ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/matt_papers/canidacy_paper/canidacy_paper.tex
(Generate patch)

Comparing trunk/matt_papers/canidacy_paper/canidacy_paper.tex (file contents):
Revision 106 by mmeineke, Wed Sep 11 03:26:01 2002 UTC vs.
Revision 111 by mmeineke, Wed Sep 18 15:53:30 2002 UTC

# Line 5 | Line 5
5   \usepackage{floatflt}
6   \usepackage{amsmath}
7   \usepackage{amssymb}
8 + \usepackage{subfigure}
9 + \usepackage{palatino}
10   \usepackage[ref]{overcite}
11  
12  
# Line 36 | Line 38 | atoms,and the head group of the lipid will typically c
38  
39   Simulations of phospholipid bilayers are, by necessity, quite
40   complex. The lipid molecules are large molecules containing many
41 < atoms,and the head group of the lipid will typically contain charge
41 > atoms, and the head group of the lipid will typically contain charge
42   separated ions which set up a large dipole within the molecule. Adding
43   to the complexity are the number of water molecules needed to properly
44 < solvate the lipid bilayer. Because of these factors, many current
45 < simulations are limited in both length and time scale due to to the
46 < sheer number of calculations performed at every time step and the
47 < lifetime of the researcher. A typical
44 > solvate the lipid bilayer, typically 25 water molecules for every
45 > lipid molecule. Because of these factors, many current simulations are
46 > limited in both length and time scale due to to the sheer number of
47 > calculations performed at every time step and the lifetime of the
48 > researcher. A typical
49   simulation\cite{saiz02,lindahl00,venable00,Marrink01} will have around
50   64 phospholipids forming a bilayer approximately 40~$\mbox{\AA}$ by
51   50~$\mbox{\AA}$ with roughly 25 waters for every lipid. This means
52   there are on the order of 8,000 atoms needed to simulate these systems
53 < and the trajectories in turn are integrated for times up to 10 ns.
53 > and the trajectories are integrated for times up to 10 ns.
54  
55   These limitations make it difficult to study certain biologically
56   interesting phenomena that don't fit within the short time and length
57 < scale requirements. One such phenomena is the existence of the ripple
57 > scale requirements. One such phenomenon is the existence of the ripple
58   phase ($P_{\beta'}$) of the bilayer between the gel phase
59   ($L_{\beta'}$) and the fluid phase ($L_{\alpha}$). The $P_{\beta'}$
60   phase has been shown to have a ripple period of
# Line 60 | Line 63 | these numbers are reasonable.
63   roughly 25 waters for every lipid to fully solvate the bilayer. With
64   the large number of atoms involved in a simulation of this magnitude,
65   steps \emph{must} be taken to simplify the system to the point where
66 < these numbers are reasonable.
66 > the numbers of atoms becomes reasonable.
67  
68   Another system of interest would be drug molecule diffusion through
69 < the membrane. Due to the fluid like properties of a lipid membrane,
69 > the membrane. Due to the fluid-like properties of a lipid membrane,
70   not all diffusion takes place at membrane channels. It is of interest
71   to study certain molecules that may incorporate themselves directly
72   into the membrane. These molecules may then have an appreciable
73   waiting time (on the order of nanoseconds) within the
74   bilayer. Simulation of such a long time scale again requires
75   simplification of the system in order to lower the number of
76 < calculations needed at each time step.
76 > calculations needed at each time step or to increase the length of
77 > each time step.
78  
79  
80   \section{Methodology}
# Line 79 | Line 83 | computational cost of the system. This is done by a co
83  
84   The length scale simplifications are aimed at increasing the number of
85   molecules that can be simulated without drastically increasing the
86 < computational cost of the system. This is done by a combination of
87 < substituting less expensive interactions for expensive ones and
88 < decreasing the number of interaction sites per molecule. Namely,
89 < point charge distributions are replaced with dipoles, and unified atoms are
90 < used in place of water, phospholipid head groups, and alkyl groups.
86 > computational cost of the simulation. This is done through a
87 > combination of substituting less expensive interactions for expensive
88 > ones and decreasing the number of interaction sites per
89 > molecule. Namely, groups of point charges are replaced with single
90 > point-dipoles, and unified atoms are used in place of water,
91 > phospholipid head groups, and alkyl groups.
