1 |
mmeineke |
95 |
\documentclass[11pt]{article} |
2 |
|
|
|
3 |
|
|
\usepackage{graphicx} |
4 |
mmeineke |
106 |
\usepackage{color} |
5 |
mmeineke |
98 |
\usepackage{floatflt} |
6 |
mmeineke |
95 |
\usepackage{amsmath} |
7 |
|
|
\usepackage{amssymb} |
8 |
|
|
\usepackage[ref]{overcite} |
9 |
|
|
|
10 |
|
|
|
11 |
|
|
|
12 |
|
|
\pagestyle{plain} |
13 |
|
|
\pagenumbering{arabic} |
14 |
|
|
\oddsidemargin 0.0cm \evensidemargin 0.0cm |
15 |
|
|
\topmargin -21pt \headsep 10pt |
16 |
|
|
\textheight 9.0in \textwidth 6.5in |
17 |
|
|
\brokenpenalty=10000 |
18 |
|
|
\renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2} |
19 |
|
|
\renewcommand\citemid{\ } % no comma in optional reference note |
20 |
|
|
|
21 |
|
|
|
22 |
|
|
\begin{document} |
23 |
|
|
|
24 |
mmeineke |
98 |
|
25 |
mmeineke |
95 |
\title{A Mesoscale Model for Phospholipid Simulations} |
26 |
|
|
|
27 |
|
|
\author{Matthew A. Meineke\\ |
28 |
|
|
Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry\\ |
29 |
|
|
University of Notre Dame\\ |
30 |
|
|
Notre Dame, Indiana 46556} |
31 |
|
|
|
32 |
|
|
\date{\today} |
33 |
|
|
\maketitle |
34 |
|
|
|
35 |
|
|
\section{Background and Research Goals} |
36 |
|
|
|
37 |
mmeineke |
106 |
Simulations of phospholipid bilayers are, by necessity, quite |
38 |
|
|
complex. The lipid molecules are large molecules containing many |
39 |
|
|
atoms,and the head group of the lipid will typically contain charge |
40 |
|
|
separated ions which set up a large dipole within the molecule. Adding |
41 |
|
|
to the complexity are the number of water molecules needed to properly |
42 |
|
|
solvate the lipid bilayer. Because of these factors, many current |
43 |
|
|
simulations are limited in both length and time scale due to to the |
44 |
|
|
sheer number of calculations performed at every time step and the |
45 |
|
|
lifetime of the researcher. A typical |
46 |
|
|
simulation\cite{saiz02,lindahl00,venable00,Marrink01} will have around |
47 |
|
|
64 phospholipids forming a bilayer approximately 40~$\mbox{\AA}$ by |
48 |
|
|
50~$\mbox{\AA}$ with roughly 25 waters for every lipid. This means |
49 |
|
|
there are on the order of 8,000 atoms needed to simulate these systems |
50 |
|
|
and the trajectories in turn are integrated for times up to 10 ns. |
51 |
|
|
|
52 |
|
|
These limitations make it difficult to study certain biologically |
53 |
|
|
interesting phenomena that don't fit within the short time and length |
54 |
|
|
scale requirements. One such phenomena is the existence of the ripple |
55 |
|
|
phase ($P_{\beta'}$) of the bilayer between the gel phase |
56 |
|
|
($L_{\beta'}$) and the fluid phase ($L_{\alpha}$). The $P_{\beta'}$ |
57 |
|
|
phase has been shown to have a ripple period of |
58 |
|
|
100-200~$\mbox{\AA}$.\cite{katsaras00,sengupta00} A simulation of this |
59 |
|
|
length scale would require approximately 1,300 lipid molecules and |
60 |
|
|
roughly 25 waters for every lipid to fully solvate the bilayer. With |
61 |
|
|
the large number of atoms involved in a simulation of this magnitude, |
62 |
|
|
steps \emph{must} be taken to simplify the system to the point where |
63 |
|
|
these numbers are reasonable. |
64 |
|
|
|
65 |
|
|
Another system of interest would be drug molecule diffusion through |
66 |
|
|
the membrane. Due to the fluid like properties of a lipid membrane, |
67 |
|
|
not all diffusion takes place at membrane channels. It is of interest |
68 |
|
|
to study certain molecules that may incorporate themselves directly |
69 |
|
|
into the membrane. These molecules may then have an appreciable |
70 |
|
|
waiting time (on the order of nanoseconds) within the |
