[AMBER] controversy in PBSA and GBSA results

From: <h_sahakyan.mb.sci.am>
Date: Tue, 20 Oct 2020 12:27:05 +0000

Dear Ray, Thank you very much for your help. As I know the default surface tension coefficient is different for GB and PB, I used default parameters for GB and inp=1 parameters for PB. Also, I performed energy decomposition and noticed that some amino acids, for instance, the N-terminal methionine, of GLY, PRO in some specific positions or the GTP molecule, can have very different contributions (~50 fold), for more details see the attached files. Maybe this information can help solve this issue. Nevertheless, which method is more reliable, or how it is possible to validate this data? I used normal mode, but it is too slow since my protein complexes have about 13000 atoms, what would recommend for protein-protein interaction free energy calculation? Best regards, Harutyun


_______________________________________________
AMBER mailing list
AMBER.ambermd.org
http://lists.ambermd.org/mailman/listinfo/amber

Received on Tue Oct 20 2020 - 06:00:02 PDT
Custom Search