92  
93 < The replacement of charge distributions with dipoles allows us to
94 < replace an interaction that has a relatively long range,
95 < $(\frac{1}{r})$, for the coulomb potential, with that of a relatively
96 < short range, $(\frac{1}{r^{3}})$, for dipole - dipole
97 < potentials. Combined with a computational simplification algorithm
98 < such as a Verlet neighbor list,\cite{allen87:csl} this should give
99 < computational scaling by $N$. This is in comparison to the Ewald
100 < sum\cite{leach01:mm} needed to compute the coulomb interactions, which
101 < scales at best by $N \ln N$.
93 > The replacement of charges with dipoles allows us to replace an
94 > interaction that has a relatively long range ($\frac{1}{r}$ for the
95 > coulomb potential) with that of a relatively short range
96 > ($\frac{1}{r^{3}}$ for dipole - dipole potentials). Combined with
97 > Verlet neighbor lists,\cite{allen87:csl} this should result in an
98 > algorithm which scales linearly with increasing system size. This is
99 > in comparison to the Ewald sum\cite{leach01:mm} needed to compute
100 > periodic replicas of the coulomb interactions, which scales at
101 > best\cite{darden93:pme} by $N \ln N$.
102  
103   The second step taken to simplify the number of calculations is to
104   incorporate unified models for groups of atoms. In the case of water,
105   we use the soft sticky dipole (SSD) model developed by
106 < Ichiye\cite{Liu96} (Section~\ref{sec:ssdModel}). For the phospholipids, a
107 < unified head atom with a dipole will replace the atoms in the head
108 < group, while unified $\text{CH}_2$ and $\text{CH}_3$ atoms will
109 < replace the alkyl units in the tails (Section~\ref{sec:lipidModel}).
106 > Ichiye\cite{liu96:new_model,liu96:monte_carlo,chandra99:ssd_md}
107 > (Section~\ref{sec:ssdModel}). For the phospholipids, a unified head
108 > atom with a dipole will replace the atoms in the head group, while
109 > unified $\text{CH}_2$ and $\text{CH}_3$ atoms will replace the alkyl
110 > units in the tails (Section~\ref{sec:lipidModel}). This model is
111 > similar in practice to that of Lipowsky and Goetz\cite{goetz98}, where
112 > the whole system is reduced to attractive and repulsive Lennard-Jones
113 > spheres. However, our model gives a greater level of detail to each
114 > unified molecule, namely through dipole, bend, and torsion
115 > interactions.
116  
117   The time scale simplifications are introduced so that we can take
118   longer time steps. By increasing the size of the time steps taken by
119 < the simulation, we are able to integrate the simulation trajectory
120 < with fewer calculations. However, care must be taken that any
121 < simplifications used, still conserve the total energy of the
119 > the simulation, we are able to integrate a given length of time using
120 > fewer calculations. However, care must be taken that any
121 > simplifications used still conserve the total energy of the
122   simulation. In practice, this means taking steps small enough to
123   resolve all motion in the system without accidently moving an object
124   too far along a repulsive energy surface before it feels the effect of
# Line 121 | Line 132 | conserve energy when bonds lengths are allowed to osci
132   energy. This is in contrast to the 1 fs time step typically needed to
133   conserve energy when bonds lengths are allowed to oscillate.
134  
135 < \subsection{The Soft Sticky Water Model}
135 > \subsection{The Soft Sticky Dipole Water Model}
136   \label{sec:ssdModel}
137  
138 < %\begin{floatingfigure}{55mm}
139 < %\includegraphics[width=45mm]{ssd.epsi}
140 < %\caption{The SSD model with the oxygen and hydrogen atoms drawn in for reference. \vspace{5mm}}
141 < %\label{fig:ssdModel}
142 < %\end{floatingfigure}
138 > \begin{figure}
139 > \centering
140 > \includegraphics[width=50mm]{ssd.epsi}
141 > \caption{The SSD model with the oxygen and hydrogen atoms drawn in for reference.}
142 > \label{fig:ssdModel}
143 > \end{figure}
144  
145   The water model used in our simulations is a modified soft
146   Stockmayer-sphere model.\cite{stevens95} Like the Stockmayer-sphere, the SSD
147 < model\cite{Liu96} consists of a Lennard-Jones interaction site and a
147 > model consists of a Lennard-Jones interaction site and a
148   dipole both located at the water's center of mass (Figure
149   \ref{fig:ssdModel}). However, the SSD model extends this by adding a
150   tetrahedral potential to correct for hydrogen bonding.