71 |
|
|
bilayer. Simulation of such a long time scale again requires |
72 |
|
|
simplification of the system in order to lower the number of |
73 |
|
|
calculations needed at each time step. |
74 |
|
|
|
75 |
|
|
|
76 |
mmeineke |
95 |
\section{Methodology} |
77 |
|
|
|
78 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\subsection{Length and Time Scale Simplifications} |
79 |
mmeineke |
95 |
|
80 |
mmeineke |
106 |
The length scale simplifications are aimed at increasing the number of |
81 |
|
|
molecules that can be simulated without drastically increasing the |
82 |
mmeineke |
95 |
computational cost of the system. This is done by a combination of |
83 |
|
|
substituting less expensive interactions for expensive ones and |
84 |
|
|
decreasing the number of interaction sites per molecule. Namely, |
85 |
mmeineke |
106 |
point charge distributions are replaced with dipoles, and unified atoms are |
86 |
|
|
used in place of water, phospholipid head groups, and alkyl groups. |
87 |
mmeineke |
95 |
|
88 |
|
|
The replacement of charge distributions with dipoles allows us to |
89 |
mmeineke |
106 |
replace an interaction that has a relatively long range, |
90 |
|
|
$(\frac{1}{r})$, for the coulomb potential, with that of a relatively |
91 |
|
|
short range, $(\frac{1}{r^{3}})$, for dipole - dipole |
92 |
|
|
potentials. Combined with a computational simplification algorithm |
93 |
|
|
such as a Verlet neighbor list,\cite{allen87:csl} this should give |
94 |
|
|
computational scaling by $N$. This is in comparison to the Ewald |
95 |
|
|
sum\cite{leach01:mm} needed to compute the coulomb interactions, which |
96 |
|
|
scales at best by $N \ln N$. |
97 |
mmeineke |
95 |
|
98 |
mmeineke |
106 |
The second step taken to simplify the number of calculations is to |
99 |
mmeineke |
95 |
incorporate unified models for groups of atoms. In the case of water, |
100 |
|
|
we use the soft sticky dipole (SSD) model developed by |
101 |
|
|
Ichiye\cite{Liu96} (Section~\ref{sec:ssdModel}). For the phospholipids, a |
102 |
|
|
unified head atom with a dipole will replace the atoms in the head |
103 |
|
|
group, while unified $\text{CH}_2$ and $\text{CH}_3$ atoms will |
104 |
mmeineke |
106 |
replace the alkyl units in the tails (Section~\ref{sec:lipidModel}). |
105 |
mmeineke |
95 |
|
106 |
mmeineke |
106 |
The time scale simplifications are introduced so that we can take |
107 |
|
|
longer time steps. By increasing the size of the time steps taken by |
108 |
|
|
the simulation, we are able to integrate the simulation trajectory |
109 |
|
|
with fewer calculations. However, care must be taken that any |
110 |
|
|
simplifications used, still conserve the total energy of the |
111 |
|
|
simulation. In practice, this means taking steps small enough to |
112 |
|
|
resolve all motion in the system without accidently moving an object |
113 |
|
|
too far along a repulsive energy surface before it feels the effect of |
114 |
|
|
the surface. |
115 |
mmeineke |
95 |
|
116 |
mmeineke |
96 |
In our simulation we have chosen to constrain all bonds to be of fixed |
117 |
|
|
length. This means the bonds are no longer allowed to vibrate about |
118 |
mmeineke |
106 |
their equilibrium positions. Bond vibrations are typically the fastest |
119 |
|
|
periodic motion in a dynamics simulation. By taking this action, we |
120 |
|
|
are able to take time steps of 3 fs while still maintaining constant |
121 |
|
|
energy. This is in contrast to the 1 fs time step typically needed to |
122 |
|
|
conserve energy when bonds lengths are allowed to oscillate. |
123 |
