ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/tengDissertation/Lipid.tex
Revision: 2941
Committed: Mon Jul 17 20:01:05 2006 UTC (17 years, 11 months ago) by tim
Content type: application/x-tex
File size: 21199 byte(s)
Log Message:
references corrections

File Contents

# Content
1 \chapter{\label{chapt:lipid}LIPID MODELING}
2
3 \section{\label{lipidSection:introduction}Introduction}
4
5 Under biologically relevant conditions, phospholipids are solvated
6 in aqueous solutions at a roughly 25:1 ratio. Solvation can have a
7 tremendous impact on transport phenomena in biological membranes
8 since it can affect the dynamics of ions and molecules that are
9 transferred across membranes. Studies suggest that because of the
10 directional hydrogen bonding ability of the lipid headgroups, a
11 small number of water molecules are strongly held around the
12 different parts of the headgroup and are oriented by them with
13 residence times for the first hydration shell being around 0.5 - 1
14 ns.\cite{Ho1992} In the second solvation shell, some water molecules
15 are weakly bound, but are still essential for determining the
16 properties of the system. Transport of various molecular species
17 into living cells is one of the major functions of membranes. A
18 thorough understanding of the underlying molecular mechanism for
19 solute diffusion is crucial to the further studies of other related
20 biological processes. All transport across cell membranes takes
21 place by one of two fundamental processes: Passive transport is
22 driven by bulk or inter-diffusion of the molecules being transported
23 or by membrane pores which facilitate crossing. Active transport
24 depends upon the expenditure of cellular energy in the form of ATP
25 hydrolysis. As the central processes of membrane assembly,
26 translocation of phospholipids across membrane bilayers requires the
27 hydrophilic head of the phospholipid to pass through the highly
28 hydrophobic interior of the membrane, and for the hydrophobic tails
29 to be exposed to the aqueous environment.\cite{Sasaki2004} A number
30 of studies indicate that the flipping of phospholipids occurs
31 rapidly in the eukaryotic endoplasmic reticulum and the bacterial
32 cytoplasmic membrane via a bi-directional, facilitated diffusion
33 process requiring no metabolic energy input. Another system of
34 interest is the distribution of sites occupied by inhaled
35 anesthetics in membrane. Although the physiological effects of
36 anesthetics have been extensively studied, the controversy over
37 their effects on lipid bilayers still continues. Recent deuterium
38 NMR measurements on halothane on POPC lipid bilayers suggest the
39 anesthetics are primarily located at the hydrocarbon chain
40 region.\cite{Baber1995} However, infrared spectroscopy experiments
41 suggest that halothane in DMPC lipid bilayers lives near the
42 membrane/water interface.\cite{Lieb1982}
43
44 Molecular dynamics simulations have proven to be a powerful tool for
45 studying the functions of biological systems, providing structural,
46 thermodynamic and dynamical information. Unfortunately, much of
47 biological interest happens on time and length scales well beyond
48 the range of current simulation technologies. Several schemes are
49 introduced in this chapter to overcome these difficulties.
50
51 \section{\label{lipidSection:model}Model and Methodology}
52
53 \subsection{\label{lipidSection:SSD}The Soft Sticky Dipole Water Model}
54
55 In a typical bilayer simulation, the dominant portion of the
56 computation time will be spent calculating water-water interactions.
