Taking a reference PDBID 3n7h, I’ve generated for an MD simulation topology and restart files. I’ve loaded on Chimera 3n7h and then the starting frame of the MD simulation. Used the MatchMaker and found perfect superposition of the protein backbone and two ligands (3n7h is #0 and the ligands #0:129.A and #0.132.B I run the radius of gyration script (see attached). I found that the radii of gyration for the ligands in the two models are completely different. #0 center of mass: 12.6543 10.4356 15.4086, radius of gyration: 21.182 #1 center of mass: 42.7381 42.5171 42.6163, radius of gyration: 37.390 I don’t follow why this is so. Any explanation would be most welcome. A second question regards the units of the radii of gyration. Are they Angstrom or nm? Thank you in advance George
Hi George, First, that script measures the radius of gyration for all the atoms in a model, not just ligands atoms or some subset of the model’s atoms. So, my best guess is that the model that’s from your MD simulation has a lot solvent atoms that Chimera isn’t displaying by default. So you should check that there are the same number of atoms in both models. One way to do that is with the command: sel #0 (number of selected atoms [all of model 0] shown in the status line) sel #1 (same thing for model 1). If the difference in the models is the solvent you would want to use the command “delete solvent” before running the gyration script. —Eric Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
On Apr 6, 2017, at 12:35 PM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Taking a reference PDBID 3n7h, I’ve generated for an MD simulation topology and restart files.
I’ve loaded on Chimera 3n7h and then the starting frame of the MD simulation. Used the MatchMaker and found perfect superposition of the protein backbone and two ligands (3n7h is #0 and the ligands #0:129.A and #0.132.B
I run the radius of gyration script (see attached). I found that the radii of gyration for the ligands in the two models are completely different.
#0 center of mass: 12.6543 10.4356 15.4086, radius of gyration: 21.182 #1 center of mass: 42.7381 42.5171 42.6163, radius of gyration: 37.390
I don’t follow why this is so. Any explanation would be most welcome.
A second question regards the units of the radii of gyration. Are they Angstrom or nm?
Thank you in advance
George
<rad_gyration.py>_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users
Thank you Eric, The problem was exactly what you identified. I assume the units are in Angstrom George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 01:46, Eric Pettersen <pett@cgl.ucsf.edu> wrote:
Hi George, First, that script measures the radius of gyration for all the atoms in a model, not just ligands atoms or some subset of the model’s atoms. So, my best guess is that the model that’s from your MD simulation has a lot solvent atoms that Chimera isn’t displaying by default. So you should check that there are the same number of atoms in both models. One way to do that is with the command:
sel #0 (number of selected atoms [all of model 0] shown in the status line) sel #1 (same thing for model 1).
If the difference in the models is the solvent you would want to use the command “delete solvent” before running the gyration script.
—Eric
Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
On Apr 6, 2017, at 12:35 PM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com <mailto:gtzotzos@me.com>> wrote:
Taking a reference PDBID 3n7h, I’ve generated for an MD simulation topology and restart files.
I’ve loaded on Chimera 3n7h and then the starting frame of the MD simulation. Used the MatchMaker and found perfect superposition of the protein backbone and two ligands (3n7h is #0 and the ligands #0:129.A and #0.132.B
I run the radius of gyration script (see attached). I found that the radii of gyration for the ligands in the two models are completely different.
#0 center of mass: 12.6543 10.4356 15.4086, radius of gyration: 21.182 #1 center of mass: 42.7381 42.5171 42.6163, radius of gyration: 37.390
I don’t follow why this is so. Any explanation would be most welcome.
A second question regards the units of the radii of gyration. Are they Angstrom or nm?
Thank you in advance
George
<rad_gyration.py>_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu> Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users <http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users>
Hi George, Units would be the same as your atomic structure coordinates, so yes, angstroms if you are just using “regular” PDB files. I’m not sure why you would expect different units. Best, Elaine
On Apr 7, 2017, at 10:48 AM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Thank you Eric,
The problem was exactly what you identified. I assume the units are in Angstrom
George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 01:46, Eric Pettersen <pett@cgl.ucsf.edu> wrote:
Hi George, First, that script measures the radius of gyration for all the atoms in a model, not just ligands atoms or some subset of the model’s atoms. So, my best guess is that the model that’s from your MD simulation has a lot solvent atoms that Chimera isn’t displaying by default. So you should check that there are the same number of atoms in both models. One way to do that is with the command:
sel #0 (number of selected atoms [all of model 0] shown in the status line) sel #1 (same thing for model 1).