mmeineke |
95 |
|
124 |
|
|
\subsection{The Soft Sticky Water Model} |
125 |
|
|
\label{sec:ssdModel} |
126 |
|
|
|
127 |
mmeineke |
106 |
%\begin{floatingfigure}{55mm} |
128 |
|
|
%\includegraphics[width=45mm]{ssd.epsi} |
129 |
|
|
%\caption{The SSD model with the oxygen and hydrogen atoms drawn in for reference. \vspace{5mm}} |
130 |
|
|
%\label{fig:ssdModel} |
131 |
|
|
%\end{floatingfigure} |
132 |
mmeineke |
96 |
|
133 |
mmeineke |
106 |
The water model used in our simulations is a modified soft |
134 |
|
|
Stockmayer-sphere model.\cite{stevens95} Like the Stockmayer-sphere, the SSD |
135 |
mmeineke |
98 |
model\cite{Liu96} consists of a Lennard-Jones interaction site and a |
136 |
|
|
dipole both located at the water's center of mass (Figure |
137 |
|
|
\ref{fig:ssdModel}). However, the SSD model extends this by adding a |
138 |
|
|
tetrahedral potential to correct for hydrogen bonding. |
139 |
|
|
|
140 |
mmeineke |
106 |
The SSD water potential is then given by the following equation: |
141 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\begin{equation} |
142 |
mmeineke |
106 |
V_{\text{SSD}} = V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{i\!j}) + V_{\text{dp}}(\mathbf{r}_{i\!j}, |
143 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) |
144 |
|
|
+ V_{\text{sp}}(\mathbf{r}_{i\!j},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i}, |
145 |
|
|
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) |
146 |
mmeineke |
98 |
\label{eq:ssdTotPot} |
147 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\end{equation} |
148 |
mmeineke |
106 |
$V_{\text{LJ}}$ is the Lennard-Jones potential: |
149 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
150 |
|
|
V_{\text{LJ}} = |
151 |
|
|
4\epsilon_{ij} \biggl[ |
152 |
|
|
\biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{12} |
153 |
|
|
- \biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{6} |
154 |
|
|
\biggr] |
155 |
|
|
\label{eq:lennardJonesPot} |
156 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
157 |
|
|
where $r_{ij}$ is the distance between two $ij$ pairs, $\sigma_{ij}$ |
158 |
mmeineke |
108 |
scales the length of the interaction, and $\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the |
159 |
mmeineke |
106 |
energy of the potential. For SSD, $\sigma_{\text{SSD}} = 3.051 \mbox{ |
160 |
|
|
\AA}$ and $\epsilon_{\text{SSD}} = 0.152\text{ kcal/mol}$. |
161 |
|
|
$V_{\text{dp}}$ is the dipole potential: |
162 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
163 |
|
|
V_{\text{dp}}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i}, |
164 |
|
|
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \biggl[ |
165 |
|
|
\frac{\boldsymbol{\mu}_{i} \cdot \boldsymbol{\mu}_{j}}{r^{3}_{ij}} |
166 |
|
|
- |
167 |
|
|
\frac{3(\boldsymbol{\mu}_i \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) % |
168 |
|
|
(\boldsymbol{\mu}_j \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) } |
169 |
|
|
{r^{5}_{ij}} \biggr] |
170 |
|
|
\label{eq:dipolePot} |
171 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
172 |
|
|
where $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the vector between $i$ and $j$, |
173 |
|
|
$\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ is the orientation of the species, and |
174 |
|
|
$\boldsymbol{\mu}$ is the dipole vector. The SSD model specifies a dipole |
175 |
|
|
magnitude of 2.35~D for water. |
176 |
mmeineke |
96 |
|
177 |
mmeineke |
101 |
The hydrogen bonding of the model is governed by the $V_{\text{sp}}$ |
178 |
mmeineke |
106 |
term of the potential. Its form is as follows: |
