- Posts: 6
Cyclohexane in Martini 3
- aleme
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Fresh Boarder
Less
More
3 years 2 months ago #8803
by aleme
Cyclohexane in Martini 3 was created by aleme
Dear all,
I see that in the topology file for solvents in Martini 3 cyclohexane is reproduced by 2 beads (SC3) and in Martini 2 cyclohexane was mapped with 3 beads (SC1). Is there a particular reason for the change from 3 to 2 beads in the new parameterization?
Given that the molecule is cyclic and similar to benzene, which is reproduced with 3 beads, I don't understand why there are only 2 beads.
Thank you in advance!
Best regards,
Aleksandar
I see that in the topology file for solvents in Martini 3 cyclohexane is reproduced by 2 beads (SC3) and in Martini 2 cyclohexane was mapped with 3 beads (SC1). Is there a particular reason for the change from 3 to 2 beads in the new parameterization?
Given that the molecule is cyclic and similar to benzene, which is reproduced with 3 beads, I don't understand why there are only 2 beads.
Thank you in advance!
Best regards,
Aleksandar
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- riccardo
- Offline
- Platinum Boarder
3 years 2 months ago #8816
by riccardo
Replied by riccardo on topic Cyclohexane in Martini 3
Hi Aleksandar,
The rationale behind the choice is the following. Cyclohexane (CHEX) is aliphatic: due to the presence of 2 hydrogen atoms per carbon and its non-flat structure, CHEX is a bulkier ring than benzene. In Martini 3, small beads capture this bulkiness better than tiny beads, and small beads have been parametrized to represent 3 non-hydrogen atoms. These 2 factors call for a model for CHEX consisting of two small-beads (2 SC3 beads to be precise, as you note). Tiny beads are instead optimal for aromatic structures since they are "atom-thick", i.e., their sigma is comparable to the one of carbon atoms in an atomistic force field, so that you can obtain stacking distances between aromatics in agreement with all-atom force fields (and experiments). Since tiny beads were parametrized to represent 2 non-hydrogen atoms, you need 3 tiny beads to model benzene.
Hope this helps!
Riccardo
The rationale behind the choice is the following. Cyclohexane (CHEX) is aliphatic: due to the presence of 2 hydrogen atoms per carbon and its non-flat structure, CHEX is a bulkier ring than benzene. In Martini 3, small beads capture this bulkiness better than tiny beads, and small beads have been parametrized to represent 3 non-hydrogen atoms. These 2 factors call for a model for CHEX consisting of two small-beads (2 SC3 beads to be precise, as you note). Tiny beads are instead optimal for aromatic structures since they are "atom-thick", i.e., their sigma is comparable to the one of carbon atoms in an atomistic force field, so that you can obtain stacking distances between aromatics in agreement with all-atom force fields (and experiments). Since tiny beads were parametrized to represent 2 non-hydrogen atoms, you need 3 tiny beads to model benzene.
Hope this helps!
Riccardo
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
- aleme
- Topic Author
- Offline
- Fresh Boarder
Less
More
- Posts: 6
3 years 1 month ago #8824
by aleme
Replied by aleme on topic Cyclohexane in Martini 3
Hi Riccardo,
This makes sense. Thank you for the explanation!
Best regards,
Aleksandar
This makes sense. Thank you for the explanation!
Best regards,
Aleksandar
Please Log in or Create an account to join the conversation.
Time to create page: 0.091 seconds