From: Irene Newhouse (einew_at_hotmail.com)
Date: Mon Jul 09 2007 - 15:27:01 CDT

I've successfully built a topology file for N-acetylglucosamine. Now I'm trying to do the same for sialic acid, which is chemically fairly similar to NAG, but is proving to be much harder.

I'm running into a bizarre problem - psfgen works & doesn't print any unusual error messages. However, my psf file contains 2 angles which are of this form: CT2-HA-CT2, where CT2 actually refers to the same atom(!) and HA-CT2-HA, again, where HA is the same atom, not 2 different ones [I've been peeking at the psf file itself to get that info]. How did I stumble on the problem? When I try to run NAMD with this psf file, I get an error message stating that there are no parameters for an angle of type CT2-HA-CT2 [duuuh!] After messing about some, I started looking through the psf file & that's how I found the other error. That one would likely not produce a NAMD error message, wrong as it, too, is.

Can someone supply me with some general guidelines for building a topology file which prevent psfgen from getting confused like this?

So far, by generalizing from existing toplogies, I get the feeling that you start at point A & go along the backbone. Once the backbone is pinned down, so to speak, you go back for the side chains. You define your backbone to be as long as possible. It turns out that the standard numbering for sialic acid differs more from that for NAG than you'd think, based on the structure, because the 'maximal backbone' rule is applied in the numbering scheme as well. [If this interests you, we can email about this off-list]. In the ICs, your references should go 'back' toward atoms in the molecule you've already specified, by which I mean if you have an H7 on C7, then your IC should read H7 C7 x6 x5 where 'x' means the atoms in positions 6 & 5 of the backbone, C or not, as opposed to 'forward' toward atoms you haven't yet dealt with. [This seems to result in a fair amount of duplication of entries of previously-defined angles and bonds in IC statements].

A major source of confusion for me is when do you decide proper dihedral definitions are not sufficient, and you need to add improper dihedrals? Also, how many specifications are enough? For instance, for the ring atoms in sugar molecules, the CSFF topology files include 2 instances of improper dihedrals in which a given atom is the central atom, but that's not the case for straight-chain amino acids. I'm finding that if I over-specify H's on the 2 last carbons of the 'backbone' of sialic acid, then psfgen complains that the H on the 3rd-to-last C of the 'backbone' has to be guessed poorly - somewhat non-local, no? And not quite obvious why that should be the case to this novice. But none of the changes which remove that complaint result in disappearance of the CT2-HA-CT2 angle from the psf file.

The atom in question is like the CH2OH group in serine, and yes, I modeled my topology on serine, and that didn't help.

I'm willing to send out my files if that proves necessary, but I'm hoping that someone can give me some additional guidelines I've missed that allow me to dig myself out.

Thanks!
Irene Newhouse

_________________________________________________________________
Missed the show?  Watch videos of the Live Earth Concert on MSN.
http://liveearth.msn.com