179 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\begin{equation} |
180 |
|
|
V_{\text{sp}}(\mathbf{r}_{i\!j},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i}, |
181 |
|
|
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) = |
182 |
|
|
v^{\circ}[s(r_{ij})w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i}, |
183 |
|
|
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) |
184 |
|
|
+ |
185 |
|
|
s'(r_{ij})w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i}, |
186 |
|
|
\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})] |
187 |
mmeineke |
98 |
\label{eq:spPot} |
188 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\end{equation} |
189 |
mmeineke |
106 |
Where $v^\circ$ scales strength of the interaction. |
190 |
mmeineke |
98 |
$w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$ |
191 |
|
|
and |
192 |
|
|
$w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$ |
193 |
|
|
are responsible for the tetrahedral potential and a correction to the |
194 |
|
|
tetrahedral potential respectively. They are, |
195 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\begin{equation} |
196 |
|
|
w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) = |
197 |
|
|
\sin\theta_{ij} \sin 2\theta_{ij} \cos 2\phi_{ij} |
198 |
|
|
+ \sin \theta_{ji} \sin 2\theta_{ji} \cos 2\phi_{ji} |
199 |
mmeineke |
106 |
\label{eq:spPot2} |
200 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\end{equation} |
201 |
mmeineke |
98 |
and |
202 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\begin{equation} |
203 |
|
|
\begin{split} |
204 |
mmeineke |
98 |
w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) = |
205 |
|
|
&(\cos\theta_{ij}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ij} + 0.8)^2 \\ |
206 |
|
|
&+ (\cos\theta_{ji}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ji} + 0.8)^2 - 2w^{\circ} |
207 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\end{split} |
208 |
mmeineke |
98 |
\label{eq:spCorrection} |
209 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\end{equation} |
210 |
mmeineke |
106 |
The angles $\theta_{ij}$ and $\phi_{ij}$ are defined by the spherical |
211 |
|
|
polar coordinates of the position of sphere $j$ in the reference frame |
212 |
|
|
fixed on sphere $i$ with the z-axis aligned with the dipole moment. |
213 |
|
|
The correction |
214 |
mmeineke |
98 |
$w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$ |
215 |
|
|
is needed because |
216 |
|
|
$w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$ |
217 |
mmeineke |
106 |
vanishes when $\theta_{ij}$ is $0^\circ$ or $180^\circ$. |
218 |
mmeineke |
96 |
|
219 |
mmeineke |
106 |
Finally, the sticky potential is scaled by a cutoff function, |
220 |
mmeineke |
101 |
$s(r_{ij})$ that scales smoothly between 0 and 1. It is represented |
221 |
|
|
by: |
222 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\begin{equation} |
223 |
|
|
s(r_{ij}) = |
224 |
|
|
\begin{cases} |
225 |
|
|
1& \text{if $r_{ij} < r_{L}$}, \\ |
226 |
|
|
\frac{(r_{U} - r_{ij})^2 (r_{U} + 2r_{ij} |
227 |
|
|
- 3r_{L})}{(r_{U}-r_{L})^3}& |
228 |
|
|
\text{if $r_{L} \leq r_{ij} \leq r_{U}$},\\ |
229 |
|
|
0& \text{if $r_{ij} \geq r_{U}$}. |
230 |
|
|
\end{cases} |
231 |
mmeineke |
98 |
\label{eq:spCutoff} |
232 |
mmeineke |
96 |
\end{equation} |
233 |
|
|
|
234 |
mmeineke |
106 |
Despite the apparent complexity of Equation \ref{eq:spPot}, the SSD |
235 |
mmeineke |
108 |
model is still computationally inexpensive. This is due to Equation |
236 |
mmeineke |
107 |
\ref{eq:spCutoff}. With $r_{L}$ being 2.75~$\mbox{\AA}$ and $r_{U}$ |
237 |
mmeineke |
106 |
