Hi guys,
We wanted to change from AmberTools15 to AmberTools16, and we saw in the
changelog (
http://ambermd.org/changelog.html) about the new specifications
for choosing force-fields.
For now, we were at least testing if oldff/leaprc.ff14SB in AmberTools16
gave the same results as the leaprc.ff14SB in AmberTools15.
As a matter of fact, it does not. The initial difference that caught my
attention was:
591c596
< AMBER General Force Field for organic molecules (Version 1.7, Nov 2013)
---
> AMBER General Force Field for organic molecules (Version 1.8, Mar 2015)
So I changed to use the gaff.dat from AmberTools15.
After that change, the entire diff between leap.log files using
AmberTools15 and AmberTools16 is:
1c1
< log started: Tue Jan 31 20:21:26 2017
---
> log started: Tue Jan 31 21:15:45 2017
48c48
< Loading parameters:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/parm/lipid14.dat
---
> Loading parameters: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/parm/lipid14.dat
55c55
< Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/lib/lipid14.lib
---
> Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/lib/lipid14.lib
65,67c65,67
< > source leaprc.ff14SB
< ----- Source: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/cmd/leaprc.ff14SB
< ----- Source of
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/cmd/leaprc.ff14SB done
---
> > source oldff/leaprc.ff14SB
> ----- Source: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/cmd/oldff/leaprc.ff14SB
> ----- Source of /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/cmd/oldff/leaprc.ff14SB done
69c69
< log started: Tue Jan 31 20:21:26 2017
---
> log started: Tue Jan 31 21:15:45 2017
169c169
< Loading parameters:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/parm/parm10.dat
---
> Loading parameters: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/parm/parm10.dat
175c175
< Loading parameters:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/parm/frcmod.ff14SB
---
> Loading parameters: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/parm/frcmod.ff14SB
183c183
< Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/lib/amino12.lib
---
> Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/lib/amino12.lib
213c213
< Loading library:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/lib/aminoct12.lib
---
> Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/lib/aminoct12.lib
241c241
< Loading library:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/lib/aminont12.lib
---
> Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/lib/aminont12.lib
267c267
< Loading library:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/lib/nucleic12.lib
---
> Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/lib/nucleic12.lib
305c305
< Loading library:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/lib/atomic_ions.lib
---
> Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/lib/atomic_ions.lib
374c374
< Loading library:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/lib/solvents.lib
---
> Loading library: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/lib/solvents.lib
376a377,380
> Loading: FB3
> Loading: FB3BOX
> Loading: FB4
> Loading: FB4BOX
495a500
> >>
498,499c503,504
< ----- Source: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/cmd/leaprc.gaff
< ----- Source of
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/cmd/leaprc.gaff done
---
> ----- Source: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/cmd/leaprc.gaff
> ----- Source of /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/cmd/leaprc.gaff done
501c506
< log started: Tue Jan 31 20:21:27 2017
---
> log started: Tue Jan 31 21:15:45 2017
589c594
< Loading parameters:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/parm/gaff.dat
---
> Loading parameters: ./gaff.dat
596c601
< Loading parameters:
/home/joao/maindisk/software/amber14/dat/leap/parm/frcmod.ionsjc_tip3p
---
> Loading parameters: /home/joao/maindisk/software/amber16/dat/leap/parm/frcmod.ionsjc_tip3p
If one excludes the differences in the paths, the only difference is in the
loading of news solvents (I think? from solvents.lib). These shouldn’t
affect.
The output .crd is the same, no differences. But the output .prmtop files
are different.
Namely,
- there are differences in the POINTERS section, in the 8th and 15th
entry, which correspond to the MPHIA (number of dihedrals not containing
hydrogen) and NPHIA (MPHIA + number of constraint dihedrals). The
difference is between 7371 and 7373, with AmberTools16 presenting two more:
7,8c7,8
< 7196 17 5555 1670 3625 2269 7454 7371
0 0
< 23114 1552 1670 2269 7371 68 160 213
35 1
---
> 7196 17 5555 1670 3625 2269 7454 7373 0 0
> 23114 1552 1670 2269 7373 68 160 213 35 1
- the previously mentioned entry differences also show in
DIHEDRALS_WITHOUT_HYDROGEN:
2097 2106 -2115 2121 44
4383 4392 -4401 4407 44
- lastly, the RADII section, there are multiple differences, where one
radius that is 1.2 in AmberTools15, shows as 1.3 in AmberTools16. Sample of
differences:
22541,22542c22542,22543
< 1.70000000E+00 1.20000000E+00 1.70000000E+00 1.30000000E+00
1.30000000E+00
< 1.30000000E+00 1.70000000E+00 1.20000000E+00 1.20000000E+00
1.70000000E+00
---
> 1.70000000E+00 1.30000000E+00 1.70000000E+00 1.30000000E+00 1.30000000E+00
> 1.30000000E+00 1.70000000E+00 1.30000000E+00 1.30000000E+00 1.70000000E+00
The tleap.in file used was this one:
# tleap file generated by amber.build
source leaprc.lipid14
source leaprc.ff14SB (CHANGED TO oldff/leaprc.ff14SB for AmberTools16)
source leaprc.gaff
# Loading parameter files
loadamberparams frcmod.ionsjc_tip3p
# Loading prepi topologies
# Loading the system
mol = loadpdb input.pdb
# Adding disulfide bonds
bond mol.22.SG mol.152.SG
bond mol.40.SG mol.56.SG
bond mol.124.SG mol.225.SG
bond mol.131.SG mol.198.SG
bond mol.163.SG mol.177.SG
bond mol.188.SG mol.212.SG
# Writing out the results
saveamberparm mol structure.prmtop structure.crd
The input.pdb from built from PDB 3PTB.
I can share the files that I used and the outputs. Let me know the platform
that you prefer for receiving the files.
Is there any reason for these differences? We are trying to have a smooth
transition from AmberTools15 to AmberTools16 and it would be very helpful
to have your insight on these. Thank you.
Best regards,
João
--
_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber
Received on Tue Jan 31 2017 - 13:00:03 PST