151  
152 < The SSD water potential is then given by the following equation:
152 > The SSD water potential for a pair of water molecules is then given by
153 > the following equation:
154   \begin{equation}
155   V_{\text{SSD}} = V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{i\!j}) + V_{\text{dp}}(\mathbf{r}_{i\!j},
156          \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})
# Line 145 | Line 158 | $V_{\text{LJ}}$ is the Lennard-Jones potential:
158          \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})
159   \label{eq:ssdTotPot}
160   \end{equation}
161 < $V_{\text{LJ}}$ is the Lennard-Jones potential:
161 > where $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the vector between molecules $i$ and $j$,
162 > and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$ and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_j$ are the
163 > Euler angles of molecule $i$ or $j$ respectively. $V_{\text{LJ}}$ is
164 > the Lennard-Jones potential:
165   \begin{equation}
166   V_{\text{LJ}} =
167          4\epsilon_{ij} \biggl[
# Line 154 | Line 170 | where $r_{ij}$ is the distance between two $ij$ pairs,
170          \biggr]
171   \label{eq:lennardJonesPot}
172   \end{equation}
173 < where $r_{ij}$ is the distance between two $ij$ pairs, $\sigma_{ij}$
174 < scales the length of the iteraction, and $\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the
175 < energy of the potential. For SSD, $\sigma_{\text{SSD}} = 3.051 \mbox{
173 > where $\sigma_{ij}$ scales the length of the interaction, and
174 > $\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the energy of the potential. For SSD,
175 > $\sigma_{\text{SSD}} = 3.051 \mbox{
176   \AA}$ and $\epsilon_{\text{SSD}} = 0.152\text{ kcal/mol}$.
177   $V_{\text{dp}}$ is the dipole potential:
178   \begin{equation}
# Line 169 | Line 185 | where $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the vector between $i$ and
185                  {r^{5}_{ij}} \biggr]
186   \label{eq:dipolePot}
187   \end{equation}
188 < where $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the vector between $i$ and $j$,
189 < $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ is the orientation of the species, and
190 < $\boldsymbol{\mu}$ is the dipole vector. The SSD model specifies a dipole
191 < magnitude of 2.35~D for water.
188 > where $\boldsymbol{\mu}_i$ is the dipole vector of molecule $i$,
189 > $\boldsymbol{\mu}_i$ points along the z-axis in the body fixed
190 > frame. This frame is then oriented in space by the Euler angles,
191 > $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$. The SSD model specifies a dipole magnitude of
192 > 2.35~D for water.
193  
194 < The hydrogen bonding of the model is governed by the $V_{\text{sp}}$
194 > The hydrogen bonding is modeled by the $V_{\text{sp}}$
195   term of the potential. Its form is as follows:
196   \begin{equation}
197   V_{\text{sp}}(\mathbf{r}_{i\!j},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},
# Line 208 | Line 225 | polar coordinates of the position of sphere $j$ in the
225   \label{eq:spCorrection}
226   \end{equation}
227   The angles $\theta_{ij}$ and $\phi_{ij}$ are defined by the spherical
228 < polar coordinates of the position of sphere $j$ in the reference frame
229 < fixed on sphere $i$ with the z-axis aligned with the dipole moment.
228 > coordinates of the position of molecule $j$ in the reference frame
229 > fixed on molecule $i$ with the z-axis aligned with the dipole moment.
230   The correction
231   $w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$
232   is needed because
233   $w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$
234   vanishes when $\theta_{ij}$ is $0^\circ$ or $180^\circ$.
235  
236 < Finally, the sticky potential is scaled by a cutoff function,
237 < $s(r_{ij})$ that scales smoothly between 0 and 1. It is represented
236 > Finally, the sticky potential is scaled by a switching function,
237 > $s(r_{ij})$, that scales smoothly between 0 and 1. It is represented
238   by:
239   \begin{equation}
240   s(r_{ij}) =
# Line 232 | Line 249 | model is still computationaly inexpensive. This is due
249   \end{equation}
250  
251   Despite the apparent complexity of Equation \ref{eq:spPot}, the SSD
252 < model is still computationaly inexpensive. This is due to Equation
253 < \ref{eq:spCutoff}. With $r_{L}$ being 2.75~$\mbox\AA}$ and $r_{U}$
252 > model is still computationally inexpensive. This is due to Equation
253 > \ref{eq:spCutoff}. With $r_{L}$ being 2.75~$\mbox{\AA}$ and $r_{U}$
254   being equal to either 3.35~$\mbox{\AA}$ for $s(r_{ij})$ or
255   4.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ for $s'(r_{ij})$, the sticky potential is only active
256 < over an extremly short range, and then only with other SSD
257 < molecules. Therefore, it's predominant interaction is through it's
258 < point dipole and Lennard-Jones sphere.