being equal to either 3.35~$\mbox{\AA}$ for $s(r_{ij})$ or |
238 |
|
|
4.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ for $s'(r_{ij})$, the sticky potential is only active |
239 |
mmeineke |
108 |
over an extremely short range, and then only with other SSD |
240 |
mmeineke |
106 |
molecules. Therefore, it's predominant interaction is through it's |
241 |
|
|
point dipole and Lennard-Jones sphere. |
242 |
mmeineke |
98 |
|
243 |
mmeineke |
95 |
\subsection{The Phospholipid Model} |
244 |
|
|
\label{sec:lipidModel} |
245 |
|
|
|
246 |
mmeineke |
107 |
%\begin{floatingfigure}{90mm} |
247 |
|
|
%\includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{lipidModel.epsi} |
248 |
|
|
%\caption{A representation of the lipid model. $\phi$ is the torsion angle, $\theta$ is the bend angle, $\mu$ is the dipole moment of the head group, and n is the chain length. \vspace{5mm}} |
249 |
|
|
%\label{fig:lipidModel} |
250 |
|
|
%\end{floatingfigure} |
251 |
mmeineke |
95 |
|
252 |
mmeineke |
99 |
The lipid molecules in our simulations are unified atom models. Figure |
253 |
|
|
\ref{fig:lipidModel} shows a template drawing for one of our |
254 |
|
|
lipids. The Head group of the phospholipid is replaced by a single |
255 |
|
|
Lennard-Jones sphere with a freely oriented dipole placed at it's |
256 |
|
|
center. The magnitude of it's dipole moment is 20.6 D. The tail atoms |
257 |
mmeineke |
106 |
are unified $\text{CH}_2$ and $\text{CH}_3$ atoms and are also modeled |
258 |
mmeineke |
99 |
as Lennard-Jones spheres. The total potential for the lipid is |
259 |
|
|
represented by Equation \ref{eq:lipidModelPot}. |
260 |
|
|
|
261 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
262 |
|
|
V_{\mbox{lipid}} = \overbrace{% |
263 |
|
|
V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{ijk}) +% |
264 |
|
|
V_{\text{tors.}}(\phi_{ijkl})}^{bonded} |
265 |
|
|
+ \overbrace{% |
266 |
|
|
V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{i\!j}) + |
267 |
|
|
V_{\text{dp}}(r_{i\!j},\Omega_{i},\Omega_{j})% |
268 |
|
|
}^{non-bonded} |
269 |
|
|
\label{eq:lipidModelPot} |
270 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
271 |
|
|
|
272 |
mmeineke |
106 |
The non-bonded interactions, $V_{\text{LJ}}$ and $V_{\text{dp}}$, are |
273 |
mmeineke |
99 |
the Lennard-Jones and dipole-dipole interactions respectively. For the |
274 |
|
|
non-bonded potentials, only the bend and the torsional potentials are |
275 |
|
|
calculated. The bond potential is not calculated, and the bond lengths |
276 |
|
|
are constrained via RATTLE.\cite{leach01:mm} The bend potential is of |
277 |
|
|
the form: |
278 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
279 |
|
|
V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{ijk}) = k_{\theta}\frac{(\theta_{ijk} - \theta_0)^2}{2} |
280 |
|
|
\label{eq:bendPot} |
281 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
282 |
mmeineke |
100 |
Where $k_{\theta}$ sets the stiffness of the bend potential, and $\theta_0$ |
283 |
|
|
sets the equilibrium bend angle. The torsion potential was given by: |
284 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
285 |
mmeineke |
106 |
V_{\text{tors.}}(\phi_{ijkl})= c_1[1+\cos\phi_{ijkl}] |
286 |
|
|
+ c_2 [1 - \cos(2\phi_{ijkl})] + c_3[1 + \cos(3\phi_{ijkl})] |
287 |
mmeineke |
100 |
\label{eq:torsPot} |
288 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
289 |
mmeineke |
102 |
All parameters for bonded and non-bonded potentials in the tail atoms |
290 |
|
|
were taken from TraPPE.\cite{Siepmann1998} The bonded interactions for |
291 |
|
|
the head atom were also taken from TraPPE, however it's dipole moment |
