On 6/03/2012 10:40 PM, Steven Neumann wrote:
On Tue, Mar 6, 2012 at 11:35 AM, Mark Abraham <[email protected] <mailto:[email protected]>> wrote:On 6/03/2012 8:21 PM, Steven Neumann wrote: Dear Gmx Users, I am running my protein with ligand. at the begining of my simulation the protein is far away from the ligand. Then in about 5-10 ns my ligand binds to the protein surface remaining there for rest 90-95 ns. Would you adjust coupling groups in thermostat as: a) Protein_LIg and Water_and_ions b) Protein Water_ions_LIG c) Protein LIG Water_ions I'd consider a single coupling group before any of those. See final part of manual 3.4.8 and ref therein. c) is unsound because the ligand is likely too small. The lack of T-group atom contiguity in a) might be an issue, I'm not sure. b) is probably what people do, but you know this from your literature searching about similar work, right? :-)Well...I used a) approach as Ligand becaome a part of the protein quite fast.
Sure, but if the path that took it there might be unsound, then you can't refute the argument that the fact that that path occurred might be a numerical artefact.
The b) just was my own tought as at the begining of the simulation is in water only, however just for 500 ps as far as I see out of 100ns. How would you tackle this?
Didn't I answer this already? :-) Mark
-- gmx-users mailing list [email protected] http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Search before posting! Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the www interface or send it to [email protected]. Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
