Re: [gmx-users] g_sas : Total surface area

2012-12-12 Thread Mark Abraham
On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Kavyashree M hmkv...@gmail.com wrote:

 Dear users,

 I was calculating solvent accessible surface area for a trajectory
 using g_sas. I used an index file with 3 sets (A, B, C) of mutually
 exclusive residues but summing up to 20 amino acids. Then using
 g_sas calculated sas for these 3 sets separately and whole protein
 separately for the same trajectory.
 I was expecting that the average value of
 Total surface area (protein) ~ Total surface area (A)+Total surface area
 (B)+Total surface area (C)
 But it is not so.
 Could anyone explain me why?


Not without seeing any numbers. You're probably thinking that the surface
area of A excludes the interfacial area to the other sets, but it doesn't.

Mark
-- 
gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
* Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists


Re: [gmx-users] g_sas : Total surface area

2012-12-12 Thread francesco oteri
Hi Kavya,
Can you better describe your system?
As Mark suggested, could you supply some number?

Francesco


2012/12/12 Mark Abraham mark.j.abra...@gmail.com

 On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Kavyashree M hmkv...@gmail.com wrote:

  Dear users,
 
  I was calculating solvent accessible surface area for a trajectory
  using g_sas. I used an index file with 3 sets (A, B, C) of mutually
  exclusive residues but summing up to 20 amino acids. Then using
  g_sas calculated sas for these 3 sets separately and whole protein
  separately for the same trajectory.
  I was expecting that the average value of
  Total surface area (protein) ~ Total surface area (A)+Total surface area
  (B)+Total surface area (C)
  But it is not so.
  Could anyone explain me why?
 

 Not without seeing any numbers. You're probably thinking that the surface
 area of A excludes the interfacial area to the other sets, but it doesn't.

 Mark
 --
 gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
 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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
 * Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists




-- 
Cordiali saluti, Dr.Oteri Francesco
-- 
gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
* Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists


Re: [gmx-users] g_sas : Total surface area

2012-12-12 Thread Kavyashree M
Thank you very much for your replies.

The system consists of a homodimer in tip4p dodecahedron box
simulated using OPLSAA ff.

The A B C here are the amino acids:
A- S T N Q G P H
B- A V L I M C F Y W
C- D E K R

So these are set in an index file and i used each one of these
to calculate sasa in g_sas.
When the g_sas calculation starts it specifies the number of
hydrophobic atoms, one of the example -
For the whole protein -
4644 out of 7590 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
For group A of same protein -
702 out of 1424 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
For group B of same protein -
2614 out of 3496 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
For group C of same protein -
1328 out of 2670 atoms were classified as hydrophobic

In this the number of hydrophobic atoms of A, B and C adds
up to the total hydrophobic atoms in whole protein.

but after the calculation is over the average values of Total sas
(legend S2 of area.xvg file) of the protein and Total sas of A, B
and C are given below
Whole protein - 254.04nm^(-2)
A - 175.87nm^(-2)
B - 211.33nm^(-2)
C - 264.65nm^(-2)

I expected that the average total sas of Whole protein atleast approximately
equal the sum of Total sas of A, B and C. If not why? All calculations are
done for the same trajectory after equilibrating.

Thank you
Kavya



On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 5:20 PM, francesco oteri
francesco.ot...@gmail.comwrote:

 Hi Kavya,
 Can you better describe your system?
 As Mark suggested, could you supply some number?

 Francesco


 2012/12/12 Mark Abraham mark.j.abra...@gmail.com

  On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 9:06 AM, Kavyashree M hmkv...@gmail.com wrote:
 
   Dear users,
  
   I was calculating solvent accessible surface area for a trajectory
   using g_sas. I used an index file with 3 sets (A, B, C) of mutually
   exclusive residues but summing up to 20 amino acids. Then using
   g_sas calculated sas for these 3 sets separately and whole protein
   separately for the same trajectory.
   I was expecting that the average value of
   Total surface area (protein) ~ Total surface area (A)+Total surface
 area
   (B)+Total surface area (C)
   But it is not so.
   Could anyone explain me why?
  