292 |
mmeineke |
106 |
and mass were based on the properties of the phosphatidylcholine head |
293 |
|
|
group. The Lennard-Jones parameter for the head group was chosen such |
294 |
|
|
that it was roughly twice the size of a $\text{CH}_3$ atom, and it's |
295 |
|
|
well depth was set to be approximately equal to that of $\text{CH}_3$. |
296 |
mmeineke |
99 |
|
297 |
mmeineke |
102 |
\section{Initial Simulation: 25 lipids in water} |
298 |
|
|
\label{sec:5x5} |
299 |
mmeineke |
101 |
|
300 |
mmeineke |
106 |
\subsection{Starting Configuration and Parameters} |
301 |
mmeineke |
102 |
\label{sec:5x5Start} |
302 |
mmeineke |
101 |
|
303 |
mmeineke |
108 |
Our first simulation is an array of 25 single chained lipids in a sea |
304 |
mmeineke |
102 |
of water (Figure \ref{fig:5x5Start}). The total number of water |
305 |
mmeineke |
108 |
molecules is 1386, giving a final of water concentration of 70\% |
306 |
|
|
wt. The simulation box measures 34.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ |
307 |
mmeineke |
107 |
x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ with periodic boundary conditions imposed. The |
308 |
mmeineke |
108 |
system is simulated in the micro-canonical (NVE) ensemble with an |
309 |
mmeineke |
102 |
average temperature of 300~K. |
310 |
|
|
|
311 |
|
|
\subsection{Results} |
312 |
|
|
\label{sec:5x5Results} |
313 |
|
|
|
314 |
|
|
Figure \ref{fig:5x5Final} shows a snapshot of the system at |
315 |
mmeineke |
107 |
3.6~ns. Note that the system has spontaneously self assembled into a |
316 |
|
|
bilayer. Discussion of the length scales of the bilayer will follow in |
317 |
|
|
this section. However, it is interesting to note a key qualitative |
318 |
|
|
property of the system revealed by this snapshot, the tail chains are |
319 |
|
|
tilted to the bilayer normal. This is usually indicative of the gel |
320 |
|
|
($L_{\beta'}$) phase. In this system, the box size is probably too |
321 |
|
|
small for the bilayer to relax to the fluid ($P_{\alpha}$) phase. This |
322 |
|
|
demonstrates a need for an isobaric-isothermal ensemble where the box |
323 |
|
|
size may relax or expand to keep the system at a 1~atm. |
324 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
325 |
mmeineke |
108 |
The simulation was analyzed using the radial distribution function, |
326 |
|
|
$g(r)$, which has the form: |
327 |
mmeineke |
106 |
\begin{equation} |
328 |
mmeineke |
107 |
g(r) = \frac{V}{N_{\text{pairs}}}\langle \sum_{i} \sum_{j > i} |
329 |
mmeineke |
106 |
\delta(|\mathbf{r} - \mathbf{r}_{ij}|) \rangle |
330 |
|
|
\label{eq:gofr} |
331 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
332 |
|
|
Equation \ref{eq:gofr} gives us information about the spacing of two |
333 |
|
|
species as a function of radius. Essentially, if the observer were |
334 |
|
|
located at atom $i$ and were looking out in all directions, $g(r)$ |
335 |
|
|
shows the relative density of atom $j$ at any given radius, $r$, |
336 |
|
|
normalized by the expected density of atom $j$ at $r$. In a |
337 |
|
|
homogeneously mixed fluid, $g(r)$ will approach 1 at large $r$, as a |
338 |
|
|
fluid contains no long range structure to contribute peaks in the |
339 |
|
|
number density. |
340 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
341 |
mmeineke |
106 |
For the species containing dipoles, a second pair wise distribution |
342 |
|
|
function was used, $g_{\gamma}(r)$. It is of the form: |
343 |
|
|
\begin{equation} |
344 |
|
|
g_{\gamma}(r) = foobar |
345 |
|
|
\label{eq:gammaofr} |
346 |
|
|
\end{equation} |
347 |
|
|
