[gmx-users] genion question

Paymon Pirzadeh ppirzade at ucalgary.ca
Tue Aug 25 23:48:41 CEST 2009


Can I change the charge of Na ion added from +1 to +0.99 to cancel the
negative charge exactly? Does that hurt science or simulation?

Payman 


On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 17:22 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> 
> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> > I realized sth about the previous error message I posted. In the
> > following I have copied the lines (with their line number) which
> > grompp gives warning on! 
> > 
> > 
> > in .gro file:
> > 65868 10940SOL    HW265866   5.038   5.739   6.407
> > 65869 10940SOL     MW65867   5.103   5.710   6.455
> > 65870 10940SOL    LP165868   5.061   5.644   6.524
> > 65871 10940SOL    LP265869   5.144   5.630   6.405
> > 65872 10941Na      Na65870   1.844   0.957   1.889
> > 65873    5.40000   6.23500  10.24600
> > 
> > in .top file:
> > 4147 [ molecules ]
> > 4148 ; Compound        #mols
> > 4149 Protein_A           1
> > 4150 SOL         10903
> > 4151 Na+          1
> > 
> > I have tested that if I remove the "+" sign, grompp will not work at all
> > and says "such molecule does not exists". 
> > So, I am not sure where the Na-NA mismatch comes from?!
> > 
> 
> Ion names are force field-specific.  If you left -pname as the default, it 
> assigns Na (for ffgmx).  Check ions.itp for the correct name.
> 
> -Justin
> 
> > Payman
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > 
> > On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 15:59 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>> When I look at the .top file generated by pdb2gmx, the last lines show
> >>> how this -0.99 is generated:
> >>>
> >>>    442   opls_302     37    ARG     CZ    138       0.64     12.011   ;
> >>> qtot -0.33
> >>>    443   opls_300     37    ARG    NH1    139       -0.8    14.0067   ;
> >>> qtot -1.13
> >>>    444   opls_301     37    ARG   HH11    139       0.46      1.008   ;
> >>> qtot -0.67
> >>>    445   opls_301     37    ARG   HH12    139       0.46      1.008   ;
> >>> qtot -0.21
> >>>    446   opls_300     37    ARG    NH2    140       -0.8    14.0067   ;
> >>> qtot -1.01
> >>>    447   opls_301     37    ARG   HH21    140       0.46      1.008   ;
> >>> qtot -0.55
> >>>    448   opls_301     37    ARG   HH22    140       0.46      1.008   ;
> >>> qtot -0.09
> >>>    449   opls_271     37    ARG      C    141        0.7     12.011   ;
> >>> qtot 0.61
> >>>    450   opls_272     37    ARG     O1    141       -0.8    15.9994   ;
> >>> qtot -0.19
> >>>    451   opls_272     37    ARG     O2    141       -0.8    15.9994   ;
> >>> qtot -0.99
> >>>
> >>> The charged side-chains are Arg, Lys, 2 * Asp and Glu. Since the pH of
> >>> simulation is supposed to be close to 7.0, I believe one of the
> >>> negatively-charged side chains needs to be neutralized. That's why I
> >>> think one Na+ might be helpful.
> >>>
> >> That's probably correct.  I just wanted to verify what was in your system.  If 
> >> you just had water, it made no sense.  But with a protein involved with lots of 
> >> partial charges, these rounding issues do occur.  You really do have a system 
> >> with -1 charge.
> >>
> >> -Justin
> >>
> >>> Payman
> >>>
> >>>
> >>> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 15:45 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>> OK! It worked! Thanks a lot again. But I have a final technical
> >>>>> question. After running grompp, it shows that my box has a net charge of
> >>>>> -0.99 . Do you think adding one Na+ and reducing the charge to +0.01 is
> >>>>> OK?! or even this 0.01 charge will cause me troubles?
> >>>> Depending on the size of your system, rounding errors can occur.  It is unusual 
> >>>> that the hundredths place would be showing this error.  Usually you'd get 
> >>>> something like 0.99998 or something.  Your water topology has a zero net charge; 
> >>>> is there something else in your system causing the -1 charge?
