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

Comparing trunk/xDissertation/md.tex (file contents):
Revision 3336 by xsun, Wed Jan 30 16:01:02 2008 UTC vs.
Revision 3370 by xsun, Fri Mar 14 21:38:07 2008 UTC

# Line 1 | Line 1
1 < \chapter{\label{chap:md}MOLECULAR DYNAMICS}
1 > \chapter{\label{chap:md}DIPOLAR ORDERING IN THE RIPPLE PHASES OF
2 > MOLECULAR-SCALE MODELS OF LIPID MEMBRANES}
3 >
4 > \section{Introduction}
5 > \label{mdsec:Int}
6 >
7 > A number of theoretical models have been presented to explain the
8 > formation of the ripple phase. Marder {\it et al.} used a
9 > curvature-dependent Landau-de~Gennes free-energy functional to predict
10 > a rippled phase.~\cite{Marder84} This model and other related
11 > continuum models predict higher fluidity in convex regions and that
12 > concave portions of the membrane correspond to more solid-like
13 > regions.  Carlson and Sethna used a packing-competition model (in
14 > which head groups and chains have competing packing energetics) to
15 > predict the formation of a ripple-like phase~\cite{Carlson87}.  Their
16 > model predicted that the high-curvature portions have lower-chain
17 > packing and correspond to more fluid-like regions.  Goldstein and
18 > Leibler used a mean-field approach with a planar model for {\em
19 > inter-lamellar} interactions to predict rippling in multilamellar
20 > phases.~\cite{Goldstein88} McCullough and Scott proposed that the {\em
21 > anisotropy of the nearest-neighbor interactions} coupled to
22 > hydrophobic constraining forces which restrict height differences
23 > between nearest neighbors is the origin of the ripple
24 > phase.~\cite{McCullough90} Lubensky and MacKintosh introduced a Landau
25 > theory for tilt order and curvature of a single membrane and concluded
26 > that {\em coupling of molecular tilt to membrane curvature} is
27 > responsible for the production of ripples.~\cite{Lubensky93} Misbah,
28 > Duplat and Houchmandzadeh proposed that {\em inter-layer dipolar
29 > interactions} can lead to ripple instabilities.~\cite{Misbah98}
30 > Heimburg presented a {\em coexistence model} for ripple formation in
31 > which he postulates that fluid-phase line defects cause sharp
32 > curvature between relatively flat gel-phase regions.~\cite{Heimburg00}
33 > Kubica has suggested that a lattice model of polar head groups could
34 > be valuable in trying to understand bilayer phase
35 > formation.~\cite{Kubica02} Bannerjee used Monte Carlo simulations of
36 > lamellar stacks of hexagonal lattices to show that large head groups
37 > and molecular tilt with respect to the membrane normal vector can
38 > cause bulk rippling.~\cite{Bannerjee02} Recently, Kranenburg and Smit
39 > described the formation of symmetric ripple-like structures using a
40 > coarse grained solvent-head-tail bead model.\cite{Kranenburg2005}
41 > Their lipids consisted of a short chain of head beads tied to the two
42 > longer ``chains''.
43 >
44 > In contrast, few large-scale molecular modeling studies have been
45 > done due to the large size of the resulting structures and the time
46 > required for the phases of interest to develop.  With all-atom (and
47 > even unified-atom) simulations, only one period of the ripple can be
48 > observed and only for time scales in the range of 10-100 ns.  One of
49 > the most interesting molecular simulations was carried out by de~Vries
50 > {\it et al.}~\cite{deVries05}. According to their simulation results,
51 > the ripple consists of two domains, one resembling the gel bilayer,
52 > while in the other, the two leaves of the bilayer are fully
53 > interdigitated.  The mechanism for the formation of the ripple phase
54 > suggested by their work is a packing competition between the head
55 > groups and the tails of the lipid molecules.\cite{Carlson87} Recently,
56 > the ripple phase has also been studied by Lenz and Schmid using Monte
57 > Carlo simulations.\cite{Lenz07} Their structures are similar to the De
58 > Vries {\it et al.} structures except that the connection between the
59 > two leaves of the bilayer is a narrow interdigitated line instead of
60 > the fully interdigitated domain.  The symmetric ripple phase was also
61 > observed by Lenz {\it et al.}, and their work supports other claims
62 > that the mismatch between the size of the head group and tail of the
63 > lipid molecules is the driving force for the formation of the ripple
64 > phase. Ayton and Voth have found significant undulations in
65 > zero-surface-tension states of membranes simulated via dissipative
66 > particle dynamics, but their results are consistent with purely
67 > thermal undulations.~\cite{Ayton02}
68 >
69 > Although the organization of the tails of lipid molecules are
70 > addressed by these molecular simulations and the packing competition
71 > between head groups and tails is strongly implicated as the primary
72 > driving force for ripple formation, questions about the ordering of
73 > the head groups in ripple phase have not been settled.
