[gmx-users] Re: gmx-users Digest, Vol 47, Issue 12

Grace Li fullofgrace88 at gmail.com
Thu Mar 6 14:14:29 CET 2008


Here is a few more replies relating to your question.

On Thu, Mar 6, 2008 at 12:09 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 with using distance restraints (disre)        with    PBC
>       (TJ Piggot)
>    2. Re: Problem with using distance restraints (disre)        with    PBC
>       (Mitchell Stanton-Cook)
>    3. lateral diffusion coefficient of bilayer (LeeHwan-kyu)
>    4. Re: lateral diffusion coefficient of bilayer (Justin A. Lemkul)
>    5. Re: Problems with OPLS topology files (Mark Abraham)
>    6. Checking the Progress of Energy minimization (s lal badshah)
>
>
>  ----------------------------------------------------------------------
>
>  Message: 1
>  Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 02:03:12 +0000
>  From: TJ Piggot <t.piggot at bristol.ac.uk>
>  Subject: Re: [gmx-users] Problem with using distance restraints
>         (disre) with    PBC
>  To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>  Message-ID: <3F4603EBE23F583CBC03F0AB at localhost.localdomain>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=us-ascii; format=flowed
>
>  I agree with increasing the size of the box (if seeing inconsistent shifts,
>  as i should have mentioned in my previous post) and in this case it is
>  practical to do as the system is quite small. However (just for future
>  reference) if the problem were in a much larger system (as it is in my
>  case) then it may be more suitable to modify the source code to avoid
>  increasing the size of the system simulated.
>
>  Tom
>
>  --On Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:52:01 +1000 Mitchell Stanton-Cook
>  <s4026869 at student.uq.edu.au> wrote:
>
>  > I have had a similar problem with orientation restraints.
>  >
>  > Are the residues far is space? Are you getting inconsistent shifts? If so
>  > -
>  >
>  > If so re-define your box size so that the shortest box vector is greater
>  > than the distance restraint residue + some tolerance.
>  >
>  > I also noticed -
>  >
>  > [ distance_restraints ]
>  > ;ai     aj      type    index   type   low     up1     up2     fac
>  >  9     413       1         0     1       8.18     8.18      10.0
>  >  1.0
>  >
>  > Have you defined the low up and up2 in the correct units?
>  >
>  > Cheers
>  >
>  > Mitch
>  >
>  > TJ Piggot wrote:
>  >> Hi,
>  >>
>  >> Firstly I would strongly reiterate what Mark said. I would make sure
>  >> the distance restraints are causing your problem. Again as Mark said
>  >> make sure you can simulate your system without the distance
>  >> restraints, and then I would try to simulate the system with distance
>  >> restraints and with a much larger box of water surrounding your
>  >> peptide. Here you should also be able to overcome the problem (if it
>  >> is this problem) with a large enough distance between periodic images.
>  >>
>  >> If you can then confirm what you have suspected to be the problem you
>  >> will need to modify the source code slightly. If you search the list
>  >> (searching for "inconsistent shifts using multiple bonds type 6") you
>  >> can see the changes you need to make, as suggested by Berk Hess to me
>  >> when i had this problem with bond type 6.
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> Hope this helps
>  >>
>  >> Cheers
>  >>
>  >> Tom
>  >>
>  >> --On Wednesday, March 05, 2008 17:16:23 -0500 Grace Li
>  >> <fullofgrace88 at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >>
>  >>> Hello,
>  >>> I am having some trouble using distance restraints. My goal is to
>  >>> apply a
>  >>> harmonic potential to the distance between two atoms in a short peptide
>  >>> (35 residues). Doing simulations in vacuo, both of the following
>  >>> techniques worked to restrain the distance. Also, both techniques worked
>  >>> for simulations in water without periodic boundary conditions. As soon
>  >>>  as I include pbc = xyz in my .mdp file and use PME for the
>  >>> electrostatics,  my simulation crashes (producing step0.pdb and
>  >>> step-1.pdb). I am assuming this is because GROMACS is using the distance
>  >>> to the image of the other atom, not the actual distance in the box? Is
>  >>> there any way of getting around PBC for distance restraints?
>  >>>
>  >>> Specifically, I have used the following:
>  >>>
>  >>> 1. I have tried using bonds type 6 in my topology:
>  >>> [ bonds ]
>  >>> ;  ai    aj funct c0 c1 c2 c3
>  >>>    9   413     6 8.18  421.54
>  >>>
>  >>> 2. When using distance restraints, I added the following lines to my
>  >>> topology file:
>  >>> [ distance_restraints ]
>  >>> ;ai     aj      type    index   type   low     up1     up2     fac
>  >>>  9     413    1         0         1       8.18     8.18      10.0
>  >>>  1.0
>  >>>
>  >>> In the case of using [ distance_restraints ] in the topology file, I
>  >>>  have
>  >>> added the following lines to my .mdp file:
>  >>> disre = simple
>  >>> disre_fc = 421.54
>  >>> disre_weighting = equal
>  >>> disre_tau = 0
>  >>> (and various other values of the force constant, disre_fc, but in all
>  >>> cases the run crashes).