57 As an efficient solvent model, the Soft Sticky Dipole (SSD) water
58 model\cite{Chandra1999,Fennell2004} is used as the explicit solvent
59 in this project. Unlike other water models which have partial
60 charges distributed throughout the whole molecule, the SSD water
61 model consists of a single site which is a Lennard-Jones interaction
62 site, as well as a point dipole. A tetrahedral potential is added to
63 correct for hydrogen bonding. The following equation describes the
64 interaction between two water molecules:
65 \begin{equation}
66 V_{SSD} = V_{LJ} (r_{ij} ) + V_{dp} (r_{ij} ,\Omega _i ,\Omega _j )
67 + V_{sticky} (r_{ij} ,\Omega _i ,\Omega _j )
68 \label{lipidSection:ssdEquation}
69 \end{equation}
70 where $r_{ij}$ is the vector between molecule $i$ and molecule $j$,
71 $\Omega _i$ and $\Omega _j$ are the orientational degrees of freedom
72 for molecule $i$ and molecule $j$ respectively. The potential terms
73 in Eq.~\ref{lipidSection:ssdEquation} are given by :
74 \begin{eqnarray}
75 V_{LJ} (r_{ij} ) &= &4\varepsilon _{ij} \left[ {\left(
76 {\frac{{\sigma _{ij} }}{{r_{ij} }}} \right)^{12} - \left(
77 {\frac{{\sigma _{ij}
78 }}{{r_{ij} }}} \right)^6 } \right], \\
79 V_{dp} (r_{ij} ,\Omega _i ,\Omega _j ) &= &
80 \frac{|\mu_i||\mu_j|}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}r_{ij}^{3}} \biggl[
81 \hat{u}_{i} \cdot \hat{u}_{j} - 3(\hat{u}_i \cdot \hat{\mathbf{r}}_{ij}) %
82 (\hat{u}_j \cdot \hat{\mathbf{r}}_{ij}) \biggr],\\
83 V_{sticky} (r_{ij} ,\Omega _i ,\Omega _j ) &=& v_0 [s(r_{ij}
84 )w(r_{ij} ,\Omega _i ,\Omega _j ) + s'(r_{ij} )w'(r_{ij} ,\Omega _i
85 ,\Omega _j )]
86 \end{eqnarray}
87 where $v_0$ is a strength parameter, $s$ and $s'$ are cubic
88 switching functions and $w$ and $w'$ are responsible for the
89 tetrahedral potential and the short-range correction to the dipolar
90 interaction respectively:
91 \begin{eqnarray}
92 w(r_{ij} ,\Omega _i ,\Omega _j )& = &\sin \theta _{ij} \sin 2\theta _{ij} \cos 2\phi _{ij}, \\
93 w'(r_{ij} ,\Omega _i ,\Omega _j )& = &(\cos \theta _{ij} - 0.6)^2 (\cos \theta _{ij} + 0.8)^2 -
94 w_0.
95 \end{eqnarray}
96 Here $\theta _{ij}$ and $\phi _{ij}$ are the spherical polar angles
97 representing relative orientations of molecule $j$ in the body-fixed
98 frame of molecule $i$. Although the dipole-dipole and sticky
99 interactions are more mathematically complicated than Coulomb
100 interactions, the number of pair interactions is reduced
101 dramatically both because the model only contains a single-point and
102 because of the "short range" nature of the more expensive
103 interaction.
104
105 \subsection{\label{lipidSection:coarseGrained}The Coarse-Grained Phospholipid Model}
106
107 Fig.~\ref{lipidFigure:coarseGrained} shows a schematic for our
108 coarse-grained phospholipid model. The lipid head group is modeled
109 by a linear rigid body which consists of three Lennard-Jones spheres
110 and a centrally located point-dipole. The backbone atoms in the
111 glycerol motif are modeled by Lennard-Jones spheres with dipoles.
112 Alkyl groups in hydrocarbon chains are replaced with unified
113 $\text{{\sc CH}}_2$ or $\text{{\sc CH}}_3$ atoms.
114 \begin{figure}
115 \centering
116 \includegraphics[width=3in]{coarse_grained.eps}
117 \caption[A representation of coarse-grained phospholipid model]{A
118 representation of coarse-grained phospholipid model. The lipid
119 headgroup consists of $\text{{\sc PO}}_4$ group (yellow),
120 $\text{{\sc NC}}_4$ group (blue) and a united C atom (gray) with a
121 dipole, while the glycerol backbone includes dipolar $\text{{\sc
122 CE}}$ (red) and $\text{{\sc CK}}$ (pink) groups. Alkyl groups in
123 hydrocarbon chains are simply represented by gray united atoms.}
124 \label{lipidFigure:coarseGrained}
125 \end{figure}
126
127 Accurate and efficient computation of electrostatics is one of the
128 most difficult tasks in molecular modeling. Traditionally, the
129 electrostatic interaction between two molecular species is
130 calculated as a sum of interactions between pairs of point charges,
131 using Coulomb's law:
132 \[
133 V = \sum\limits_{i = 1}^{N_A } {\sum\limits_{j = 1}^{N_B }
134 {\frac{{q_i q_j }}{{4\pi \varepsilon _0 r_{ij} }}} }
135 \]
136 where $N_A$ and $N_B$ are the number of point charges in the two
137 molecular species. Originally developed to study ionic crystals, the
138 Ewald sum method mathematically transforms this straightforward but
139 conditionally convergent summation into two more complicated but
140 rapidly convergent sums. One summation is carried out in reciprocal
141 space while the other is carried out in real space. An alternative
142 approach is the multipole expansion, which is based on electrostatic
143 moments, such as charge (monopole), dipole, quadrupole etc.