256 > over an extremely short range, and then only with other SSD
257 > molecules. Therefore, it's predominant interaction is through the
258 > point dipole and the Lennard-Jones sphere. Of these, only the dipole
259 > interaction can be considered ``long-range''.
260  
261   \subsection{The Phospholipid Model}
262   \label{sec:lipidModel}
263  
264 < \begin{floatingfigure}{90mm}
264 > \begin{figure}
265 > \centering
266   \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{lipidModel.epsi}
267 < \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}}
267 > \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.}
268   \label{fig:lipidModel}
269 < \end{floatingfigure}
269 > \end{figure}
270  
271   The lipid molecules in our simulations are unified atom models. Figure
272 < \ref{fig:lipidModel} shows a template drawing for one of our
273 < lipids. The Head group of the phospholipid is replaced by a single
272 > \ref{fig:lipidModel} shows a schematic for one of our
273 > lipids. The head group of the phospholipid is replaced by a single
274   Lennard-Jones sphere with a freely oriented dipole placed at it's
275 < center. The magnitude of it's dipole moment is 20.6 D. The tail atoms
276 < are unified $\text{CH}_2$ and $\text{CH}_3$ atoms and are also modeled
277 < as Lennard-Jones spheres. The total potential for the lipid is
278 < represented by Equation \ref{eq:lipidModelPot}.
275 > center. The magnitude of the dipole moment is 20.6 D, chosen to match
276 > that of DPPC\cite{Cevc87}. The tail atoms are unified $\text{CH}_2$
277 > and $\text{CH}_3$ atoms and are also modeled as Lennard-Jones
278 > spheres. The total potential for the lipid is represented by Equation
279 > \ref{eq:lipidModelPot}.
280  
281   \begin{equation}
282 < V_{\mbox{lipid}} = \overbrace{%
283 <        V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{ijk}) +%
284 <        V_{\text{tors.}}(\phi_{ijkl})}^{bonded}
285 <        + \overbrace{%
286 <        V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{i\!j}) +
287 <        V_{\text{dp}}(r_{i\!j},\Omega_{i},\Omega_{j})%
268 <        }^{non-bonded}
282 > V_{\text{lipid}} =
283 >        \sum_{i}V_{i}^{\text{internal}}
284 >        + \sum_i \sum_{j>i} \sum_{\alpha_i}
285 >        \sum_{\beta_j}
286 >        V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{\alpha_{i}\beta_{j}})
287 >        +\sum_i\sum_{j>i}V_{\text{dp}}(r_{1_i,1_j},\Omega_{1_i},\Omega_{1_j})
288   \label{eq:lipidModelPot}
289   \end{equation}
290 + where,
291 + \begin{equation}
292 + V_{i}^{\text{internal}} =
293 +        \sum_{\text{bends}}V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma})
294 +        + \sum_{\text{torsions}}V_{\text{tors.}}(\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta})
295 +        + \sum_{\alpha_i} \sum_{\beta_i > \alpha_i}V_{\text{LJ}}
296 +                (r_{\alpha_i \beta_i})
297 + \label{eq:lipidModelPotInternal}
298 + \end{equation}
299  
300   The non-bonded interactions, $V_{\text{LJ}}$ and $V_{\text{dp}}$, are
301   the Lennard-Jones and dipole-dipole interactions respectively. For the
302 < non-bonded potentials, only the bend and the torsional potentials are
302 > bonded potentials, only the bend and the torsional potentials are
303   calculated. The bond potential is not calculated, and the bond lengths
304   are constrained via RATTLE.\cite{leach01:mm} The bend potential is of
305   the form:
306   \begin{equation}
307 < V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{ijk}) = k_{\theta}\frac{(\theta_{ijk} - \theta_0)^2}{2}
307 > V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma})
308 >        = k_{\theta}\frac{(\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma} - \theta_0)^2}{2}
309   \label{eq:bendPot}
310   \end{equation}
311   Where $k_{\theta}$ sets the stiffness of the bend potential, and $\theta_0$
312   sets the equilibrium bend angle. The torsion potential was given by:
313   \begin{equation}
314 < V_{\text{tors.}}(\phi_{ijkl})= c_1[1+\cos\phi_{ijkl}]
315 <        + c_2 [1 - \cos(2\phi_{ijkl})] + c_3[1 + \cos(3\phi_{ijkl})]
314 > V_{\text{tors.}}(\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta})
315 >        = c_1 [1+\cos\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta}]
316 >        + c_2 [1 - \cos(2\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta})]