If the difference in the models is the solvent you would want to use the command “delete solvent” before running the gyration script.
—Eric
Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
On Apr 6, 2017, at 12:35 PM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Taking a reference PDBID 3n7h, I’ve generated for an MD simulation topology and restart files.
I’ve loaded on Chimera 3n7h and then the starting frame of the MD simulation. Used the MatchMaker and found perfect superposition of the protein backbone and two ligands (3n7h is #0 and the ligands #0:129.A and #0.132.B
I run the radius of gyration script (see attached). I found that the radii of gyration for the ligands in the two models are completely different.
#0 center of mass: 12.6543 10.4356 15.4086, radius of gyration: 21.182 #1 center of mass: 42.7381 42.5171 42.6163, radius of gyration: 37.390
I don’t follow why this is so. Any explanation would be most welcome.
A second question regards the units of the radii of gyration. Are they Angstrom or nm?
Thank you in advance
George
<rad_gyration.py>_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users
_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users
Hi Elaine, The reason I asked is because I’ve measured the radius of gyration of a particular ligand during the course of an MD trajectory using AmberTools. Comparing the mean radius of gyration of the ligand during the trajectory with the corresponding value generated by the Chimera script, the difference is by a factor of 4. AmberTools radius of gyration is also in angstrom. Have a good day George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 19:58, Elaine Meng <meng@cgl.ucsf.edu> wrote:
Hi George, Units would be the same as your atomic structure coordinates, so yes, angstroms if you are just using “regular” PDB files. I’m not sure why you would expect different units. Best, Elaine
On Apr 7, 2017, at 10:48 AM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Thank you Eric,
The problem was exactly what you identified. I assume the units are in Angstrom
George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 01:46, Eric Pettersen <pett@cgl.ucsf.edu> wrote:
Hi George, First, that script measures the radius of gyration for all the atoms in a model, not just ligands atoms or some subset of the model’s atoms. So, my best guess is that the model that’s from your MD simulation has a lot solvent atoms that Chimera isn’t displaying by default. So you should check that there are the same number of atoms in both models. One way to do that is with the command:
sel #0 (number of selected atoms [all of model 0] shown in the status line) sel #1 (same thing for model 1).
If the difference in the models is the solvent you would want to use the command “delete solvent” before running the gyration script.
—Eric
Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
On Apr 6, 2017, at 12:35 PM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Taking a reference PDBID 3n7h, I’ve generated for an MD simulation topology and restart files.
I’ve loaded on Chimera 3n7h and then the starting frame of the MD simulation. Used the MatchMaker and found perfect superposition of the protein backbone and two ligands (3n7h is #0 and the ligands #0:129.A and #0.132.B
I run the radius of gyration script (see attached). I found that the radii of gyration for the ligands in the two models are completely different.
#0 center of mass: 12.6543 10.4356 15.4086, radius of gyration: 21.182 #1 center of mass: 42.7381 42.5171 42.6163, radius of gyration: 37.390
I don’t follow why this is so. Any explanation would be most welcome.
A second question regards the units of the radii of gyration. Are they Angstrom or nm?
Thank you in advance
George
<rad_gyration.py>_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users
_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users
Hi George, Mathematically, radius of gyration is pretty simple. From Wikipedia: radius of gyration is the root mean square distance of the object's parts from its center of mass. Looking at the script, perhaps the radius of gyration computation should not be mass weighted. The script I’ve attached eliminates that mass weighting. Let me know if that gives the results you expect. —Eric Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
On Apr 7, 2017, at 11:16 AM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Hi Elaine,
The reason I asked is because I’ve measured the radius of gyration of a particular ligand during the course of an MD trajectory using AmberTools. Comparing the mean radius of gyration of the ligand during the trajectory with the corresponding value generated by the Chimera script, the difference is by a factor of 4. AmberTools radius of gyration is also in angstrom.
