On Wed, Nov 03, 2010, Rossella Noschese wrote:
>
> sorry I wasn't very clear in my second question. It may be a trivial
> question...however, in my second run, I had, for example, for VAL an output
> of j=7.6Hz (that was very near to my observed averaged j). This corresponds
> to a dihedral phi of about -85°. But when I measured it on my pdb it was
> about -145°. I believe that this means that I am measuring theta (85+60) not
> phi. Therefore, there is something wrong, if I am measuring a j which should
> give me a phi of 85°, yet I am calculating 145.° Could it be related to the
> j being averaged or not ? I assumed that the j in the output is not
> averaged, but is precisely related to the "final" molecule, therefore, it
> should be the precise conformation with that dihedral angle.
You should do a one-step minimization, to be sure that the value calculated
is what you want. I think (but it has been a long time) that the Karplus
coefficients need to be in terms of the H--H torsion angle, *not* some
conventional backbone torsion. That is, the angle "tau" on p. 181 is the
HN-N-Ca-Ha torsion, and the Karplus coefficients have to be written for that
torsion. So make sure that with a known structure, you are getting the
desired coupling constant.
...good luck...dac
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Wed Nov 03 2010 - 18:30:03 PDT