317 >        + c_3 [1 + \cos(3\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta})]
318   \label{eq:torsPot}
319   \end{equation}
320   All parameters for bonded and non-bonded potentials in the tail atoms
# Line 300 | Line 331 | Our first simulation was an array of 25 single chained
331   \subsection{Starting Configuration and Parameters}
332   \label{sec:5x5Start}
333  
334 < Our first simulation was an array of 25 single chained lipids in a sea
334 > \begin{figure}
335 > \centering
336 > \mbox{
337 >        \subfigure[The starting configuration of the 25 lipid system.]{%
338 >                \label{fig:5x5Start}%
339 >                \includegraphics[width=70mm]{5x5-initial.eps}}\quad
340 >        \subfigure[The 25 lipid system at 6.27~ns.]{%
341 >                \label{fig:5x5Final}%
342 >                \includegraphics[width=70mm]{5x5-6.27ns.eps}}
343 > }
344 > \caption{Snapshots of the 25 lipid system. Carbon tail atoms are drawn in gray, the phospholipid head groups are colored blue, and the waters are scaled down for visibility. A box has been drawn around the periodic image.}
345 > \end{figure}
346 >
347 > Our first simulation is an array of 25 single chain lipids in a sea
348   of water (Figure \ref{fig:5x5Start}). The total number of water
349 < molecules was 1386, giving a final of water concentration of 70\%
350 < wt. The simulation box measured 34.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$
351 < x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ with periodic boundary conditions invoked. The
352 < system was simulated in the micro-canonical (NVE) ensemble with an
349 > molecules is 1386, giving a final of water concentration of 70\%
350 > wt. The simulation box measures 34.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$
351 > x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ with periodic boundary conditions imposed. The
352 > system is simulated in the micro-canonical (NVE) ensemble with an
353   average temperature of 300~K.
354  
355   \subsection{Results}
356   \label{sec:5x5Results}
357  
358 + \begin{figure}
359 + \centering
360 +        \subfigure[The self correlation of the phospholipid head groups. $g(r)$ is on the top, the bottom chart is the $g_\gamma(r)$.]{%
361 +                \label{fig:5x5HHCorr}%
362 +                \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{all5x5-HEAD-HEAD.epsi}%
363 +                }
364 +        \subfigure[The $g(r)$ for the $\text{CH}_2$ molecules in the chain tails]{%
365 +                \label{fig:5x5CCg}%
366 +                \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{all5x5-CH2-CH2.epsi}}
367 +        \subfigure%
368 +        [The pair correlations between the head groups and the water]{%
369 +                \label{fig:5x5HXCorr}%
370 +                \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{all5x5-HEAD-X.epsi}}
371 + \caption{The pair correlation functions for the 25 lipid system}
372 + \end{figure}
373 +                
374 +
375   Figure \ref{fig:5x5Final} shows a snapshot of the system at
376 < 3.6~ns. Here it is exciting to note that the system has spontaneously
377 < self assembled into a bilayer. Discussion of the length scales of the
378 < bilayer will follow in this section. However, it is interesting to
379 < note several qualitative properties of the system revealed by this
380 < snapshot. First, is how the tail chains are tilted to the bilayer
381 < normal. This is usually indicative of the gel ($L_{\beta'}$)
382 < phase. Likely, the box size is too small for the bilayer to relax to
383 < the fluid ($P_{\alpha}$ phase. Showing the need for a constant
384 < pressure simulation versus the constant volume of the current
324 < ensemble.
376 > 6.27~ns. Note that the system has spontaneously self assembled into a
377 > bilayer. Discussion of the length scales of the bilayer will follow in
378 > this section. However, it is interesting to note a key qualitative
379 > property of the system revealed by this snapshot, the tail chains are
380 > tilted to the bilayer normal. This is usually indicative of the gel
381 > ($L_{\beta'}$) phase. In this system, the box size is probably too
382 > small for the bilayer to relax to the fluid ($P_{\alpha}$) phase. This
383 > demonstrates a need for an isobaric-isothermal ensemble where the box
384 > size may relax or expand to keep the system at 1~atm.