144
145 Here we consider a linear molecule which consists of two point
146 charges $\pm q$ located at $ ( \pm \frac{d}{2},0)$. The
147 electrostatic potential at point $P$ is given by:
148 \[
149 \frac{1}{{4\pi \varepsilon _0 }}\left( {\frac{{ - q}}{{r_ - }} +
150 \frac{{ + q}}{{r_ + }}} \right) = \frac{1}{{4\pi \varepsilon _0
151 }}\left( {\frac{{ - q}}{{\sqrt {r^2 + \frac{{d^2 }}{4} + rd\cos
152 \theta } }} + \frac{q}{{\sqrt {r^2 + \frac{{d^2 }}{4} - rd\cos
153 \theta } }}} \right)
154 \]
155 \begin{figure}
156 \centering
157 \includegraphics[width=3in]{charge_dipole.eps}
158 \caption[An illustration of split-dipole
159 approximation]{Electrostatic potential due to a linear molecule
160 comprising two point charges with opposite charges. }
161 \label{lipidFigure:chargeDipole}
162 \end{figure}
163 The basic assumption of the multipole expansion is $r \gg d$ , thus,
164 $\frac{{d^2 }}{4}$ inside the square root of the denominator is
165 neglected. This is a reasonable approximation in most cases.
166 Unfortunately, in our headgroup model, the distance of charge
167 separation $d$ (4.63 $\rm{\AA}$ in PC headgroup) may be comparable to $r$.
168 Nevertheless, we could still assume $ \cos \theta \approx 0$ in
169 the central region of the headgroup. Using Taylor expansion and
170 associating appropriate terms with electric moments will result in a
171 "split-dipole" approximation:
172 \[
173 V(r) = \frac{1}{{4\pi \varepsilon _0 }}\frac{{r\mu \cos \theta
174 }}{{R^3 }}
175 \]
176 where$R = \sqrt {r^2 + \frac{{d^2 }}{4}}$ Placing a dipole at point
177 $P$ and applying the same strategy, the interaction between two
178 split-dipoles is then given by:
179 \[
180 V_{sd} (r_{ij} ,\Omega _i ,\Omega _j ) = \frac{1}{{4\pi \varepsilon
181 _0 }}\left[ {\frac{{\mu _i \cdot \mu _j }}{{R_{ij}^3 }} -
182 \frac{{3\left( {\mu _i \cdot r_{ij} } \right)\left( {\mu _i \cdot
183 r_{ij} } \right)}}{{R_{ij}^5 }}} \right]
184 \]
185 where $\mu _i$ and $\mu _j$ are the dipole moment of molecule $i$
186 and molecule $j$ respectively, $r_{ij}$ is vector between molecule
187 $i$ and molecule $j$, and $R_{ij}$ is given by,
188 \[
189 R_{ij} = \sqrt {r_{ij}^2 + \frac{{d_i^2 }}{4} + \frac{{d_j^2
190 }}{4}}
191 \]
192 where $d_i$ and $d_j$ are the charge separation distance of dipole
193 and respectively. This approximation to the multipole expansion
194 maintains the fast fall-off of the multipole potentials but lacks
195 the normal divergences when two polar groups get close to one
196 another. The comparision between different electrostatic
197 approximation is shown in \ref{lipidFigure:splitDipole}. Due to the
198 divergence at the central region of the headgroup introduced by
199 dipole-dipole approximation, we have discovered that water molecules
200 are locked into the central region in the simulation. This artifact
201 can be corrected using split-dipole approximation or other accurate
202 methods.
