my suggestion is based only on my personal experience and what i've seen in
the literature- I don't have experience with igb=2 on nucleic acids. As I
said before, you'll need to proceed with caution. Perhaps others on the
list can let you know their experience too.
On Tue, Sep 4, 2012 at 1:01 PM, jit mukherjee <jitiitkgp.gmail.com> wrote:
> Dear Carlos,
> Thanks for your reply. You advised me to use igb=1 only. Why only igb=1 and
> not igb=2 (igb=2 is better than igb=1 to describe true molecular volume,
> i.e. , closer to real situation than using igb=1). Is the effective Born
> radii are not rescaled for nucleic acid or the corresponding bases? Please
> clarify.
>
> Regards,
> jit
> _______________________________________________
> AMBER mailing list
> AMBER.ambermd.org
> http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
>
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Tue Sep 04 2012 - 13:00:03 PDT
