1997
DOI: 10.1002/(sici)1096-987x(199703)18:4<449::aid-jcc1>3.0.co;2-t
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Free energies of hydration from thermodynamic integration: Comparison of molecular mechanics force fields and evaluation of calculation accuracy

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

3
23
0

Year Published

1998
1998
2010
2010

Publication Types

Select...
8
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 37 publications
(26 citation statements)
references
References 55 publications
3
23
0
Order By: Relevance
“…59 This conditioning radius is also close to the conditioning radius of = 3.35 Å obtained for the methyl groups of neopentane in water at 298 K and 1 bar using the SPC/E potential model for water. This radius was found to give normally distributed p͑ i ͉ n =0͒ and ex = 2.25 kcal/ mol for propane in water at 298 K and 1 bar, which falls between the value of 2.02 kcal/mol derived from the measured solubility of propane in water 58 and the value of 2.4 kcal/mol estimated from molecular simulations of OPLS propane in TIP3P water at the same temperature and pressure.…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 80%
“…59 This conditioning radius is also close to the conditioning radius of = 3.35 Å obtained for the methyl groups of neopentane in water at 298 K and 1 bar using the SPC/E potential model for water. This radius was found to give normally distributed p͑ i ͉ n =0͒ and ex = 2.25 kcal/ mol for propane in water at 298 K and 1 bar, which falls between the value of 2.02 kcal/mol derived from the measured solubility of propane in water 58 and the value of 2.4 kcal/mol estimated from molecular simulations of OPLS propane in TIP3P water at the same temperature and pressure.…”
Section: Methodssupporting
confidence: 80%
“…For camphor the parameters were obtained from the XPLO-2D program (Kleywegt and Jones 1997) and the partial charges of camphor were taken from Helms and Wade (1997). The simulations were performed using the CHARMM program (Brooks et al 1983).…”
Section: The Force Field Parametersmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Alternatively, force field parameters may be fit to experimental data such as crystal structure, energy and lattice dynamics, infrared, X-ray data on small molecules, liquid properties like density and enthalpy of vaporization, free energy of solvation, NMR data, etc. [8] OPLS, [10] CHARMM, [11] GROMOS, [12] AMBER [13] and CVFF [14] are examples of the most popular force fields and have been critically evaluated [15][16][17][18][19].…”
Section: Current Force Fields For Biomolecular Systemsmentioning
confidence: 99%