[gmx-users] Advice for simulating small DNA
Justin A. Lemkul
jalemkul at vt.edu
Mon Feb 2 06:08:54 CET 2009
Joshua Ballanco wrote:
>
> On Feb 1, 2009, at 8:22 PM, Mark Abraham wrote:
>
>> Joshua Ballanco wrote:
>>> On Feb 1, 2009, at 6:48 PM, Mark Abraham wrote:
>>>> Joshua Ballanco wrote:
>>>>> Hi,
>>>>> I'm attempting to model a system involving a small DNA 3-mer.
>>>>> Without any explicit constraints, the helix begins to come apart
>>>>> around 0.75 ns to 1 ns into the simulation.
>>>>
>>>> Presumably you have a 3-mer of helices, of which at least one comes
>>>> apart. Does a single helix in water survive? (Giving a better
>>>> description of your simulation system would be a good idea!)
>>> Apologies for not being more descriptive... It is a single strand of
>>> DNA containing 3 A-T base pairs. The system also contains a single
>>> Arginine residue. Simulating it in water leads to the single DNA
>>> strand gradually coming apart. With the DNA and water alone, the
>>> helix stays together much longer, but still eventually comes apart.
>>
>> OK, so your model physics for DNA is intrinsically broken. Where did
>> you get it?
>
> The coordinates are from 3DNA. I'm using the terms from the G53a6 force
> field for DADE and DTHY. As for the H-bond physics, I've thus far been
> unable to find a good suggestion for how to handle these explicitly
> using Gromacs. Do you have a recommendation as to where I should be
> looking? (None of the primary literature I've looked through thus far
> seems concerned with MD of such short DNA fragments).
>
>>>>> So I'm now attempting to add restraints for the base-pair H-bonds,
>>>>> but I'm having trouble. It seems like no matter what I try, my
>>>>> system reliably explodes within the first 1 ns. My constraints look
>>>>> like this:
>>>>> [ distance_restraints ]
>>>>> ; ai aj type index type’ low up1 up2 fac
>>>>> 18 136 1 0 2 0.0 2.0 2.1 1.0
>>>>> 14 134 1 0 2 0.0 2.0 2.1 1.0
>>>>> 43 114 1 0 2 0.0 2.0 2.1 1.0
>>>>> 39 112 1 0 2 0.0 2.0 2.1 1.0
>>>>> 68 92 1 0 2 0.0 2.0 2.1 1.0
>>>>> 64 90 1 0 2 0.0 2.0 2.1 1.0
>>>>> I've tried pre-equilibrating for up to 100 ps, but even that
>>>>> doesn't prevent the system from eventually exploding.
>>>>
>>>> Your .mdp settings for distance restraints may also be relevant here
>>>> - not least in setting the existence and magnitude of these restraints.
>>> As I understand, the only relevant lines are:
>>> constraints = all-bonds
>>> integrator = md
>>> disre = simple
>>
>> disre-fc and others are also relevant. See manual chapter 7.
>
> Thanks for the pointer. I had overlooked most of the options there,
> since I'm not actually doing anything related to NMR. (That'll teach me
> to read more carefully!) Unfortunately, playing around with this,
> disre-tau, disre-weighting, and the weighting factors for each bond have
> not, so far, avoided the explosion.
>
>>> For PME I was using:
>>> coulombtype = PME
>>> rlist = 0.55
>>> rcoulomb = 0.55
>>> rvdw = 0.55
>>> fourierspacing = 0.1375
>>
>> I agree with Justin that these are very weird for normal usage.
>
> Thanks for pointing that out. I'm relatively new with Gromacs, and
> hastily reduced these values to fix the relatively small box my system
> fits in. I doubled the short box dimension (triclinic; was --> 2.0, 2.1,
> 1.1 now --> 2.0, 2.1, 2.0) and increased the radii to the (as far as I
> can tell) more recommended values:
>
> coulombtype = PME
> rlist = 0.9
> rcoulomb = 0.9
> rvdw = 0.9
> fourierspacing = 0.12
>
> Unfortunately, even with all of these changes, I'm still getting an
> explosion (and my simulation is quite a bit slower).
>
Read the primary literature references for Gromos96 53a6; I believe the rvdw
parameter should be 1.4 nm to keep consistent with the parameterization scheme.
Are your box dimensions really adequate? A standard DNA helix should be about 2
nm wide, so your system may be seeing its periodic images if your box is only
about 2.0 nm across its shortest dimension. Use, for example, editconf -c -d
1.0 to generate sufficient box dimensions.
-Justin
> Thanks again for the pointers. I'm going to try running everything with
> ffamber to see if it does a better job with the DNA (without the added
> restraints). I presume the port validated with Gromacs 3.3.1 is still
> good for 4.0?
>
> Thanks!
>
> - Josh_______________________________________________
> 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 thewww
> interface or send it to gmx-users-request at gromacs.org.
> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
>
--
========================================
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
========================================
More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users
mailing list