>  >>>
>  >>> Thanks for any suggestions!
>  >>> _______________________________________________
>  >>> 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
>  >>
>  >>
>  >>
>  >> ----------------------
>  >> TJ Piggot
>  >> t.piggot at bristol.ac.uk
>  >> University of Bristol, UK.
>  >>
>  >> _______________________________________________
>  >> 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
>
>
>
>  ----------------------
>  TJ Piggot
>  t.piggot at bristol.ac.uk
>  University of Bristol, UK.
>
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Message: 2
>  Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 12:50:18 +1000
>  From: Mitchell Stanton-Cook <s4026869 at student.uq.edu.au>
>  Subject: Re: [gmx-users] Problem with using distance restraints
>         (disre) with    PBC
>  To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>  Message-ID: <47CF5BEA.90002 at student.uq.edu.au>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>  Hi Tom,
>
>  Have you modified the src? As far as I know this has not been done in
>  331 or 332. I'm unsure of 333. I would be interested in the patch. As
>  far as I know the problem is due to the the distance/orientation
>  restraints being placed in the bonded graph. There was a bit of chatter
>  on the developers list in 2007 about this but I haven't heard much else.
>
>  For my system I was using a truncated dodecahedron box. The box vector
>  1/2d was my biggest problem. I simply changed to a triclinic box without
>  too much cost. However I think I could grab an extra 300ps/day if I had
>  an actual fix.
>
>
>  Cheers
>
>  Mitch
>
>  TJ Piggot wrote:
>  > I agree with increasing the size of the box (if seeing inconsistent
>  > shifts, as i should have mentioned in my previous post) and in this
>  > case it is practical to do as the system is quite small. However (just
>  > for future reference) if the problem were in a much larger system (as
>  > it is in my case) then it may be more suitable to modify the source
>  > code to avoid increasing the size of the system simulated.
>  >
>  > Tom
>  >
>  > --On Thursday, March 06, 2008 11:52:01 +1000 Mitchell Stanton-Cook
>  > <s4026869 at student.uq.edu.au> wrote:
>  >
>  >> I have had a similar problem with orientation restraints.
>  >>
>  >> Are the residues far is space? Are you getting inconsistent shifts?
>  >> If so
>  >> -
>  >>
>  >> If so re-define your box size so that the shortest box vector is greater
>  >> than the distance restraint residue + some tolerance.
>  >>
>  >> I also noticed -
>  >>
>  >> [ distance_restraints ]
>  >> ;ai     aj      type    index   type   low     up1     up2     fac
>  >>  9     413       1         0     1       8.18     8.18      10.0
>  >>  1.0
>  >>
>  >> Have you defined the low up and up2 in the correct units?
>  >>
>  >> Cheers
>  >>
>  >> Mitch
>  >>
>  >> TJ Piggot wrote:
>  >>> Hi,
>  >>>
>  >>> Firstly I would strongly reiterate what Mark said. I would make sure
>  >>> the distance restraints are causing your problem. Again as Mark said
>  >>> make sure you can simulate your system without the distance
>  >>> restraints, and then I would try to simulate the system with distance
>  >>> restraints and with a much larger box of water surrounding your
>  >>> peptide. Here you should also be able to overcome the problem (if it
>  >>> is this problem) with a large enough distance between periodic images.
>  >>>
>  >>> If you can then confirm what you have suspected to be the problem you
>  >>> will need to modify the source code slightly. If you search the list
>  >>> (searching for "inconsistent shifts using multiple bonds type 6") you
>  >>> can see the changes you need to make, as suggested by Berk Hess to me
>  >>> when i had this problem with bond type 6.
>  >>>
>  >>>
>  >>> Hope this helps
>  >>>
>  >>> Cheers
>  >>>
>  >>> Tom
>  >>>
>  >>> --On Wednesday, March 05, 2008 17:16:23 -0500 Grace Li
>  >>> <fullofgrace88 at gmail.com> wrote:
>  >>>
>  >>>> Hello,
>  >>>> I am having some trouble using distance restraints. My goal is to
>  >>>> apply a
>  >>>> harmonic potential to the distance between two atoms in a short
>  >>>> peptide
>  >>>> (35 residues). Doing simulations in vacuo, both of the following
>  >>>> techniques worked to restrain the distance. Also, both techniques
>  >>>> worked
>  >>>> for simulations in water without periodic boundary conditions. As soon
>  >>>>  as I include pbc = xyz in my .mdp file and use PME for the
>  >>>> electrostatics,  my simulation crashes (producing step0.pdb and
>  >>>> step-1.pdb). I am assuming this is because GROMACS is using the
>  >>>> distance
>  >>>> to the image of the other atom, not the actual distance in the box? Is
>  >>>> there any way of getting around PBC for distance restraints?