Have a good day
George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 19:58, Elaine Meng <meng@cgl.ucsf.edu> wrote:
Hi George, Units would be the same as your atomic structure coordinates, so yes, angstroms if you are just using “regular” PDB files. I’m not sure why you would expect different units. Best, Elaine
On Apr 7, 2017, at 10:48 AM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Thank you Eric,
The problem was exactly what you identified. I assume the units are in Angstrom
George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 01:46, Eric Pettersen <pett@cgl.ucsf.edu> wrote:
Hi George, First, that script measures the radius of gyration for all the atoms in a model, not just ligands atoms or some subset of the model’s atoms. So, my best guess is that the model that’s from your MD simulation has a lot solvent atoms that Chimera isn’t displaying by default. So you should check that there are the same number of atoms in both models. One way to do that is with the command:
sel #0 (number of selected atoms [all of model 0] shown in the status line) sel #1 (same thing for model 1).
If the difference in the models is the solvent you would want to use the command “delete solvent” before running the gyration script.
—Eric
Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
On Apr 6, 2017, at 12:35 PM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Taking a reference PDBID 3n7h, I’ve generated for an MD simulation topology and restart files.
I’ve loaded on Chimera 3n7h and then the starting frame of the MD simulation. Used the MatchMaker and found perfect superposition of the protein backbone and two ligands (3n7h is #0 and the ligands #0:129.A and #0.132.B
I run the radius of gyration script (see attached). I found that the radii of gyration for the ligands in the two models are completely different.
#0 center of mass: 12.6543 10.4356 15.4086, radius of gyration: 21.182 #1 center of mass: 42.7381 42.5171 42.6163, radius of gyration: 37.390
I don’t follow why this is so. Any explanation would be most welcome.
A second question regards the units of the radii of gyration. Are they Angstrom or nm?
Thank you in advance
George
<rad_gyration.py>_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users
_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users
_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users
Hi Eric, Thank you very much. I tried the new script on residues 126 and 127 of the attached PDB file. Both ligands are indole. The Reply Log returns #0 center of mass: 29.5741 29.9514 29.7281, radius of gyration: 3010.778 #0 center of mass: 29.5741 29.9514 29.7281, radius of gyration: 3010.778 This looks unrealistic and seems to be off by at least 3 orders of magnitude. I used the following script based on AmberTools15 parm cmplx_solv.prmtop trajin prod_0-100ns.nc radgyr :126&!(@H=) out RoG.dat mass nomax run I get a radius of gyrations with mean ~ 1.8 angstrom. See snapshot attached. For easy reference, the AmberTools15 manual states (p.586) radgyr | rog radgyr [name>] [<mask>] [out <filename>] [mass] [nomax] [tensor] [<name>] Data set name. [<mask>] Atoms to calculate radius of gyration for; default all atoms. [out <filename>] Write data to <filename>. [mass] Mass-weight radius of gyration. [nomax] Do not calculate maximum radius of gyration. [tensor] Calculate radius of gyration tensor, output format ’XX YY ZZ XY XZ YZ’. Data Sets Created: Data Sets Created: <name> Radius of gyration in Ang. <name>[Max] Max radius of gyration in Ang. <name>[Tensor] Radius of gyration tensor; format ’XX YY ZZ XY XZ YZ’. Calculate the radius of gyration of specified atoms. For example, to calculate only the mass-weighted radius of gyration (not the maximum) of the non-hydrogen atoms of residues 4 to 10 and print the results to “RoG.dat”: radgyr :4-10&!(@H=) out RoG.dat mass nomax
On 10 Apr 2017, at 20:30, Eric Pettersen <pett@cgl.ucsf.edu> wrote:
Hi George, Mathematically, radius of gyration is pretty simple. From Wikipedia: radius of gyration is the root mean square distance of the object's parts from its center of mass. Looking at the script, perhaps the radius of gyration computation should not be mass weighted. The script I’ve attached eliminates that mass weighting. Let me know if that gives the results you expect.
—Eric
Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
<radius-of-gyration.py>
On Apr 7, 2017, at 11:16 AM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com <mailto:gtzotzos@me.com>> wrote:
Hi Elaine,
The reason I asked is because I’ve measured the radius of gyration of a particular ligand during the course of an MD trajectory using AmberTools. Comparing the mean radius of gyration of the ligand during the trajectory with the corresponding value generated by the Chimera script, the difference is by a factor of 4. AmberTools radius of gyration is also in angstrom.