Where $\gamma_{ij}$ is the angle between the dipole of atom $j$ with |
348 |
|
|
respect to the dipole of atom $i$. This correlation will vary between |
349 |
|
|
$+1$ and $-1$ when the two dipoles are perfectly aligned and |
350 |
|
|
anti-aligned respectively. This then gives us information about how |
351 |
|
|
directional species are aligned with each other as a function of |
352 |
|
|
distance. |
353 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
354 |
mmeineke |
106 |
Figure \ref{fig:5x5HHCorr} shows the two self correlation functions |
355 |
mmeineke |
108 |
for the Head groups of the lipids. The first peak in the $g(r)$ at |
356 |
|
|
4.03~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the nearest neighbor separation of the heads of |
357 |
|
|
two lipids. This corresponds to a maximum in the $g_{\gamma}(r)$ which |
358 |
|
|
means that the two neighbors on the same monolayer have their dipoles |
359 |
|
|
aligned. The broad peak at 6.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the inter-bilayer |
360 |
|
|
spacing. Here, there is a corresponding anti-alignment in the angular |
361 |
|
|
correlation. This means that although the dipoles are aligned on the |
362 |
|
|
same monolayer, the dipoles will orient themselves to be anti-aligned |
363 |
|
|
on a opposite facing monolayer. With this information, the two peaks |
364 |
|
|
at 7.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ and 7.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ are head groups on the same |
365 |
|
|
monolayer, and they are the second nearest neighbors to the head |
366 |
|
|
group. The peak is likely a split peak because of the small statistics |
367 |
|
|
of this system. Finally, the peak at 8.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ is likely the |
368 |
|
|
second nearest neighbor on the opposite monolayer because of the |
369 |
|
|
anti-alignment evident in the angular correlation. |
370 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
371 |
mmeineke |
108 |
Figure \ref{fig:5x5CCg} shows the radial distribution function for the |
372 |
|
|
$\text{CH}_2$ unified atoms. The spacing of the atoms along the tail |
373 |
|
|
chains accounts for the regularly spaced sharp peaks, but the broad |
374 |
|
|
underlying peak with its maximum at 4.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the |
375 |
|
|
distribution of chain-chain distances between two lipids. The final |
376 |
|
|
Figure, Figure \ref{fig:5x5HXCorr}, includes the correlation functions |
377 |
|
|
between the Head group and the SSD atoms. The peak in $g(r)$ at |
378 |
|
|
3.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the distance of closest approach between the two, |
379 |
|
|
and $g_{\gamma}(r)$ shows that the SSD atoms will align their dipoles |
380 |
|
|
with the head groups at close distance. However, as one increases the |
381 |
|
|
distance, the SSD atoms are no longer aligned. |
382 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
383 |
mmeineke |
108 |
\section{Second Simulation: 50 randomly oriented lipids in water} |
384 |
|
|
\label{sec:r50} |
385 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
386 |
mmeineke |
108 |
\subsection{Starting Configuration and Parameters} |
387 |
|
|
\label{sec:r50Start} |
388 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
389 |
mmeineke |
108 |
The second simulation consists of 50 single chained lipid molecules |
390 |
|
|
embedded in a sea of 1384 SSD waters (54\% wt.). The lipids in this |
391 |
|
|
simulation were started with random orientation and location (Figure |
392 |
|
|