>  >>>>
>  >>>> Specifically, I have used the following:
>  >>>>
>  >>>> 1. I have tried using bonds type 6 in my topology:
>  >>>> [ bonds ]
>  >>>> ;  ai    aj funct c0 c1 c2 c3
>  >>>>    9   413     6 8.18  421.54
>  >>>>
>  >>>> 2. When using distance restraints, I added the following lines to my
>  >>>> topology file:
>  >>>> [ distance_restraints ]
>  >>>> ;ai     aj      type    index   type   low     up1     up2     fac
>  >>>>  9     413    1         0         1       8.18     8.18      10.0
>  >>>>  1.0
>  >>>>
>  >>>> In the case of using [ distance_restraints ] in the topology file, I
>  >>>>  have
>  >>>> added the following lines to my .mdp file:
>  >>>> disre = simple
>  >>>> disre_fc = 421.54
>  >>>> disre_weighting = equal
>  >>>> disre_tau = 0
>  >>>> (and various other values of the force constant, disre_fc, but in all
>  >>>> cases the run crashes).
>  >>>>
>  >>>> Thanks for any suggestions!
>  >>>> _______________________________________________
>  >>>> 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
>  >>>
>  >>>
>  >>>
>  >>> ----------------------
>  >>> TJ Piggot
>  >>> t.piggot at bristol.ac.uk
>  >>> University of Bristol, UK.
>  >>>
>  >>> _______________________________________________
>  >>> 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
>  >
>  >
>  >
>  > ----------------------
>  > TJ Piggot
>  > t.piggot at bristol.ac.uk
>  > University of Bristol, UK.
>  >
>  > _______________________________________________
>  > 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: 3
>  Date: Wed, 5 Mar 2008 22:41:35 -0500
>  From: LeeHwan-kyu <hklee910 at hotmail.com>
>  Subject: [gmx-users] lateral diffusion coefficient of bilayer
>  To: <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>  Message-ID: <BAY105-W51E37A31B14675D1316FD998120 at phx.gbl>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="ks_c_5601-1987"
>
>
>  Dear gmx-users,
>
>  I have some questions about calculation of lateral diffusion coefficient for bilayer.  I've searched this forum, but I still have problems.
>
>  1) I'm trying to get lateral diffusion coefficient of the lipid bilayer , and I typed "g_msd -f ***.xtc -s ***.tpr -o msd.xvg -b 30000 -e 40000 -beginfit 1000 -endfit 7000 -lateral z".   I got too high D value (which is shown as D[ xxx] 0.5412 (+/- 0.0021) 1e-5 cm^2/s.   I calculated it for each monolayer, and also for bilayer, but had similar values.   This big value comes from the size effect ?   Is there anyway to get a reasonable lateral D?
>
>  2) When I ran the bilayer simulation, did I have to remove center of mass for each monolayer?  My input script is jut like below.  Do I need to write commends for center of mass removal for each monolayer, and run simulations again?
>  -------
>  nstcomm    =  1
>  comm-grps =
>  -------
>
>  Thank you for your help in advance.
>
>  best,
>  Hwankyu.
>
>
>  _________________________________________________________________
>  MSN ¸Þ½ÅÀúÀÇ Â÷¼¼´ë ¹öÀü, Windows Live Messenger!
>  http://windowslive.msn.co.kr/wlm/messenger/
>  -------------- next part --------------
>  An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>  URL: http://www.gromacs.org/pipermail/gmx-users/attachments/20080305/524c14c2/attachment-0001.html
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Message: 4
>  Date: Wed,  5 Mar 2008 23:04:22 -0500
>  From: "Justin A. Lemkul" <jalemkul at vt.edu>
>  Subject: Re: [gmx-users] lateral diffusion coefficient of bilayer
>  To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>  Message-ID: <1204776262.47cf6d46cf02e at webmail.vt.edu>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1
>
>
>  Did you follow the thread I started here:
>
>  http://www.gromacs.org/pipermail/gmx-users/2008-January/031797.html
>
>  I got some great information when I was getting some strange values for D.  What
>  group are you using to calculate D?  The suggestion that David gave me about
>  using P atoms only for the calculation led me to much more reasonable results.
>
>  -Justin
>
>  Quoting LeeHwan-kyu <hklee910 at hotmail.com>:
>
>  >
>  > Dear gmx-users,
>  >
>  > I have some questions about calculation of lateral diffusion coefficient for
>  > bilayer.  I've searched this forum, but I still have problems.