203 \begin{figure}
204 \centering
205 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{split_dipole.eps}
206 \caption[Comparison between electrostatic
207 approximation]{Electrostatic potential map for two pairs of charges
208 with different alignments: (a) illustration of different alignments;
209 (b) charge-charge interaction; (c) dipole-dipole approximation; (d)
210 split-dipole approximation.} \label{lipidFigure:splitDipole}
211 \end{figure}
212
213 \section{\label{lipidSection:resultDiscussion}Results and Discussion}
214
215 \subsection{One Lipid in Sea of Water Molecules}
216
217 To tune our parameters without the inter-headgroup interactions,
218 atomistic models of one lipid (DMPC or DLPE) in sea of water
219 molecules (TIP3P) were built and studied using atomistic molecular
220 dynamics. The simulation was analyzed using a set of radial
221 distribution functions, which give the probability of finding a pair
222 of molecular species a distance apart, relative to the probability
223 expected for a completely random distribution function at the same
224 density
225 \begin{eqnarray}
226 g_{AB} (r) & = & \frac{1}{{\rho _B }}\frac{1}{{N_A }} <
227 \sum\limits_{i
228 \in A} {\sum\limits_{j \in B} {\delta (r - r_{ij} )} } >, \\
229 g_{AB} (r,\cos \theta ) & = & \frac{1}{{\rho _B }}\frac{1}{{N_A }} <
230 \sum\limits_{i \in A} {\sum\limits_{j \in B} {\delta (r - r_{ij} )}
231 } \delta (\cos \theta _{ij} - \cos \theta ) >.
232 \end{eqnarray}
233 From Fig.~\ref{lipidFigure:PCFAtom}, we can identify the first
234 solvation shell (3.5 $\rm{\AA}$) and the second solvation shell (5.0 \AA)
235 from both plots. However, the corresponding orientations are
236 different. In DLPE, water molecules prefer to sit around $\text{{\sc
237 NH}}_3$ group due to the hydrogen bonding. In contrast, because of
238 the hydrophobic effect of the $ {\rm{N(CH}}_{\rm{3}}
239 {\rm{)}}_{\rm{3}} $ group, the preferred position of water molecules
240 in DMPC is around the $\text{{\sc PO}}_4$ Group. When the water
241 molecules are far from the headgroup, the distribution of the two
242 angles should be uniform. The correlation close to center of the
243 headgroup dipole in both plots tells us that in the closely-bound
244 region, the dipoles of the water molecules are preferentially
245 anti-aligned with the dipole of the headgroup. When the water molecules
246 are far from the headgroup, the distribution of the two angles
247 should be uniform. The correlation close to center of the headgroup
248 dipole in both plots tell us that in the closely-bound region, the
249 dipoles of the water molecules are preferentially aligned with the
250 dipole of the headgroup.
251 \begin{figure}
252 \centering
253 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{g_atom.eps}
254 \caption[The pair correlation functions for atomistic models]{The
255 pair correlation functions for atomistic models: (a)$g(r,\cos \theta
256 )$ for DMPC; (b) $g(r,\cos \theta )$ for DLPE; (c)$g(r,\cos \omega
257 )$ for DMPC; (d)$g(r,\cos \omega )$ for DLPE; (e)$g(\cos \theta,\cos
258 \omega)$ for DMPC; (f)$g(\cos \theta,\cos \omega)$ for DMLPE.}
259 \label{lipidFigure:PCFAtom}
260 \end{figure}
261
262 The initial configurations of coarse-grained systems are constructed
263 from the previous atomistic ones. The parameters for the
264 coarse-grained model in Table~\ref{lipidTable:parameter} are
265 estimated and tuned using isothermal-isobaric molecular dynamics.
266 Pair distribution functions calculated from coarse-grained models
267 preserve the basic characteristics of the atomistic simulations. The
268 water density, measured in a head-group-fixed reference frame,
269 surrounding two phospholipid headgroups is shown in
270 Fig.~\ref{lipidFigure:PCFCoarse}. It is clear that the phosphate end
271 in DMPC and the amine end in DMPE are the two most heavily solvated
272 atoms.