 
  Not without seeing any numbers. You're probably thinking that the surface
  area of A excludes the interfacial area to the other sets, but it
 doesn't.
 
  Mark
  --
  gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
  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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
  * Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists
 



 --
 Cordiali saluti, Dr.Oteri Francesco
 --
 gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
 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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
 * Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists

-- 
gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
* Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists


Re: [gmx-users] g_sas : Total surface area

2012-12-12 Thread Justin Lemkul



On 12/12/12 9:37 AM, Kavyashree M wrote:

Thank you very much for your replies.

The system consists of a homodimer in tip4p dodecahedron box
simulated using OPLSAA ff.

The A B C here are the amino acids:
A- S T N Q G P H
B- A V L I M C F Y W
C- D E K R

So these are set in an index file and i used each one of these
to calculate sasa in g_sas.
When the g_sas calculation starts it specifies the number of
hydrophobic atoms, one of the example -
For the whole protein -
4644 out of 7590 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
For group A of same protein -
702 out of 1424 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
For group B of same protein -
2614 out of 3496 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
For group C of same protein -
1328 out of 2670 atoms were classified as hydrophobic

In this the number of hydrophobic atoms of A, B and C adds
up to the total hydrophobic atoms in whole protein.

but after the calculation is over the average values of Total sas
(legend S2 of area.xvg file) of the protein and Total sas of A, B
and C are given below
Whole protein - 254.04nm^(-2)
A - 175.87nm^(-2)
B - 211.33nm^(-2)
C - 264.65nm^(-2)

I expected that the average total sas of Whole protein atleast approximately
equal the sum of Total sas of A, B and C. If not why? All calculations are
done for the same trajectory after equilibrating.



Are you selecting the correct groups when running g_sas?  For instance, you 
should be selecting Protein for the surface calculation, and then your custom 
subsets for output.  If you use the subsets for both surface calculation and 
output, you will get an artificially inflated value that includes extra surface 
area that is actually buried in the context of the whole structure.


-Justin

--


Justin A. Lemkul, Ph.D.
Research Scientist
Department of Biochemistry
Virginia Tech
Blacksburg, VA
jalemkul[at]vt.edu | (540) 231-9080
http://www.bevanlab.biochem.vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justin


--
gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.

* Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists


Re: [gmx-users] g_sas : Total surface area

2012-12-12 Thread Kavyashree M
Sir,

Oh! I was using sunset index numbers for both. I am sorry. I will try
that and see. First option as protein and next the subset. Thank you
very much.

Kavya


On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Justin Lemkul jalem...@vt.edu wrote:



 On 12/12/12 9:37 AM, Kavyashree M wrote:

 Thank you very much for your replies.

 The system consists of a homodimer in tip4p dodecahedron box
 simulated using OPLSAA ff.

 The A B C here are the amino acids:
 A- S T N Q G P H
 B- A V L I M C F Y W
 C- D E K R

 So these are set in an index file and i used each one of these
 to calculate sasa in g_sas.
 When the g_sas calculation starts it specifies the number of
 hydrophobic atoms, one of the example -
 For the whole protein -
 4644 out of 7590 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
 For group A of same protein -
 702 out of 1424 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
 For group B of same protein -
 2614 out of 3496 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
 For group C of same protein -
 1328 out of 2670 atoms were classified as hydrophobic

 In this the number of hydrophobic atoms of A, B and C adds
 up to the total hydrophobic atoms in whole protein.

 but after the calculation is over the average values of Total sas
 (legend S2 of area.xvg file) of the protein and Total sas of A, B
 and C are given below
 Whole protein - 254.04nm^(-2)
 A - 175.87nm^(-2)
 B - 211.33nm^(-2)
 C - 264.65nm^(-2)

 I expected that the average total sas of Whole protein atleast
 approximately
 equal the sum of Total sas of A, B and C. If not why? All calculations are
 done for the same trajectory after equilibrating.