> >>>>
> >>>> Adding a single Na+ to neutralize the charge may be appropriate, but that's up 
> >>>> to you based on what's in your system (something else may be broken, but I just 
> >>>> don't know).
> >>>>
> >>>> -Justin
> >>>>
> >>>>> Sorry for tons of e-mails.
> >>>>> regards,
> >>>>>
> >>>>> Payman
> >>>>>
> >>>>>
> >>>>> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 14:38 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >>>>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>>>> OK! That's fine. But what if I do not have permissions to make such
> >>>>>>> changes in the itp files? Also, isn't that the case that when you define
> >>>>>> That's why I said copy the force field files into your local directory.  Once 
> >>>>>> there, you can modify them.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> sth for the second time, grompp will take the second one? Sorry for mass
> >>>>>>> of e-mail!
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>> That is only true in the case of .mdp files.
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>> -Justin
> >>>>>>
> >>>>>>> Payman
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>
> >>>>>>> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 14:26 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >>>>>>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>> I have done that already! I use my local copy to make my files. but how
> >>>>>>>>> can I get rid of this error? get into the oplsaanb.itp or include this
> >>>>>>>>> water model in the topology file before oplsaa.itp?
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> I don't understand what you're saying you've already done.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> The problem is this: when grompp attempts to assemble the .tpr file, it reads 
> >>>>>>>> all of the information from the ffoplsaa*.itp files.  It finds the directives 
> >>>>>>>> like [defaults], [atomtypes], etc in a pre-defined order.  If, later, it finds a 
> >>>>>>>> duplicate of these directives, it complains.  So when you #include your .itp 
> >>>>>>>> file with new [atomtypes], it generates the error because it is a duplicate 
> >>>>>>>> directive.  You have to include the new atom types in ffoplsaanb.itp in the 
> >>>>>>>> [atomtypes] directive of this file.  The rest of the topology shouldn't cause a 
> >>>>>>>> problem, just the [atomtypes] directive.
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -Justin
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> Payman
> >>>>>>>>>   
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 14:14 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>> OK!
> >>>>>>>>>>> here is the .itp file which I generated. I might upload it because it
> >>>>>>>>>>> has passed the initial tests.
> >>>>>>>>>>>  
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; This is an itp file to describe water's six-site model by H. Nada and
> >>>>>>>>>>> J.P. J. M. Van der Eerden, J. Chem. Phys. Vol.118, no.16, pp7401-7413
> >>>>>>>>>>> (2003)
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; This model is a combination of TIP4P and TIP5P. It has three LJ sites
> >>>>>>>>>>> and 3 Coulomb sites
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; O-H bond length is 0.980A, HOH angle is 108.00degrees, LOL angle is
> >>>>>>>>>>> 111.00 degrees, O-M and O-L are about 0.230A and 0.8892A respectively
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ defaults ]
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; non-bondedtype        combrule        genpairs        FudgeLJ
> >>>>>>>>>>> FudgeQQ         N
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1                       2               NO
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ atomtypes ]
> >>>>>>>>>>> ;name   mass    charge  ptype   c6      c12
> >>>>>>>>>>> OW      15.9994 0.0     A       0.3115  0.714845562
> >>>>>>>>>>> HW      1.00800 0.477   A       0.0673  0.11541
> >>>>>>>>>>> MW      0.000   -0.866  D       0.00    0.00
> >>>>>>>>>>> LW      0.00    -0.044  D       0.00    0.00
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ moleculetype ]
> >>>>>>>>>>> ;molname    nrexcl
> >>>>>>>>>>> SOL            2
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ atoms ]
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; nr    atomtype        resnr   residuename     atom    cgnr    charge
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1       OW              1       SOL             OW      1       0.0
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2       HW              1       SOL             HW1     1       0.477
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3       HW              1       SOL             HW2     1       0.477
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4       MW              1       SOL             MW      1       -0.866
> >>>>>>>>>>> 5       LW              1       SOL             LP1     1       -0.044
> >>>>>>>>>>> 6       LW              1       SOL             LP2     1       -0.044
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ settles ]
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; OW    function        doh     dhh
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1       1               0.0980  0.15856
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ dummies3 ]
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; These set of parameters are for M site which can be easily calculated
> >>>>>>>>>>> using TIP4P calculations from tip4p.itp
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; So, it will be described as dummy site 3: r(v)= r(i) + a*(r(i)-r(j)) +
> >>>>>>>>>>> b*(r(i)-r(k))
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; const = |OH|/{|OH|*cos(HOH/2)} => Due to vector algebra a=b=const/2.