273 \begin{figure}
274 \centering
275 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{g_coarse.eps}
276 \caption[The pair correlation functions for coarse-grained
277 models]{The pair correlation functions for coarse-grained models:
278 (a)$g(r,\cos \theta )$ for DMPC; (b) $g(r,\cos \theta )$ for DLPE.}
279 \label{lipidFigure:PCFCoarse}
280 \end{figure}
281 \begin{figure}
282 \centering
283 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{EWD_coarse.eps}
284 \caption[Excess water density of coarse-grained
285 phospholipids]{Excess water density of coarse-grained
286 phospholipids.} \label{lipidFigure:EWDCoarse}
287 \end{figure}
288
289 \begin{table}
290 \caption{THE PARAMETERS FOR COARSE-GRAINED PHOSPHOLIPIDS}
291 \label{lipidTable:parameter}
292 \begin{center}
293 \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
294 \hline
295 % after \\: \hline or \cline{col1-col2} \cline{col3-col4} ...
296 Atom type & Mass & $\sigma$ & $\epsilon$ & charge & Dipole \\
297 \hline
298 $\text{{\sc CH}}_2$ & 14.03 & 3.95 & 0.0914 & 0 & 0 \\
299 $\text{{\sc CH}}_3$ & 15.04 & 3.75 & 0.195 & 0 & 0 \\
300 $\text{{\sc CE}}$ & 28.01 & 3.427& 0.294 & 0 & 1.693 \\
301 $\text{{\sc CK}}$ & 28.01 & 3.592& 0.311 & 0 & 2.478 \\
302 $\text{{\sc PO}}_4$ & 108.995& 3.9 & 1.88 & -1& 0 \\
303 $\text{{\sc HDP}}$ & 14.03 & 4.0 & 0.13 & 0 & 0 \\
304 $\text{{\sc NC}}_4$ & 73.137 & 4.9 & 0.88 & +1& 0 \\
305 $\text{{\sc NH}}_3$ & 17.03 & 3.25 & 0.17 & +1& 0\\
306 \hline
307 \end{tabular}
308 \end{center}
309 \end{table}
310
311 \subsection{Bilayer Simulations Using Coarse-grained Model}
312
313 A bilayer system consisting of 128 DMPC lipids and 3655 water
314 molecules has been constructed from an atomistic coordinate file.
315 The MD simulation is performed at constant temperature, T = 300K,
316 and constant pressure, p = 1 atm, and consisted of an equilibration
317 period of 2 ns. During the equilibration period, the system was
318 initially simulated at constant volume for 1 ns. Once the system was
319 equilibrated at constant volume, the cell dimensions of the system
320 was relaxed by performing under NPT conditions using Nos\'{e}-Hoover
321 extended system isothermal-isobaric dynamics. After equilibration,
322 different properties were evaluated over a production run of 5 ns.
323 \begin{figure}
324 \centering
325 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{bilayer.eps}
326 \caption[Image of a coarse-grained bilayer system]{A coarse-grained
327 bilayer system consisting of 128 DMPC lipids and 3655 SSD water
328 molecules.}
329 \label{lipidFigure:bilayer}
330 \end{figure}
331
332 \subsubsection{\textbf{Electron Density Profile (EDP)}}
333
334 Assuming a gaussian distribution of electrons on each atomic center
335 with a variance estimated from the size of the van der Waals radius,
336 the EDPs which are proportional to the density profiles measured
337 along the bilayer normal obtained by x-ray scattering experiment,
338 can be expressed by\cite{Tu1995}
339 \begin{equation}
340 \rho _{x - ray} (z)dz \propto \sum\limits_{i = 1}^N {\frac{{n_i
341 }}{V}\frac{1}{{\sqrt {2\pi \sigma _i ^2 } }}e^{ - (z - z_i )^2
342 /2\sigma _i ^2 } dz},
343 \end{equation}
344 where $\sigma _i$ is the variance equal to the van der Waals radius,
345 $n_i$ is the atomic number of site $i$ and $V$ is the volume of the
346 slab between $z$ and $z+dz$ . The highest density of total EDP
347 appears at the position of lipid-water interface corresponding to
348 headgroup, glycerol, and carbonyl groups of the lipids and the
349 distribution of water locked near the head groups, while the lowest
350 electron density is in the hydrocarbon region. As a good
351 approximation to the thickness of the bilayer, the headgroup spacing
352 $d$ , is defined as the distance between two peaks in the electron
353 density profile, calculated from our simulations to be 34.1
354 $\rm{\AA}$. This value is close to the x-ray diffraction
355 experimental value 34.4 $\rm{\AA}$.\cite{Petrache1998}