74 >
75 > In Ch.~\ref{chap:mc}, we presented a simple ``web of dipoles'' spin
76 > lattice model which provides some physical insight into relationship
77 > between dipolar ordering and membrane buckling.\cite{sun:031602} We
78 > found that dipolar elastic membranes can spontaneously buckle, forming
79 > ripple-like topologies.  The driving force for the buckling of dipolar
80 > elastic membranes is the anti-ferroelectric ordering of the dipoles.
81 > This was evident in the ordering of the dipole director axis
82 > perpendicular to the wave vector of the surface ripples.  A similar
83 > phenomenon has also been observed by Tsonchev {\it et al.} in their
84 > work on the spontaneous formation of dipolar peptide chains into
85 > curved nano-structures.\cite{Tsonchev04,Tsonchev04II}
86 >
87 > In this chapter, we construct a somewhat more realistic molecular-scale
88 > lipid model than our previous ``web of dipoles'' and use molecular
89 > dynamics simulations to elucidate the role of the head group dipoles
90 > in the formation and morphology of the ripple phase.  We describe our
91 > model and computational methodology in section \ref{mdsec:method}.
92 > Details on the simulations are presented in section
93 > \ref{mdsec:experiment}, with results following in section
94 > \ref{mdsec:results}.  A final discussion of the role of dipolar heads in
95 > the ripple formation can be found in section
96 > \ref{mdsec:discussion}.
97 >
98 > \section{Computational Model}
99 > \label{mdsec:method}
100 >
101 > \begin{figure}
102 > \centering
103 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdLipidModels.pdf}
104 > \caption{Three different representations of DPPC lipid molecules,
105 > including the chemical structure, an atomistic model, and the
106 > head-body ellipsoidal coarse-grained model used in this
107 > work.\label{mdfig:lipidModels}}
108 > \end{figure}
109 >
110 > Our simple molecular-scale lipid model for studying the ripple phase
111 > is based on two facts: one is that the most essential feature of lipid
112 > molecules is their amphiphilic structure with polar head groups and
113 > non-polar tails. Another fact is that the majority of lipid molecules
114 > in the ripple phase are relatively rigid (i.e. gel-like) which makes
115 > some fraction of the details of the chain dynamics negligible.  Figure
116 > \ref{mdfig:lipidModels} shows the molecular structure of a DPPC
117 > molecule, as well as atomistic and molecular-scale representations of
118 > a DPPC molecule.  The hydrophilic character of the head group is
119 > largely due to the separation of charge between the nitrogen and
120 > phosphate groups.  The zwitterionic nature of the PC headgroups leads
121 > to abnormally large dipole moments (as high as 20.6 D), and this
122 > strongly polar head group interacts strongly with the solvating water
123 > layers immediately surrounding the membrane.  The hydrophobic tail
124 > consists of fatty acid chains.  In our molecular scale model, lipid
125 > molecules have been reduced to these essential features; the fatty
126 > acid chains are represented by an ellipsoid with a dipolar ball
127 > perched on one end to represent the effects of the charge-separated
128 > head group.  In real PC lipids, the direction of the dipole is
129 > nearly perpendicular to the tail, so we have fixed the direction of
130 > the point dipole rigidly in this orientation.  