> >>>>>>>>>>> Remember that OM is in the same direction of OH bonds.
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; Remember this site is in the same plane of OH bonds; so, its function
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1
> >>>>>>>>>>> ;
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; site  from            function        a               b
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4       1  2  3         1               0.199642536     0.199642536
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; Now we define the position of L sites which can be obtained from
> >>>>>>>>>>> tip5p.itp
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; So, it will be described as dummy site 3out: r(v) = r(i) +
> >>>>>>>>>>> a*(r(i)-r(j)) + b*(r(i)-r(k)) + c*(r(ij)Xr(ik))
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; const1 = {|OL|*cos(LOL/2)}/{|OH|*cos(HOH/2)} => Due to vector algebra
> >>>>>>>>>>> |a|=|b|=const/2. since the lone pairs are in opposite direction of OH
> >>>>>>>>>>> bonds, a minus sign is added. This part is similar to M site.
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; const2 = {|OL|*sin(LOL/2)}/{|OH|*|OH|*sin(HOH)} => The denominator is
> >>>>>>>>>>> the magnitude of vector product of OH bonds.
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; This sites are tetrahedral sites; so, its function 4
> >>>>>>>>>>> ;
> >>>>>>>>>>> ; site  from            function        a               b
> >>>>>>>>>>> c
> >>>>>>>>>>> 5       1  2  3         4               -0.437172388    -0.437172388
> >>>>>>>>>>> 8.022961206
> >>>>>>>>>>> 6       1  2  3         4               -0.437172388    -0.437172388
> >>>>>>>>>>> -8.022961206
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> [ exclusions ]
> >>>>>>>>>>> 1       2       3       4       5       6
> >>>>>>>>>>> 2       1       3       4       5       6
> >>>>>>>>>>> 3       1       2       4       5       6
> >>>>>>>>>>> 4       1       2       3       5       6
> >>>>>>>>>>> 5       1       2       3       4       6
> >>>>>>>>>>> 6       1       2       3       4       5
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> and here is the message I get from grompp:
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Program grompp_d_mpi, VERSION 4.0.5
> >>>>>>>>>>> Source code file: topio.c, line: 415
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Fatal error:
> >>>>>>>>>>> Syntax error - File sixsitewater.itp, line 12
> >>>>>>>>>>> Last line read:
> >>>>>>>>>>> '[ atomtypes ]'
> >>>>>>>>>>> Invalid order for directive atomtypes
> >>>>>>>>>>> -------------------------------------------------------
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> I believe the original files of GROMACS need admin permissions which I
> >>>>>>>>>>> do not have on the cluster that I am currently using and I am not sure
> >>>>>>>>>>> if that might not cause troubles for other users. So, I thought how I
> >>>>>>>>>>> can keep the changes local.