356
357 \begin{figure}
358 \centering
359 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{electron_density.eps}
360 \caption[The density profile of the lipid bilayers]{Electron density
361 profile along the bilayer normal. The water density is shown in red,
362 the density due to the headgroups in green, the glycerol backbone in
363 brown, $\text{{\sc CH}}_2$ in yellow, $\text{{\sc CH}}_3$ in cyan,
364 and total density due to DMPC in blue.}
365 \label{lipidFigure:electronDensity}
366 \end{figure}
367
368 \subsubsection{\textbf{$\text{S}_{\text{{\sc cd}}}$ Order Parameter}}
369
370 Measuring deuterium order parameters by NMR is a useful technique to
371 study the orientation of hydrocarbon chains in phospholipids. The
372 order parameter tensor $S$ is defined by:
373 \begin{equation}
374 S_{ij} = \frac{1}{2} < 3\cos \theta _i \cos \theta _j - \delta
375 _{ij} >
376 \end{equation}
377 where $\theta _i$ is the angle between the $i$th molecular axis and
378 the bilayer normal ($z$ axis). The brackets denote an average over
379 time and lipid molecules. The molecular axes are defined:
380 \begin{itemize}
381 \item $\mathbf{\hat{z}}$ is the vector from $C_{n-1}$ to $C_{n+1}$.
382 \item $\mathbf{\hat{y}}$ is the vector that is perpendicular to $z$ and
383 in the plane through $C_{n-1}$, $C_{n}$, and $C_{n+1}$.
384 \item $\mathbf{\hat{x}}$ is the vector perpendicular to
385 $\mathbf{\hat{y}}$ and $\mathbf{\hat{z}}$.
386 \end{itemize}
387 In our coarse-grained model, although there are no explicit
388 hydrogens, the order parameter can still be written in terms of
389 carbon ordering at each point of the chain\cite{Egberts1988}
390 \begin{equation}
391 S_{ij} = \frac{1}{2} < 3\cos \theta _i \cos \theta _j - \delta
392 _{ij} >.
393 \end{equation}
394
395 Fig.~\ref{lipidFigure:Scd} shows the order parameter profile
396 calculated for our coarse-grained DMPC bilayer system at 300K as
397 well as the experimental data.\cite{Tu1995} The fact that
398 $\text{S}_{\text{{\sc cd}}}$ order parameters calculated from
399 simulation are higher than the experimental ones is ascribed to the
400 assumption of the locations of implicit hydrogen atoms which are
401 fixed in coarse-grained models at positions relative to the CC
402 vector.
403
404 \begin{figure}
405 \centering
406 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{scd.eps}
407 \caption[$\text{S}_{\text{{\sc cd}}}$ order parameter]{A comparison
408 of $|\text{S}_{\text{{\sc cd}}}|$ between coarse-grained model
409 (blue) and DMPC\cite{Petrache2000} (black) near 300~K.}
410 \label{lipidFigure:Scd}
411 \end{figure}
412
413 %\subsection{Bilayer Simulations Using Gay-Berne Ellipsoid Model}
414
415 \section{\label{lipidSection:Conclusion}Conclusion}
416
417 Atomistic simulations have been used in this study to determine the
418 preferred orientation and location of water molecules relative to
419 the location and orientation of the PC and PE lipid headgroups.
420 Based on the results from our all-atom simulations, we developed a
421 simple coarse-grained model which captures the essential features of
422 the headgroup solvation which is crucial to transport process in
423 membrane system. In addition, the model has been explored in a
424 bilayer system was shown to have reasonable electron density
425 profiles, $\text{S}_{\text{{\sc cd}}}$ order parameter and other
426 structural properties. The accuracy of this model is achieved by
427 matching atomistic result. It is also easy to represent different
428 phospholipids by changing a few parameters of the model. Another
429 important characteristic of this model distinguishing itself from
430 other models\cite{Goetz1998,Marrink2004} is the computational speed
431 gained by introducing a short range electrostatic approximation.
432 Further studies of this system using z-constraint method could
433 extend the time length of the simulations to study transport
434 phenomena in large-scale membrane systems.