 Are you selecting the correct groups when running g_sas?  For instance,
 you should be selecting Protein for the surface calculation, and then
 your custom subsets for output.  If you use the subsets for both surface
 calculation and output, you will get an artificially inflated value that
 includes extra surface area that is actually buried in the context of the
 whole structure.

 -Justin

 --
 ==**==

 Justin A. Lemkul, Ph.D.
 Research Scientist
 Department of Biochemistry
 Virginia Tech
 Blacksburg, VA
 jalemkul[at]vt.edu | (540) 231-9080
 http://www.bevanlab.biochem.**vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justinhttp://www.bevanlab.biochem.vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justin

 ==**==

 --
 gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
 http://lists.gromacs.org/**mailman/listinfo/gmx-usershttp://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
 * Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/**
 Support/Mailing_Lists/Searchhttp://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Searchbefore
  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/**Support/Mailing_Listshttp://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists

-- 
gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
* Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists


Re: [gmx-users] g_sas : Total surface area

2012-12-12 Thread Kavyashree M
I meant subset :)

On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:21 PM, Kavyashree M hmkv...@gmail.com wrote:

 Sir,

 Oh! I was using sunset index numbers for both. I am sorry. I will try
 that and see. First option as protein and next the subset. Thank you
 very much.

 Kavya



 On Wed, Dec 12, 2012 at 8:16 PM, Justin Lemkul jalem...@vt.edu wrote:



 On 12/12/12 9:37 AM, Kavyashree M wrote:

 Thank you very much for your replies.

 The system consists of a homodimer in tip4p dodecahedron box
 simulated using OPLSAA ff.

 The A B C here are the amino acids:
 A- S T N Q G P H
 B- A V L I M C F Y W
 C- D E K R

 So these are set in an index file and i used each one of these
 to calculate sasa in g_sas.
 When the g_sas calculation starts it specifies the number of
 hydrophobic atoms, one of the example -
 For the whole protein -
 4644 out of 7590 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
 For group A of same protein -
 702 out of 1424 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
 For group B of same protein -
 2614 out of 3496 atoms were classified as hydrophobic
 For group C of same protein -
 1328 out of 2670 atoms were classified as hydrophobic

 In this the number of hydrophobic atoms of A, B and C adds
 up to the total hydrophobic atoms in whole protein.

 but after the calculation is over the average values of Total sas
 (legend S2 of area.xvg file) of the protein and Total sas of A, B
 and C are given below
 Whole protein - 254.04nm^(-2)
 A - 175.87nm^(-2)
 B - 211.33nm^(-2)
 C - 264.65nm^(-2)

 I expected that the average total sas of Whole protein atleast
 approximately
 equal the sum of Total sas of A, B and C. If not why? All calculations
 are
 done for the same trajectory after equilibrating.


 Are you selecting the correct groups when running g_sas?  For instance,
 you should be selecting Protein for the surface calculation, and then
 your custom subsets for output.  If you use the subsets for both surface
 calculation and output, you will get an artificially inflated value that
 includes extra surface area that is actually buried in the context of the
 whole structure.

 -Justin

 --
 ==**==

 Justin A. Lemkul, Ph.D.
 Research Scientist
 Department of Biochemistry
 Virginia Tech
 Blacksburg, VA
 jalemkul[at]vt.edu | (540) 231-9080
 http://www.bevanlab.biochem.**vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justinhttp://www.bevanlab.biochem.vt.edu/Pages/Personal/justin

 ==**==

 --
 gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
 http://lists.gromacs.org/**mailman/listinfo/gmx-usershttp://lists.gromacs.org/mailman/listinfo/gmx-users
 * Please search the archive at http://www.gromacs.org/**
 Support/Mailing_Lists/Searchhttp://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists/Searchbefore
  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/**Support/Mailing_Listshttp://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists



-- 
gmx-users mailing listgmx-users@gromacs.org
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 gmx-users-requ...@gromacs.org.
* Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/Support/Mailing_Lists