[gmx-users] Whether CHARMM force field in GROMACS is different from that in CHARMM commercial package

[David van der Spoel]

On 2013-02-14 07:02, fayaz wrote:
> Dear Gromacs Forum,
>
> I want to do RNA simulation using Gromacs. I have installed gromacs 4.5.5
> and i found Charmm force field present in it. Can I use this force field for
> my simulation. I am asking this because I heard that Charmm force field in
> Gromacs is incomplete and different from the one that is present in CHARMM
> software package. I think this conception is present with many of the
> gromacs users. Most of my friends are also not using Charmm force field that
> comes with gromacs. Please clear this doubt.
>
Please read the paper by Bjelkmar et al. about the implementation of the FF.

Rumors is not enough, but if there is concrete evidence that something 
is incorrect a bug-report should be filed at http://redmine.gromacs.org.

Another question is whether Amber or Charmm is the better force field 
for RNA. In my group we use Amber.
> Thanks in advance
>
> Fayaz
>
>
>
> --
> View this message in context: http://gromacs.5086.n6.nabble.com/Whether-CHARMM-force-field-in-GROMACS-is-different-from-that-in-CHARMM-commercial-package-tp5005524.html
> Sent from the GROMACS Users Forum mailing list archive at Nabble.com.
>


-- 
David van der Spoel, Ph.D., Professor of Biology
Dept. of Cell & Molec. Biol., Uppsala University.
Box 596, 75124 Uppsala, Sweden. Phone:	+46184714205.
spoel at xray.bmc.uu.se    http://folding.bmc.uu.se