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> Make a copy in your local directory; grompp will use these before looking for 
> >>>>>>>>>> system-wide files.  As a general rule, whenever developing new parameters or 
> >>>>>>>>>> adjusting files, do so locally before potentially messing yourself (or others) up :)
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>> -Justin
> >>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> Payman
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2009-08-25 at 13:53 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Just a reminder that I had troubled with combination rules between my
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> water model and GROMACS forcefields. I fixed the problem by adjusting my
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> water model's parameters. BUT, now, I specified the new parameters in
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> my .itp file under [ atomtype ] category and grompp makes errors out of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> the orders. Now I am using OPLSaa. I suspect again the problem comes
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> from the presence of the second [atomtype ]. How can I keep my new
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> parameters and use them in my water model's itp file? Or should I change
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> these parameters in the OPLSaa.itp file? 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> You can't have a second [atomtypes] directive.  You can add new parameters to 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> ffoplsaanb.itp to account for the atom types you are implementing, though.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> If you want anything more specific, you'll probably have to provide the topology 
> >>>>>>>>>>>> file you're working with, as well as any actual error messages you're seeing.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>> -Justin
> >>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Payman  
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> On Wed, 2009-08-19 at 10:20 +1000, Mark Abraham wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I checked all the force-fields available in the GROAMCS. None of them
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> have the #2 combination rule which matches my water model! Any
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> alternatives (rather than changing my water model)?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> A water model that isn't compatible with the model of the solutes isn't 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> of any value, so it looks like you have put the cart before the horse.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Mark
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 18:52 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> That was very helpful! But I realized a problem. The OPLSaa uses the
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> combination rule #3 in [ defaults ] while my water model uses #2. Now if
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I comment out my water model's combination, I am not sure what I am
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> going to face! Any comments?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Then I would say that your water model's combination rule is inconsistent with 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> the method of nonbonded calculations in OPLS.  It appears that the only 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> difference between combination rules 2 and 3 comes when a specific interaction 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> is not defined in the [nonbond_params] section.  The specifics of these 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> combination rules are given in manual section 5.3.3.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Justin
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Payman
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 18:19 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Well,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I changed the topology file of the system and manually typed the .itp of
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> my own water model. Just a reminder that I have used my own water
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> model's .itp file successfully in pure water systems. This .itp file
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> starts from [ defaults ] and contains all information needed. But when
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> it comes to grompp, the following error appears:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Program grompp_d_mpi, VERSION 4.0.5
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Source code file: topio.c, line: 415
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Fatal error:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Syntax error - File sixsitewater.itp, line 6
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Last line read:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> '[ defaults ]'
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Invalid order for directive defaults
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> The only time that [defaults] should appear is in the force field that you are 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> calling (i.e., ffoplsaa.itp):
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> http://oldwiki.gromacs.org/index.php/Errors#Invalid_order_for_directive_defaults
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Justin
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am trying to use this water model with OPLSaa. what kind of directive
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> am I missing? 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Payman
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> On Tue, 2009-08-18 at 16:05 -0400, Justin A. Lemkul wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Paymon Pirzadeh wrote:
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Hello,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I am trying to use a different water model for my proteins (using oplsaa
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> force field). I use the .itp file which I developed, but pdb2gmx does
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> not accept it. I am a bit confused on how I can make my water model work
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> with OPLSaa. Based on what I saw from spc.itp or other samples, do I
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> need to change the names of my particles in my water .itp file by
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> including _FF_OPLS?
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> I don't know how pdb2gmx decides how to recognize water models; it may be 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> hard-coded.  In any case, your atom types have to be consistent with OPLS 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> standards; as for whether or not you need the #ifdef _FF_OPLS in your .itp file, 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> you may not need it if OPLS is the only force field with which it will be used. 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>   The #ifdef blocks just prevent a GROMOS system from trying to recognize OPLS, etc.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> -Justin
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Regards,
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Payman 
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at 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-request at gromacs.org.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at 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-request at gromacs.org.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at 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-request at gromacs.org.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> _______________________________________________
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> gmx-users mailing list    gmx-users at 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-request at gromacs.org.
> >>>>>>>>>>>>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> >>>>>>>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> -- 
> >>>>>>>> ========================================
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>> Justin A. Lemkul
> >>>>>>>> Ph.D. Candidate
> >>>>>>>> ICTAS Doctoral Scholar
> >>>>>>>> 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 list    gmx-users at 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-request at gromacs.org.
> >>>>>>>> Can't post? Read http://www.gromacs.org/mailing_lists/users.php
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>>>>>>
> >>>
> > 
> > 
> 




More information about the gromacs.org_gmx-users mailing list