Have a good day
George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 19:58, Elaine Meng <meng@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:meng@cgl.ucsf.edu>> wrote:
Hi George, Units would be the same as your atomic structure coordinates, so yes, angstroms if you are just using “regular” PDB files. I’m not sure why you would expect different units. Best, Elaine
On Apr 7, 2017, at 10:48 AM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com <mailto:gtzotzos@me.com>> wrote:
Thank you Eric,
The problem was exactly what you identified. I assume the units are in Angstrom
George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 01:46, Eric Pettersen <pett@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:pett@cgl.ucsf.edu>> wrote:
Hi George, First, that script measures the radius of gyration for all the atoms in a model, not just ligands atoms or some subset of the model’s atoms. So, my best guess is that the model that’s from your MD simulation has a lot solvent atoms that Chimera isn’t displaying by default. So you should check that there are the same number of atoms in both models. One way to do that is with the command:
sel #0 (number of selected atoms [all of model 0] shown in the status line) sel #1 (same thing for model 1).
If the difference in the models is the solvent you would want to use the command “delete solvent” before running the gyration script.
—Eric
Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
On Apr 6, 2017, at 12:35 PM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com <mailto:gtzotzos@me.com>> wrote:
Taking a reference PDBID 3n7h, I’ve generated for an MD simulation topology and restart files.
I’ve loaded on Chimera 3n7h and then the starting frame of the MD simulation. Used the MatchMaker and found perfect superposition of the protein backbone and two ligands (3n7h is #0 and the ligands #0:129.A and #0.132.B
I run the radius of gyration script (see attached). I found that the radii of gyration for the ligands in the two models are completely different.
#0 center of mass: 12.6543 10.4356 15.4086, radius of gyration: 21.182 #1 center of mass: 42.7381 42.5171 42.6163, radius of gyration: 37.390
I don’t follow why this is so. Any explanation would be most welcome.
A second question regards the units of the radii of gyration. Are they Angstrom or nm?
Thank you in advance
George
<rad_gyration.py>_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu> Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users <http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users>
_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu> Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users <http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users>
_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu> Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users <http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users>
Hi George, My non-mass-weighted script should have been dividing by the number of atoms and it wasn’t. I’ve attached a corrected version. Nonetheless, the Amber calculation is using mass weighting, so that is not the issue. I need to emphasize again that the script is going to compute the radius of gyration of all atoms in your model, regardless of which ones are selected. The only way to compute the value (with that script) for a subset of atoms is to delete all the other ones. For instance, with the PDB you sent if I delete all atoms except for residue 26, this is the output I get using the mass-weighted script: #0 center of mass: 26.1014 36.0445 34.9565, radius of gyration: 1.934 If you want the script to work on the currently selected atoms instead of all atoms, I could send you a modified script that does that. Let me know if you want that. —Eric
On Apr 10, 2017, at 12:12 PM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com> wrote:
Hi Eric,
Thank you very much. I tried the new script on residues 126 and 127 of the attached PDB file. Both ligands are indole.
The Reply Log returns
#0 center of mass: 29.5741 29.9514 29.7281, radius of gyration: 3010.778 #0 center of mass: 29.5741 29.9514 29.7281, radius of gyration: 3010.778
This looks unrealistic and seems to be off by at least 3 orders of magnitude.
I used the following script based on AmberTools15
parm cmplx_solv.prmtop trajin prod_0-100ns.nc radgyr :126&!(@H=) out RoG.dat mass nomax run
I get a radius of gyrations with mean ~ 1.8 angstrom. See snapshot attached.
For easy reference, the AmberTools15 manual states (p.586)
radgyr | rog
radgyr [name>] [<mask>] [out <filename>] [mass] [nomax] [tensor]
[<name>] Data set name. [<mask>] Atoms to calculate radius of gyration for; default all atoms. [out <filename>] Write data to <filename>.
[mass] Mass-weight radius of gyration. [nomax] Do not calculate maximum radius of gyration. [tensor] Calculate radius of gyration tensor, output format ’XX YY ZZ XY XZ YZ’. Data Sets Created:
Data Sets Created:
<name> Radius of gyration in Ang. <name>[Max] Max radius of gyration in Ang. <name>[Tensor] Radius of gyration tensor; format ’XX YY ZZ XY XZ YZ’.
