On 2012-03-28 13:02, Acoot Brett wrote:
Dear All,
Does anyone can make an introduction on the differences among the
following force fields for protein? Which are much easy to be accepted
for publication purpose?
Try reading some literature. Search for protein force field simulation.
Cheers,
Acoot
1: AMBER03 force field (Duan et al., J. Comp. Chem. 24, 1999-2012, 2003)
2: AMBER94 force field (Cornell et al., JACS 117, 5179-5197, 1995)
3: AMBER96 force field (Kollman et al., Acc. Chem. Res. 29, 461-469, 1996)
4: AMBER99 force field (Wang et al., J. Comp. Chem. 21, 1049-1074, 2000)
5: AMBER99SB force field (Hornak et al., Proteins 65, 712-725, 2006)
6: AMBER99SB-ILDN force field (Lindorff-Larsen et al., Proteins 78, 1950-58,
2010)
7: AMBERGS force field (Garcia&
Sanbonmatsu, PNAS 99, 2782-2787, 2002)
8: CHARMM27 all-atom force field (with CMAP) - version 2.0
9: GROMOS96 43a1 force field
10: GROMOS96 43a2 force field (improved alkane dihedrals)
11: GROMOS96 45a3 force field (Schuler JCC 2001 22 1205)
12: GROMOS96 53a5 force field (JCC 2004 vol 25 pag 1656)
13: GROMOS96 53a6 force field (JCC 2004 vol 25 pag 1656)
14: OPLS-AA/L all-atom force field (2001 aminoacid dihedrals)
15: [DEPRECATED] Encad all-atom force field, using full solvent charges
16: [DEPRECATED] Encad all-atom force field, using scaled-down vacuum charges
17: [DEPRECATED] Gromacs force field (see manual)
18: [DEPRECATED] Gromacs force field with hydrogens for NMR
--
David van der Spoel, Ph.D., Professor of Biology
Dept. of Cell & Molec. Biol., Uppsala University.
Box 596, 75124 Uppsala, Sweden. Phone: +46184714205.
[email protected] http://folding.bmc.uu.se
--
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