131 >
132 > The ellipsoidal portions of the model interact via the Gay-Berne
133 > potential which has seen widespread use in the liquid crystal
134 > community.  Ayton and Voth have also used Gay-Berne ellipsoids for
135 > modeling large length-scale properties of lipid
136 > bilayers.\cite{Ayton01} In its original form, the Gay-Berne potential
137 > was a single site model for the interactions of rigid ellipsoidal
138 > molecules.\cite{Gay1981} It can be thought of as a modification of the
139 > Gaussian overlap model originally described by Berne and
140 > Pechukas.\cite{Berne72} The potential is constructed in the familiar
141 > form of the Lennard-Jones function using orientation-dependent
142 > $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$ parameters,
143 > \begin{multline}
144 > V_{ij}({\mathbf{\hat u}_i}, {\mathbf{\hat u}_j}, {\mathbf{\hat
145 > r}_{ij}}) = 4\epsilon ({\mathbf{\hat u}_i}, {\mathbf{\hat u}_j},
146 > {\mathbf{\hat r}_{ij}})\left[ \left(\frac{\sigma_0}{r_{ij}-\sigma({\mathbf{\hat u}_i},
147 > {\mathbf{\hat u}_j}, {\mathbf{\hat r}_{ij}})+\sigma_0}\right)^{12}
148 > \right. \\
149 > \left. - \left(\frac{\sigma_0}{r_{ij}-\sigma({\mathbf{\hat u}_i},
150 > {\mathbf{\hat u}_j}, {\mathbf{\hat
151 > r}_{ij}})+\sigma_0}\right)^6\right]
152 > \label{mdeq:gb}
153 > \end{multline}
154 >
155 > The range $(\sigma({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf
156 > \hat{r}}_{ij}))$, and strength $(\epsilon({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf
157 > \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf \hat{r}}_{ij}))$ parameters
158 > are dependent on the relative orientations of the two molecules (${\bf
159 > \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j}$) as well as the direction of the
160 > intermolecular separation (${\bf \hat{r}}_{ij}$).  $\sigma$ and
161 > $\sigma_0$ are also governed by shape mixing and anisotropy variables,
162 > \begin {eqnarray*}
163 > \sigma_0 & = & \sqrt{d_i^2 + d_j^2} \\ \\
164 > \chi & = & \left[ \frac{\left( l_i^2 - d_i^2 \right) \left(l_j^2 -
165 > d_j^2 \right)}{\left( l_j^2 + d_i^2 \right) \left(l_i^2 +
166 > d_j^2 \right)}\right]^{1/2} \\ \\
167 > \alpha^2 & = & \left[ \frac{\left( l_i^2 - d_i^2 \right) \left(l_j^2 +
168 > d_i^2 \right)}{\left( l_j^2 - d_j^2 \right) \left(l_i^2 +
169 > d_j^2 \right)}\right]^{1/2},
170 > \end{eqnarray*}
171 > where $l$ and $d$ describe the length and width of each uniaxial
172 > ellipsoid.  These shape anisotropy parameters can then be used to
173 > calculate the range function,
174 > \begin{multline}
175 > \sigma({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf \hat{r}}_{ij}) = \\
176 > \sigma_0 \left[ 1 - \left\{ \frac{ \chi \alpha^2 ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf
177 > \hat{r}}_{ij} ) + \chi \alpha^{-2} ({\bf \hat{u}}_j \cdot {\bf
178 > \hat{r}}_{ij} ) - 2 \chi^2 ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf
179 > \hat{r}}_{ij} )({\bf \hat{u}}_j \cdot {\bf
180 > \hat{r}}_{ij} ) ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf \hat{u}}_j)}{1 - \chi^2
181 > \left({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf \hat{u}}_j\right)^2} \right\}
182 > \right]^{-1/2}
183 > \end{multline}
184 >
185 > Gay-Berne ellipsoids also have an energy scaling parameter,
186 > $\epsilon^s$, which describes the well depth for two identical
187 > ellipsoids in a {\it side-by-side} configuration.  Additionally, a well
188 > depth aspect ratio, $\epsilon^r = \epsilon^e / \epsilon^s$, describes
189 > the ratio between the well depths in the {\it end-to-end} and
190 > side-by-side configurations.  As in the range parameter, a set of
191 > mixing and anisotropy variables can be used to describe the well