Calculate the radius of gyration of specified atoms. For example, to calculate only the mass-weighted radius of gyration (not the maximum) of the non-hydrogen atoms of residues 4 to 10 and print the results to “RoG.dat”:
radgyr :4-10&!(@H=) out RoG.dat mass nomax
<PastedGraphic-1.png>
<indX2.pdb>
On 10 Apr 2017, at 20:30, Eric Pettersen <pett@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:pett@cgl.ucsf.edu>> wrote:
Hi George, Mathematically, radius of gyration is pretty simple. From Wikipedia: radius of gyration is the root mean square distance of the object's parts from its center of mass. Looking at the script, perhaps the radius of gyration computation should not be mass weighted. The script I’ve attached eliminates that mass weighting. Let me know if that gives the results you expect.
—Eric
Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
<radius-of-gyration.py>
On Apr 7, 2017, at 11:16 AM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com <mailto:gtzotzos@me.com>> wrote:
Hi Elaine,
The reason I asked is because I’ve measured the radius of gyration of a particular ligand during the course of an MD trajectory using AmberTools. Comparing the mean radius of gyration of the ligand during the trajectory with the corresponding value generated by the Chimera script, the difference is by a factor of 4. AmberTools radius of gyration is also in angstrom.
Have a good day
George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 19:58, Elaine Meng <meng@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:meng@cgl.ucsf.edu>> wrote:
Hi George, Units would be the same as your atomic structure coordinates, so yes, angstroms if you are just using “regular” PDB files. I’m not sure why you would expect different units. Best, Elaine
On Apr 7, 2017, at 10:48 AM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com <mailto:gtzotzos@me.com>> wrote:
Thank you Eric,
The problem was exactly what you identified. I assume the units are in Angstrom
George
On 7 Apr 2017, at 01:46, Eric Pettersen <pett@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:pett@cgl.ucsf.edu>> wrote:
Hi George, First, that script measures the radius of gyration for all the atoms in a model, not just ligands atoms or some subset of the model’s atoms. So, my best guess is that the model that’s from your MD simulation has a lot solvent atoms that Chimera isn’t displaying by default. So you should check that there are the same number of atoms in both models. One way to do that is with the command:
sel #0 (number of selected atoms [all of model 0] shown in the status line) sel #1 (same thing for model 1).
If the difference in the models is the solvent you would want to use the command “delete solvent” before running the gyration script.
—Eric
Eric Pettersen UCSF Computer Graphics Lab
> On Apr 6, 2017, at 12:35 PM, George Tzotzos <gtzotzos@me.com <mailto:gtzotzos@me.com>> wrote: > > Taking a reference PDBID 3n7h, I’ve generated for an MD simulation topology and restart files. > > I’ve loaded on Chimera 3n7h and then the starting frame of the MD simulation. > Used the MatchMaker and found perfect superposition of the protein backbone and two ligands (3n7h is #0 and the ligands #0:129.A and #0.132.B > > I run the radius of gyration script (see attached). I found that the radii of gyration for the ligands in the two models are completely different. > > #0 center of mass: 12.6543 10.4356 15.4086, radius of gyration: 21.182 > #1 center of mass: 42.7381 42.5171 42.6163, radius of gyration: 37.390 > > I don’t follow why this is so. Any explanation would be most welcome. > > A second question regards the units of the radii of gyration. Are they Angstrom or nm? > > Thank you in advance > > George > > <rad_gyration.py>_______________________________________________ > Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu> > Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users <http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users>
_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu> Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users <http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users>
_______________________________________________ Chimera-users mailing list: Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu <mailto:Chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu> Manage subscription: http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users <http://plato.cgl.ucsf.edu/mailman/listinfo/chimera-users>
Dear Chimera, I wonder if there is an easy way to get the density values of a volume map at selected atom positions in a fitted structure. There is the button "Values at Atom Positions" in Volume Viewer->Tools that I believe does something very close to what I am looking for. However, In addition to this I would also like to: 1- Get a list of all the values for all the atoms (e.g to calculate the sum or average of all) in addition to the given histogram 2- Being able to get the values for selected atoms rather than whole models. Thanks Hernando
