MOD 2pi term and this delta_phi parameter. It's just
> not obvious to me how equation 4.70 can be expanded or rearranged to
> look like a harmonic potential in the dihedral angles. Am I just not
> seeing something correctly?
> Bob
>
>
> On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 2:47 PM, David Mobley <dmobley at gmail.com> wrote:
> > Robert,
> >
> >  I am not sure which manual you are looking at, but in the GROMACS 3.3
> >  manual, equation 4.70 gives the dihedral restraint as harmonic.
> >
> >  David
> >
> >
> >
> >
> >  On Mon, Feb 25, 2008 at 10:10 AM, Robert Johnson
> >  <bobjohnson1981 at gmail.com> wrote:
> >  > Hello everyone,
> >  >  I am trying to calculate the absolute free energy of binding between
> a
> >  >  DNA base and a nanotube. To do this, I am first calculating the free
> >  >  energy associated with restraining the base in the correct binding
> >  >  geometry in accordance with Boresch et. al. J. Phs. Chem. B., 107,
> >  >  2003. In this paper, all restraints (1 distance, 2 angles, 3
> >  >  dihedrals) are assumed to be harmonic. In Gromacs, there already
> >  >  exists a harmonic distance restraint. Technically, the angle
> restraint
> >  >  (Equation 4.67 in the manual) is not harmonic. However, for small
> >  >  angle displacements it can be approximated as harmonic, so that's
> not
> >  >  a problem either.
> >  >
> >  >  However, there is no harmonic dihedral restraint. A reasonable
> >  >  solution would be to use an improper dihedral (Equation 4. 59 in the
> >  >  manual) for the restraint. Is this alright, or are there any
> problems
> >  >  that could arise from using this? To my knowledge, exclusions are
> >  >  defined by bonds. Thus, I don't think I have to worry about the
> >  >  improper dihedral affecting the exclusions. Is this correct?
> >  >
> >  >  Thanks,
> >  >  Bob
> >  >  _______________________________________________
> >  >  gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at gromacs.org
> >  >  http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
> >  >  Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before
> posting!
> >  >  Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
> >  >  www interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
> >  >  Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> >  >
> >  _______________________________________________
> >  gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at gromacs.org
> >  http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
> >  Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before
> posting!
> >  Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the
> >  www interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
> >  Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> >
>
>
> ------------------------------
>
> _______________________________________________
> gmx-users mailing list
> gmx-users at gromacs.org
> http://www.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
> Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before posting!
>
> End of gmx-users Digest, Vol 46, Issue 79
> *****************************************
>
-------------- next part --------------
An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
URL: <http://maillist.sys.kth.se/pipermail/gromacs.org_gmx-users/attachments/20080226/4c445531/attachment.html>


More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users mailing list