192 > depths for dissimilar particles,
193 > \begin {eqnarray*}
194 > \epsilon_0 & = & \sqrt{\epsilon^s_i  * \epsilon^s_j} \\ \\
195 > \epsilon^r & = & \sqrt{\epsilon^r_i  * \epsilon^r_j} \\ \\
196 > \chi' & = & \frac{1 - (\epsilon^r)^{1/\mu}}{1 + (\epsilon^r)^{1/\mu}}
197 > \\ \\
198 > \alpha'^2 & = & \left[1 + (\epsilon^r)^{1/\mu}\right]^{-1}
199 > \end{eqnarray*}
200 > The form of the strength function is somewhat complicated,
201 > \begin{eqnarray*}
202 > \epsilon({\bf \hat{u}}_{i}, {\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf \hat{r}}_{ij}) & = &
203 > \epsilon_{0}  \epsilon_{1}^{\nu}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i}.{\bf \hat{u}}_{j})
204 > \epsilon_{2}^{\mu}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf
205 > \hat{r}}_{ij}) \\ \\
206 > \epsilon_{1}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j}) & = &
207 > \left[1-\chi^{2}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i}.{\bf
208 > \hat{u}}_{j})^{2}\right]^{-1/2}
209 > \end{eqnarray*}
210 > \begin{multline*}
211 > \epsilon_{2}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf \hat{r}}_{ij})
212 > =  \\
213 > 1 - \left\{ \frac{ \chi' \alpha'^2 ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf
214 > \hat{r}}_{ij} ) + \chi' \alpha'^{-2} ({\bf \hat{u}}_j \cdot {\bf
215 > \hat{r}}_{ij} ) - 2 \chi'^2 ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf
216 > \hat{r}}_{ij} )({\bf \hat{u}}_j \cdot {\bf
217 > \hat{r}}_{ij} ) ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf \hat{u}}_j)}{1 - \chi'^2
218 > \left({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf \hat{u}}_j\right)^2} \right\},
219 > \end{multline*}
220 > although many of the quantities and derivatives are identical with
221 > those obtained for the range parameter. Ref. \citen{Luckhurst90}
222 > has a particularly good explanation of the choice of the Gay-Berne
223 > parameters $\mu$ and $\nu$ for modeling liquid crystal molecules. An
224 > excellent overview of the computational methods that can be used to
225 > efficiently compute forces and torques for this potential can be found
226 > in Ref. \citen{Golubkov06}
227 >
228 > The choices of parameters we have used in this study correspond to a
229 > shape anisotropy of 3 for the chain portion of the molecule.  In
230 > principle, this could be varied to allow for modeling of longer or
231 > shorter chain lipid molecules. For these prolate ellipsoids, we have:
232 > \begin{equation}
233 > \begin{array}{rcl}
234 > d & < & l \\
235 > \epsilon^{r} & < & 1
236 > \end{array}
237 > \end{equation}
238 > A sketch of the various structural elements of our molecular-scale
239 > lipid / solvent model is shown in figure \ref{mdfig:lipidModel}.  The
240 > actual parameters used in our simulations are given in table
241 > \ref{mdtab:parameters}.
242 >
243 > \begin{figure}
244 > \centering
245 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/md2LipidModel.pdf}
246 > \caption{The parameters defining the behavior of the lipid
247 > models. $\sigma_h / d$ is the ratio of the head group to body diameter.
248 > Molecular bodies had a fixed aspect ratio of 3.0.  The solvent model
249 > was a simplified 4-water bead ($\sigma_w \approx d$) that has been
250 > used in other coarse-grained simulations.  The dipolar strength
251 > (and the temperature and pressure) were the only other parameters that
252 > were varied systematically.\label{mdfig:lipidModel}}
253 > \end{figure}
254 >
255 > To take into account the permanent dipolar interactions of the
256 > zwitterionic head groups, we have placed fixed dipole moments
257 > $\mu_{i}$ at one end of the Gay-Berne particles.  The dipoles are
258 > oriented at an angle $\theta = \pi / 2$ relative to the major axis.