\ref{fig:r50Start} ) The simulation box measured 34.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ x |
393 |
|
|
39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ with periodic boundary conditions |
394 |
|
|
imposed. The simulation was run in the NVE ensemble with an average |
395 |
|
|
temperature of 300~K. |
396 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
397 |
mmeineke |
108 |
\subsection{Results} |
398 |
|
|
\label{sec:r50Results} |
399 |
mmeineke |
102 |
|
400 |
mmeineke |
108 |
Figure \ref{fig:r50Final} is a snapshot of the system at 2.0~ns. Here |
401 |
|
|
we see that the system has already aggregated into several micelles |
402 |
|
|
and two are even starting to merge. It will be interesting to watch as |
403 |
|
|
this simulation continues what the total time scale for the micelle |
404 |
|
|
aggregation and bilayer formation will be. |
405 |
|
|
|
406 |
|
|
Figures \ref{fig:r50HHCorr}, \ref{fig:r50CCg}, and \ref{fig:r50} are |
407 |
|
|
the same correlation functions for the random 50 simulation as for the |
408 |
|
|
previous simulation of 25 lipids. What is most interesting to note, is |
409 |
|
|
the high degree of similarity between the correlation functions for |
410 |
|
|
each system. Even though the 25 lipid simulation formed a bilayer and |
411 |
|
|
the random 50 simulation is still in the micelle stage, both have a |
412 |
|
|
inter surface spacing of 6.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ with the same characteristic |
413 |
|
|
anti-alignment between surfaces. Not as surprising, is the consistency |
414 |
|
|
of the closest packing statistics between systems. Namely, a head-head |
415 |
|
|
closest approach distance of 4~$\mbox{\AA}$, and similar findings for |
416 |
|
|
the chain-chain and head-water distributions as in the 25 lipid |
417 |
|
|
system. |
418 |
|
|
|
419 |
mmeineke |
101 |
\section{Future Directions} |
420 |
|
|
|
421 |
mmeineke |
108 |
Current simulations indicate that our model is a feasible one, however |
422 |
|
|
improvements will need to be made to allow the system to simulate an |
423 |
|
|
isobaric-isothermal ensemble. This will allow the system to relax to |
424 |
|
|
an equilibrium configuration at room temperature and pressure allowing |
425 |
|
|
us to compare our model to experimental results. Also, we plan to |
426 |
|
|
parallelize the code for an even greater speedup. This will allow us |
427 |
|
|
to simulate the size systems needed to examine phenomena such as the |
428 |
|
|
ripple phase and drug molecule diffusion |
429 |
mmeineke |
101 |
|
430 |
mmeineke |
108 |
Once the work has completed on the simulation engine, we would then |
431 |
|
|
like to use it to explore phase diagram for our model. By |
432 |
|
|
characterizing how our model parameters affect the bilayer properties, |
433 |
|
|
we hope to tailor our model to more closely match real biological |
434 |
|
|
molecules. With this information, we then hope to incorporate |
435 |
|
|
biologically relevant molecules into the system and observe their |
436 |
|
|
transport properties across the membrane. |
437 |
|
|
|
438 |
|
|
\section{Acknowledgments} |
439 |
|
|
|
440 |
|
|
I would like to thank Dr. J.Daniel Gezelter for his guidance on this |
441 |
|
|
project. I would also like to acknowledge the following for their help |
442 |
|
|
and discussions during this project: Christopher Fennell, Charles |
443 |
|
|
Vardeman, Teng Lin, Megan Sprague, Patrick Conforti, and Dan Combest. |
444 |
|
|
|
445 |
|
|
\pagebreak |
446 |
|
|
\bibliographystyle{achemso} |
447 |
|
|
\bibliography{canidacy_paper} |
448 |
|
|
\end{document} |