Journal of Computer-Aided Molecular Design

, Volume 14, Issue 3, pp 233–242 | Cite as

The effect of isodensity surface sampling on ESP derived charges and the effect of adding bondcenters on DMA derived charges

  • G. Schaftenaar
  • J.H. Noordik


The effect of sampling the electrostatic potential around a molecule on the quality of electrostatic potential derived charges is investigated. In addition, the effect of the number of expansion sites in a Distributed Multipole Analysis (DMA) on the quality of charges fitted to the DMA derived electrostatic potential is investigated. Sampling on constant electron density surfaces gives a better fit between the quantum mechanical potential and the potential derived from the fitted charges, compared to sampling on a van der Waals surface composed of intersecting spheres. The fit between the electrostatic potential derived from point charges and the quantum mechanical potential becomes poorer with increasing quality of the employed basis set. The inclusion of bondcenters into the calculations improves the fit between the Quantum Mechanical (QM) electrostatic potential and the DMA derived potential. The number of expansion sites needed for an accurate approximation of the QM electrostatic potential increases with increasing quality of the used basis set.

electrostatic potential isodensity surface potential derived charges 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Del Re, G., J. Chem. Soc. London, 1958 (1958) 4031.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Gasteiger, J. and Marsili, M., Tetrahedron, 36 (1980) 3219.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Mulliken, R.S., J. Chem. Phys., 23 (1955) 1833.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bader, R., Atoms in Molecules-A Quantum Theory, Oxford University Press, Oxford, 1990.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Hirshfeld, F.L., Theor. Chim. Acta, 49 (1977) 129.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Breneman, C.M. and Wiberg, K.B., J. Comput. Chem., 11 (1990) 361.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Besler, B.H., Merz, K.M. and Kollman, P.A., J. Comput. Chem., 11 (1990) 431.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Bayly, C.I., Cieplak, P., Cornell, W.D. and Kollman, P.A., J. Phys. Chem., 97 (1993) 10269.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Stone, A.J., Chem. Phys. Lett., 83 (1981) 233.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Price, S.L., Stone, A.J. and Alderton, M., Mol. Phys., 52 (1984) 987.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Ponder, J.W. and Richards, F.M., J. Comput. Chem., 8 (1987) 1016.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Willock, D.J., Price, S.L., Leslie, M. and Catlow, C.R.A., J. Comput. Chem., 16 (1995) 628.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Winn, P.J., Ferenczy, G.G. and Reynolds, C.A., J. Phys. Chem., 101 (1997) 5437.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Williams, D.E., Reviews in Computational Chemistry, ch. Net Atomic Charge and Multiple Models for the ab initio Molecular Electric Potential, VCH Publishers, Inc., New York, NY, 1991.Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Schaftenaar, G. and Noordik, J.H., J. Comput.-Aided Mol. Design, 14 (2000) 123.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cox, S.R. and Williams, D.E., J. Comput. Chem., 2 (1981) 304.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Singh, U.C. and Kollman, P.A., J. Comput. Chem., 5 (1984) 129.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Colonna, F. and Evleth, E., J. Comput. Chem., 13 (1992) 1324.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Kluwer Academic Publishers 2000

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. Schaftenaar
    • 1
  • J.H. Noordik
    • 1
  1. 1.CAOS/CAMM Center, Faculty of ScienceNijmegen University, ToernooiveldNijmegenThe Netherlands

Personalised recommendations