385  
386 < The trajectory of the simulation was analyzed using the pair-wise
387 < radial distribution function, $g(r)$, which has the form:
386 > The simulation was analyzed using the radial distribution function,
387 > $g(r)$, which has the form:
388   \begin{equation}
389 < g(r) = \frac{V}{N_{\text{pairs}}}\langle \sum_{i} \sum_{j \neq i}
389 > g(r) = \frac{V}{N_{\text{pairs}}}\langle \sum_{i} \sum_{j > i}
390          \delta(|\mathbf{r} - \mathbf{r}_{ij}|) \rangle
391   \label{eq:gofr}
392   \end{equation}
# Line 339 | Line 399 | For the species containing dipoles, a second pair wise
399   fluid contains no long range structure to contribute peaks in the
400   number density.
401  
402 < For the species containing dipoles, a second pair wise distribution
402 > For the species containing dipoles, a second pair-wise distribution
403   function was used, $g_{\gamma}(r)$. It is of the form:
404   \begin{equation}
405 < g_{\gamma}(r) = foobar
405 > g_{\gamma}(r) = \langle \sum_i \sum_{j>i}
406 >        (\cos \gamma_{ij}) \delta(| \mathbf{r} - \mathbf{r}_{ij}|) \rangle
407   \label{eq:gammaofr}
408   \end{equation}
409   Where $\gamma_{ij}$ is the angle between the dipole of atom $j$ with
# Line 353 | Line 414 | for the Head groups of the lipids. The first peak at 4
414   distance.
415  
416   Figure \ref{fig:5x5HHCorr} shows the two self correlation functions
417 < for the Head groups of the lipids. The first peak at 4.03~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the
418 < nearest neighbor separation of the heads of two lipids.
417 > for the Head groups of the lipids. The first peak in the $g(r)$ at
418 > 4.03~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the nearest neighbor separation of the heads of
419 > two lipids. This corresponds to a maximum in the $g_{\gamma}(r)$ which
420 > means that the two neighbors on the same leaf have their dipoles
421 > aligned. The broad peak at 6.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the inter-surface
422 > spacing. Here, there is a corresponding anti-alignment in the angular
423 > correlation. This means that although the dipoles are aligned on the
424 > same monolayer, the dipoles will orient themselves to be anti-aligned
425 > on a opposite facing monolayer. With this information, the two peaks
426 > at 7.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ and 7.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ are head groups on the same
427 > monolayer, and they are the second nearest neighbors to the head
428 > group. The peak is likely a split peak because of the small statistics
429 > of this system. Finally, the peak at 8.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ is likely the
430 > second nearest neighbor on the opposite monolayer because of the
431 > anti-alignment evident in the angular correlation.
432  
433 + Figure \ref{fig:5x5CCg} shows the radial distribution function for the
434 + $\text{CH}_2$ unified atoms. The spacing of the atoms along the tail
435 + chains accounts for the regularly spaced sharp peaks, but the broad
436 + underlying peak with its maximum at 4.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the
437 + distribution of chain-chain distances between two lipids. The final
438 + Figure, Figure \ref{fig:5x5HXCorr}, includes the correlation functions
439 + between the Head group and the SSD atoms. The peak in $g(r)$ at
440 + 3.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the distance of closest approach between the two,
441 + and $g_{\gamma}(r)$ shows that the SSD atoms will align their dipoles
442 + with the head groups at close distance. However, as one increases the
443 + distance, the SSD atoms are no longer aligned.
