Hi Yunshi,
For a comparison between ff14SB and ff12SB, please have a look at the last
3-4 pages of supporting information of the ff14SB paper. These pages
describe the key differences in the development of these two force fields.
Best,
Koushik
On Wednesday, October 21, 2015, yunshi11 . <yunshi09.gmail.com
<javascript:_e(%7B%7D,'cvml','yunshi09.gmail.com');>> wrote:
> Hello everyone,
>
> I understand that both ff12SB and ff14SB are developed by Simmerling group.
> While ff14SB is shown to improve side chain conformations (
> http://pubs.acs.org/doi/abs/10.1021/acs.jctc.5b00255), I am not sure if
> ff12SB does the same thing since I can't find a good paper on ff12SB except
> (
>
> http://www.jbsdonline.com/benchmark-amber-ff12sb-force-field-comparison-of-estimated-hairpin-loop-folding-stabilities-experiments-p18872.html
> ).
>
> So is ff14SB a mere continuation of improvement of ff94 after ff12SB? Or
> are ff14SB and ff12SB developed in different manners?
>
> I believe both ff12SB and ff14SB are compatible with GAFF and Glycam_06j,
> and hope to know which perform better in the simulation of protein-ligand
> complex according to their development strategies (since there's no
> extensive data or benchmark available).
>
> Thanks for any suggestion.
>
> Yun
> _______________________________________________
> 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 Wed Oct 21 2015 - 19:00:03 PDT
