Analysing crossing waters in membrane with LOOS #116
-
Hi, I'm trying to use the crossing-waters tool to analyse the number of water molecules that cross a membrane in a trajectory from gromacs. I've centralized my membrane with
But no matter what I do I get the same absurd result:
I've centered the membrane in all possible ways, but nothing seems to work, this result is exactly the same for different trajectory chunks, like the last or the first 100 ns of a 2µs simulation. My system has 17920 water molecules and it's just impossible for 13056 water molecules to cross the membrane in 100 ns. In all publications regarding water pores the cumulative flux of water is in the order of 2500 molecules over a period of 500 ns. So it's just impossible this is right. The result's change to 256 if I use I really don't know what I'm doing wrong. Thanks |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Replies: 1 comment 3 replies
-
Hi, I'll do my best to help you. That output indicates that it thinks there are 13056 waters in the system and none of them crossed during the simulation. However, from your description, that's clearly not what you expected (the zero crossings in 500 frames could be right, but the number of waters isn't). I'm reasonably certain the problem is that the selection string at the end is supposed to be the water, and you're giving it one of the lipid species. What happens if you leave the selection string out entirely? There's a default water selection built into the code, which often works but isn't universal. If it doesn't give you there expected 17920, you might need to customize the selection -- we guessed about common namings for water, but can't match everything. If it doesn't work, you might try something like
replacing "WAT" with whatever your water residue name is. I'm assuming you're using a standard 3-site water model, and you'd need something a little different for a 4-site model. Separately, if you're going to use LOOS more than once it's worth running
where you'd replace foo.tpr with your system's tpr file, and PREFIX with whatever you'd like the resulting pdb and psf files to be called. LOOS is willing to use gro files, but they have almost no metadata in them -- this conversion to psf gives you a system file with bonds, charges, masses, residue names, and a guess at segment names, which makes a lot of analysis tasks simpler. As an added benefit, VMD can do more with the PSF than it can with the gro (e.g. if it's a coarse-grained simulation, the psf will let it draw bonds correctly). Just to be clear: using the gro isn't what's causing this problem. It's just that going forward, you're better off using a richer file format. Last, you might want to take a look at some of the user tutorials for LOOS, available at https://github.com/GrossfieldLab/loos/wiki/Tutorials-for-Users In particular, there's a tutorial focused on getting started with LOOS for gromacs simulations. I hope this helps -- please write back if it doesn't, or you have more questions. Cheers, Alan |
Beta Was this translation helpful? Give feedback.
Hi,
I'll do my best to help you.
That output indicates that it thinks there are 13056 waters in the system and none of them crossed during the simulation. However, from your description, that's clearly not what you expected (the zero crossings in 500 frames could be right, but the number of waters isn't).
I'm reasonably certain the problem is that the selection string at the end is supposed to be the water, and you're giving it one of the lipid species. What happens if you leave the selection string out entirely? There's a default water selection built into the code, which often works but isn't universal. If it doesn't give you there expected 17920, you might need to customize the selecti…