Dear Hernando, (A) Saving a list of values for all atoms or just selected/specified atoms. After assigning the values with “Values at Atom Positions”, you can write out a list of the atoms and their values (attribute values) from the Render by Attribute dialog menu: "File… Save Attributes”. The Render by Attribute dialog is the one that shows the histogram of attribute values. The attribute-saving dialog has a choice to restrict the output to only the atoms you have selected. <http://www.rbvi.ucsf.edu/chimera/docs/ContributedSoftware/render/render.html...> Alternatively you can assign values to only certain atoms specified in the “measure mapValues” command instead of using the “Values at Atom Positions” tool. Saving to a file would be the same as described above. However, the command also has a “report” option to send the list to the Reply Log, so yet another possibility would be to use that and then save the Reply Log to file or just copy those lines from the Reply Log and manually paste into some file, if there aren’t too many lines. <http://www.rbvi.ucsf.edu/chimera/docs/UsersGuide/midas/measure.html#mapValue...> (B) Getting a sum or average. You can use the Attribute Calculator tool (in menu under Tools… Structure Analysis) to get a sum or average of the attributes for all atoms or selected atoms. Maybe one slightly tricky thing is that you need to specify you are calculating a new attribute of “molecules” since you only want one sum or average of the atomic values, not per residue (I assume… although you could do that too!). <http://www.rbvi.ucsf.edu/chimera/docs/ContributedSoftware/calculator/calcula...> I hope this helps, Elaine ----- Elaine C. Meng, Ph.D. UCSF Computer Graphics Lab (Chimera team) and Babbitt Lab Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry University of California, San Francisco
On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Hernando J Sosa <hernando.sosa@einstein.yu.edu> wrote:
Dear Chimera,
I wonder if there is an easy way to get the density values of a volume map at selected atom positions in a fitted structure. There is the button "Values at Atom Positions" in Volume Viewer->Tools that I believe does something very close to what I am looking for. However, In addition to this I would also like to:
1- Get a list of all the values for all the atoms (e.g to calculate the sum or average of all) in addition to the given histogram 2- Being able to get the values for selected atoms rather than whole models.
Thanks Hernando
Thanks Elaine, As usual your response was very helpful. I ended up using option A) and then a little script to parse the resulting file to get what I wanted. Thanks again. H. -----Original Message----- From: Elaine Meng [mailto:meng@cgl.ucsf.edu] Sent: Friday, April 7, 2017 9:54 PM To: Hernando J Sosa Cc: chimera-users@cgl.ucsf.edu BB Subject: Re: [Chimera-users] Values at at atom position. Dear Hernando, (A) Saving a list of values for all atoms or just selected/specified atoms. After assigning the values with “Values at Atom Positions”, you can write out a list of the atoms and their values (attribute values) from the Render by Attribute dialog menu: "File… Save Attributes”. The Render by Attribute dialog is the one that shows the histogram of attribute values. The attribute-saving dialog has a choice to restrict the output to only the atoms you have selected. <http://www.rbvi.ucsf.edu/chimera/docs/ContributedSoftware/render/render.html...> Alternatively you can assign values to only certain atoms specified in the “measure mapValues” command instead of using the “Values at Atom Positions” tool. Saving to a file would be the same as described above. However, the command also has a “report” option to send the list to the Reply Log, so yet another possibility would be to use that and then save the Reply Log to file or just copy those lines from the Reply Log and manually paste into some file, if there aren’t too many lines. <http://www.rbvi.ucsf.edu/chimera/docs/UsersGuide/midas/measure.html#mapValue...> (B) Getting a sum or average. You can use the Attribute Calculator tool (in menu under Tools… Structure Analysis) to get a sum or average of the attributes for all atoms or selected atoms. Maybe one slightly tricky thing is that you need to specify you are calculating a new attribute of “molecules” since you only want one sum or average of the atomic values, not per residue (I assume… although you could do that too!). <http://www.rbvi.ucsf.edu/chimera/docs/ContributedSoftware/calculator/calcula...> I hope this helps, Elaine ----- Elaine C. Meng, Ph.D. UCSF Computer Graphics Lab (Chimera team) and Babbitt Lab Department of Pharmaceutical Chemistry University of California, San Francisco
On Apr 7, 2017, at 1:58 PM, Hernando J Sosa <hernando.sosa@einstein.yu.edu> wrote:
Dear Chimera,
I wonder if there is an easy way to get the density values of a volume map at selected atom positions in a fitted structure. There is the button "Values at Atom Positions" in Volume Viewer->Tools that I believe does something very close to what I am looking for. However, In addition to this I would also like to:
1- Get a list of all the values for all the atoms (e.g to calculate the sum or average of all) in addition to the given histogram 2- Being able to get the values for selected atoms rather than whole models.
Thanks Hernando
participants (4)
-
Elaine Meng -
Eric Pettersen -
George Tzotzos -
Hernando J Sosa