Dear gromacs Users, I found this in the web, but I wanted to know if there exists the possibility now of using implicit solvent efficiently.
Thanks, Esteban A repeating question on the mailing list whether GROMACS can perform implicit solvent simulations. The answer is, not really. Over the last few years there have been quite a few papers in (good) journals about why one in general should or should not use it. Please search literature by Ruhong Zhou, Vijay Pande and/or Bruce Berne on the subject (and fill in the references here plus DOI links etc.). - R. Zhou and B. J. Berne. *Can a continuum solvent model reproduce the free energy landscape of a β-hairpin in water?*, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 99 (2002), 12777-12782 DOI<http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.142430099> - Young Min Rhee, Eric J. Sorin, Guha Jayachandran, Erik Lindahl, and Vijay S. Pande. *Simulations of the role of water in the protein- folding mechanism*, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 101 (2004), 6456-6461 DOI<http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0307898101> - Hao Fan, Alan E. Mark, Jiang Zhu, and Barry Honig. Comparative study of generalized Born models: protein dynamics, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 102 (2005), 6760-6764 DOI <http://dx.doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0408857102> The current state in Gromacs is that we already have very optimized assembly kernels for the actual generalized born interaction, so that part is done. We also have C language functions to calculate Still radii (not yet in CVS), although these have to be ported to assembly for decent performance. The one big remaining issue is a fast surface calculation algorithm. The problem with the commonly used ones (e.g. Still) is that everything else in Gromacs (including the GB loops) is an order of magnitude faster, so that surface calculation would take over 90% of the time. They also do not parallelize easily. There are some tricks we can use (e.g. only calculating surface every N steps), but we still need a *very* fast surface calculation algorithm. The best starting point in the literature is probably the algorithm of Brooks, where you simply have empiric parameters for sp2/sp3/sp neighbors of different atom types combined with a short neighborlist. We definitely need approximate derivatives of the surface free energy with respect to all atom coordinates, and the last couple of years there has also been some discussion that the volume term could be even more important than the surface, so preferably volume derivatives too. If you're interested in helping I (lind...@cbr.su.se) have reference code that calculates both surface/volume and the associated derivatives analytically.
-- gmx-users mailing list gmx-users@gromacs.org http://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/search before posting! Please don't post (un)subscribe requests to the list. Use the www interface or send it to gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org. Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php