>  >
>  > 1) I'm trying to get lateral diffusion coefficient of the lipid bilayer , and
>  > I typed "g_msd -f ***.xtc -s ***.tpr -o msd.xvg -b 30000 -e 40000 -beginfit
>  > 1000 -endfit 7000 -lateral z".   I got too high D value (which is shown as D[
>  > xxx] 0.5412 (+/- 0.0021) 1e-5 cm^2/s.   I calculated it for each monolayer,
>  > and also for bilayer, but had similar values.   This big value comes from the
>  > size effect ?   Is there anyway to get a reasonable lateral D?
>  >
>  > 2) When I ran the bilayer simulation, did I have to remove center of mass for
>  > each monolayer?  My input script is jut like below.  Do I need to write
>  > commends for center of mass removal for each monolayer, and run simulations
>  > again?
>  > -------
>  > nstcomm    =  1
>  > comm-grps =
>  > -------
>  >
>  > Thank you for your help in advance.
>  >
>  > best,
>  > Hwankyu.
>  >
>  >
>  > _________________________________________________________________
>  > MSN ¸Þ½ÅÀúÀÇ Â÷¼¼´ë ¹öÀü, Windows Live Messenger!
>  > http://windowslive.msn.co.kr/wlm/messenger/
>
>
>
>  ========================================
>
>  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: 5
>  Date: Thu, 06 Mar 2008 15:06:20 +1100
>  From: Mark Abraham <Mark.Abraham at anu.edu.au>
>  Subject: Re: [gmx-users] Problems with OPLS topology files
>  To: Discussion list for GROMACS users <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>  Message-ID: <47CF6DBC.9080507 at anu.edu.au>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset=ISO-8859-1; format=flowed
>
>  Goran Krilov wrote:
>  > Thanks!
>  > I am enclosing the piece of the topology file (2607 is the first line
>  > after the
>  > [dihedrals] heading:
>  >
>  >  342    97    98   105     3      0.62760   1.88280   0.00000  -2.51040
>  >  0.0000  0.0000
>  >   342    97   323   324     3      0.00000   0.00000   0.00000   0.00000
>  >  0.0000  0.0000
>  >   342    97   323   327     3      0.00000   0.00000   0.00000   0.00000
>  >  0.0000  0.0000
>  >
>  > [ dihedrals ]
>  >
>  > ;  ai    aj    ak    al   funct    c0         c1        c2        c3
>  >   c4      c5
>  >     2     5     1    25     1      8.36800   0.00000  -8.36800   0.00000
>  >  0.0000  0.0000
>
>  Look at Table 5.4... dihedral function type 1 doesn't take 6 parameters.
>   Because it is actually expecting 3, gromacs infers that because 6 =
>  2*3 that you're trying to do a free-energy perturbation calculation.
>  This explains the error message.
>
>  Mark
>
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  Message: 6
>  Date: Thu, 6 Mar 2008 05:09:06 +0000 (GMT)
>  From: s lal badshah <shahbiochemist at yahoo.com>
>  Subject: [gmx-users] Checking the Progress of Energy minimization
>  To: gromacs <gmx-users at gromacs.org>
>  Message-ID: <299026.97381.qm at web53005.mail.re2.yahoo.com>
>  Content-Type: text/plain; charset="iso-8859-1"
>
>  Dear All,
>  I am doing Energy minimization of a protein.The valus are fluctuating butI don't know in how much time it will be completed and what are the signs that show that it is running?
>
>  top - 09:54:08 up 22:52,  2 users,  load average: 0.07, 0.17, 0.16
>  Tasks: 111 total,   1 running, 109 sleeping,   1 stopped,   0 zombie
>  Cpu(s):  6.7%us,  2.3%sy,  0.0%ni, 89.6%id,  0.6%wa,  0.8%hi,  0.0%si,  0.0%st
>  Mem:   1025804k total,   980436k used,    45368k free,   201956k buffers
>  Swap:  2104444k total,        0k used,  2104444k free,   454128k cached
>
>
>  Please guide me.
>  Regrads,
>  Lalbadshah
>
>
>  SYED LAL BADSHAH
>  M.Phil Scholar
>  NCE in Physical Chemistry,
>  University of Peshawar.
>  NWFP,Pakistan.
>  Cell # 03349060632.
>   Send instant messages to your online friends http://uk.messenger.yahoo.com
>  -------------- next part --------------
>  An HTML attachment was scrubbed...
>  URL: http://www.gromacs.org/pipermail/gmx-users/attachments/20080306/64c4a182/attachment.html
>
>  ------------------------------
>
>  _______________________________________________
>  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 47, Issue 12
>  *****************************************
>



More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users mailing list