Re: [AMBER] Amber Force Fields

From: Carlos Simmerling <>
Date: Wed, 31 Aug 2016 20:34:12 -0400

I agree with Hai. If you have started a project and a ew force field comes
out, it doesn't mean you need to start over. All of our models have
limitations. The important thing is to understand them, and know how they
influence your results. Work done using older, less accurate models may be
just fine. Work with newer force fields may just be a better choice for
quantitative work, especially for things focused on the physics that is
improved in the new model.

On Aug 31, 2016 3:34 PM, "amir sadeghi" <> wrote:

Hello dear Amber users,
I have question about the differences between the classicalAmber force
fields. They are several versions or editions of Amber force fieldsfor
protein molecular dynamics simulations (like :ff99SB, ff14SB, ff99SBildn
and etc.). The newer versions of the Amber force fieldsare recommended in
the case of accuracy and reliability of the simulationsresults comparing to
the older ones. But nowadays they are many published articlesthat use the
older version contrary to these recommendations. The question is that
which edition of Amber forcefields are suitable of protein simulations? The
older ones with huge amount ofcitations (like ff95) or the newer ones with
more accuracy reported (like: ff14SB)?

Best regards Amir Sadeghi
AMBER mailing list
AMBER mailing list
Received on Wed Aug 31 2016 - 18:00:02 PDT
Custom Search