Re: [AMBER] amber question

From: Vikas Sharma <vs_vikassharma.yahoo.co.in>
Date: Sun, 26 Apr 2009 10:51:38 +0100

Thanks Barbault Florent,, I shall keep this in my mind ________________________________ From: Barbault Florent <florent.barbault.univ-paris-diderot.fr> To: AMBER Mailing List <amber.ambermd.org> Sent: Sunday, 26 April, 2009 2:18:31 PM Subject: Re: [AMBER] amber question Hello, In your antechamber command, you are using AM1-BCC method. This is a semi-empirical QM method. I personnaly used several methods for my ligands : - RESP charges, from HF 6-31* gaussian calculations. You need to do these calculations with several conformations and to do the average. This is certainly, the most accurate way to obtain ligand atomic charges. - AM1-BCC, which seems to be less dependent to conformation. Generaly, I used it with only one ligand conformation. I have generally good results from this method but I used this method with ligands which not display large conformational changes. - Gasteiger. This is not a quantum calculation. I employed this method for several ligands on the same RNA binding site. I found that it was not really good for my problem. However, the calculation is damn quick. - With antechamber, you can also don't calculate charges and simply read the charges from input file. I used this for a ligand/ligand simulation in vaccuo. To do that, I took the charges from Sybyl calculations (marsili charges). This was good, but I will never do that for a protein/ligand interaction where you will need charges in adequation with amber protein charges. To sum up, you have several possibilities depending of what you want to do. Now, I generally uses AM1-BCC as default method, and I have quite good results. In my mind, this is a good compromise with accuracy and cpu time. Hope that my experience will help you. Regards Florent Barbault On Sun, 26 Apr 2009 11:30:06 +0530 (IST) Vikas Sharma <vs_vikassharma.yahoo.co.in> wrote: > hi all > Is it always necessary to perform QM calculations for ligand to calculate charges or antechamber is sufficient? > Actually iam usin antechamber with the following command: > > antechamber -i ligand.mol2 - fi mol2 -o ligand.prepin -fo prepi -c bcc -s 2 > > and Its going fine..i checked the tutorial and its mentioned there that for non standard residues we should use QM calculations coz antechamber wont work in case of non- standard... > > If QM calculation is required then why? > If QM calculation is not required then why? > > > Now surf faster and smarter ! Check out the new Firefox 3 - Yahoo! Edition http://downloads.yahoo.com/in/firefox/ > _______________________________________________ > AMBER mailing list > AMBER.ambermd.org > http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber ------------------------------------------------- Dr Florent Barbault Maitre de conferences / Assistant professor NEW ADDRESS !!! Universite Paris Diderot Laboratoire ITODYS 15 rue Jean de Baïf, bâtiment Lavoisier 75013 Paris FRANCE http://www.itodys.univ-paris7.fr/ tel : (33) 01-57-27-88-50 e-mail : florent.barbault.univ-paris-diderot.fr ------------------------------------------------- _______________________________________________ AMBER mailing list AMBER.ambermd.org http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber Own a website.Get an unlimited package.Pay next to nothing.*Go to http://in.business.yahoo.com/
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Wed May 20 2009 - 12:53:34 PDT
Custom Search