444  
445 + \section{Second Simulation: 50 randomly oriented lipids in water}
446 + \label{sec:r50}
447  
448 + \subsection{Starting Configuration and Parameters}
449 + \label{sec:r50Start}
450  
451 < \section{Second Simulation: 50 randomly oriented lipids in water}
451 > \begin{figure}
452 > \centering
453 > \mbox{
454 >        \subfigure[The starting configuration of the 50 lipid system.]{%
455 >                \label{fig:r50Start}%
456 >                \includegraphics[width=70mm]{r50-initial.eps}}\quad    
457 >        \subfigure[The 50 lipid system at 2.21~ns]{%
458 >                \label{fig:r50Final}%  
459 >                \includegraphics[width=70mm]{r50-2.21ns.eps}}
460 > }
461 > \caption{Snapshots of the 50 lipid system}
462 > \end{figure}
463  
464 < the second simulation
464 > The second simulation consists of 50 single chained lipid molecules
465 > embedded in a sea of 1384 SSD waters (54\% wt.). The lipids in this
466 > simulation were started with random orientation and location (Figure
467 > \ref{fig:r50Start} ) The simulation box measured 26.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ x
468 > 26.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ x 108.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ with periodic boundary conditions
469 > imposed. The simulation was run in the NVE ensemble with an average
470 > temperature of 300~K.
471  
472 + \subsection{Results}
473 + \label{sec:r50Results}
474 +
475 + \begin{figure}
476 + \centering
477 +        \subfigure[The self correlation of the phospholipid head groups.]{%
478 +                \label{fig:r50HHCorr}%
479 +                \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{r50-HEAD-HEAD.epsi}%
480 +                }
481 +        \subfigure%
482 +        [The pair correlations between the head groups and the water]{%
483 +                \label{fig:r50HXCorr}%
484 +                \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{r50-HEAD-X.epsi}%
485 +                }
486 +        \subfigure[The $g(r)$ for the $\text{CH}_2$ molecules in the chain tails]{%
487 +                \label{fig:r50CCg}%
488 +                \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{r50-CH2-CH2.epsi}}
489 +
490 + \caption{The pair correlation functions for the 50 lipid system}
491 + \end{figure}
492 +
493 + Figure \ref{fig:r50Final} is a snapshot of the system at 2.21~ns. Here
494 + we see that the system has already aggregated into several micelles
495 + and two are even starting to merge. It will be interesting to watch as
496 + this simulation continues what the total time scale for the micelle
497 + aggregation and bilayer formation will be, in Marrink's\cite{Marrink01}
498 + simulation, bilayer aggregation is predicted to occur around 10~ns.
499 +
500 + Figures \ref{fig:r50HHCorr}, \ref{fig:r50HXCorr}, and \ref{fig:r50CCg} are
501 + the same correlation functions for the random 50 simulation as for the
502 + previous simulation of 25 lipids. What is most interesting to note, is
503 + the high degree of similarity between the correlation functions
504 + between systems. Even though the 25 lipid simulation formed a bilayer
505 + and the random 50 simulation is still in the micelle stage, both have
506 + an inter-surface spacing of 6.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ with the same
507 + characteristic anti-alignment between surfaces. Not as surprising, is
508 + the consistency of the closest packing statistics between
509 + systems. Namely, a head-head closest approach distance of
510 + 4~$\mbox{\AA}$, and similar findings for the chain-chain and
511 + head-water distributions as in the 25 lipid system.
512 +
513   \section{Future Directions}
514  
515 + Current simulations indicate that our model is a feasible one, however
516 + improvements will need to be made to allow the system to be simulated
517 + in the isobaric-isothermal ensemble. This will relax the system to an
518 + equilibrium configuration at room temperature and pressure allowing us
519 + to compare our model to experimental results. Also, we are in the
520 + process of parallelizing the code for an even greater speedup. This
521 + will allow us to simulate large enough systems to examine phenomena
522 + such as the ripple phase and drug molecule diffusion
523  
524 < \pagebreak
525 < \bibliographystyle{achemso}
526 < \bibliography{canidacy_paper} \end{document}
524 > Once the work has been completed on the simulation engine, we will
525 > then use it to explore the phase diagram for our model. By
526 > characterizing how our model parameters affect the bilayer properties,
527 > we will tailor our model to more closely match real biological
528 > molecules. With this information, we will then incorporate
529 > biologically relevant molecules into the system and observe their
530 > transport properties across the membrane.
531 >
532 > \section{Acknowledgments}
533 >
534 > I would like to thank Dr.~J.~Daniel Gezelter for his guidance on this
535 > project. I would also like to acknowledge the following for their help
536 > and discussions during this project: Christopher Fennell, Charles
537 > Vardeman, Teng Lin, Megan Sprague, Patrick Conforti, and Dan
538 > Combest. Funding for this project came from the National Science
539 > Foundation.
540 >
541 > \pagebreak
542 > \bibliographystyle{achemso}
543 > \bibliography{canidacy_paper}
544 > \end{document}

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines