From: Kenno Vanommeslaeghe (kvanomme_at_rx.umaryland.edu)
Date: Tue Nov 11 2014 - 11:07:25 CST
I don't have a clear-cut answer to this question, but can offer some food
for thought:
http://www.charmm.org/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=25263#Post25263
http://www.charmm.org/ubbthreads/ubbthreads.php?ubb=showflat&Number=28502#Post28502
Bottom line is, as always, that it all depends on what kind of accuracy
you need. I certainly wouldn't use it for any kind of quantitative (e.g.
free energy) calculation without stringent validation, but if you just
want qualitative sampling information on a system in which the oxygen does
not play a central role, a very approximate model that is either based on
"OM" in toppar_all36_prot_heme.str or OG2D1 in CGenFF may be good enough.
On 11/11/2014 11:11 AM, Francesco Pietra wrote:
> Hello:
> My question is about the heroic use of dioxygen data from
> toppar_all22_prot_heme.str (by zeroing the charges) and
> par_all27_prot_lipid.rtf for CHARMM36. I refer to free dioxygen in TIP3
> water solution.
>
> With CHARMM36 the "OM" type of previous FF version should be changed. Is
> the change to "OG2D1" the best compromise?
>
> Thanks for advice
>
> francesco pietra
This archive was generated by hypermail 2.1.6 : Wed Dec 31 2014 - 23:23:00 CST