259 > These dipoles are protected by a head ``bead'' with a range parameter
260 > ($\sigma_h$) which we have varied between $1.20 d$ and $1.41 d$.  The
261 > head groups interact with each other using a combination of
262 > Lennard-Jones,
263 > \begin{equation}
264 > V_{ij}(r_{ij}) = 4\epsilon_h \left[\left(\frac{\sigma_h}{r_{ij}}\right)^{12} -
265 > \left(\frac{\sigma_h}{r_{ij}}\right)^6\right],
266 > \end{equation}
267 > and dipole-dipole,
268 > \begin{equation}
269 > V_{ij}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf
270 > \hat{r}}_{ij})) = \frac{|\mu|^2}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r_{ij}^3}
271 > \left[ \hat{\bf u}_i \cdot \hat{\bf u}_j - 3 (\hat{\bf u}_i \cdot
272 > \hat{\bf r}_{ij})(\hat{\bf u}_j \cdot \hat{\bf r}_{ij}) \right]
273 > \end{equation}
274 > potentials.  
275 > In these potentials, $\mathbf{\hat u}_i$ is the unit vector pointing
276 > along dipole $i$ and $\mathbf{\hat r}_{ij}$ is the unit vector
277 > pointing along the inter-dipole vector $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$.  
278 >
279 > Since the charge separation distance is so large in zwitterionic head
280 > groups (like the PC head groups), it would also be possible to use
281 > either point charges or a ``split dipole'' approximation,
282 > \begin{equation}
283 > V_{ij}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf
284 > \hat{r}}_{ij})) = \frac{1}{{4\pi \epsilon_0 }}\left[ {\frac{{\mu _i  \cdot \mu _j }}{{R_{ij}^3 }} -
285 > \frac{{3\left( {\mu _i  \cdot r_{ij} } \right)\left( {\mu _i  \cdot
286 > r_{ij} } \right)}}{{R_{ij}^5 }}} \right]
287 > \end{equation}
288 > where $\mu _i$ and $\mu _j$ are the dipole moments of sites $i$ and
289 > $j$, $r_{ij}$ is vector between the two sites, and $R_{ij}$ is given
290 > by,
291 > \begin{equation}
292 > R_{ij}  = \sqrt {r_{ij}^2  + \frac{{d_i^2 }}{4} + \frac{{d_j^2
293 > }}{4}}.
294 > \end{equation}
295 > Here, $d_i$ and $d_j$ are charge separation distances associated with
296 > each of the two dipolar sites. This approximation to the multipole
297 > expansion maintains the fast fall-off of the multipole potentials but
298 > lacks the normal divergences when two polar groups get close to one
299 > another.
300 >
301 > For the interaction between nonequivalent uniaxial ellipsoids (in this
302 > case, between spheres and ellipsoids), the spheres are treated as
303 > ellipsoids with an aspect ratio of 1 ($d = l$) and with an well depth
304 > ratio ($\epsilon^r$) of 1 ($\epsilon^e = \epsilon^s$).  The form of
305 > the Gay-Berne potential we are using was generalized by Cleaver {\it
306 > et al.} and is appropriate for dissimilar uniaxial
307 > ellipsoids.\cite{Cleaver96}
308 >
309 > The solvent model in our simulations is similar to the one used by
310 > Marrink {\it et al.}  in their coarse grained simulations of lipid
311 > bilayers.\cite{Marrink2004} The solvent bead is a single site that
312 > represents four water molecules (m = 72 amu) and has comparable
313 > density and diffusive behavior to liquid water.  However, since there
314 > are no electrostatic sites on these beads, this solvent model cannot
315 > replicate the dielectric properties of water.  Note that although we
316 > are using larger cutoff and switching radii than Marrink {\it et al.},
317 > our solvent density at 300 K remains at 0.944 g cm$^{-3}$, and the
318 > solvent diffuses at 0.43 \AA$^2 ps^{-1}$ (only twice as fast as liquid
319 > water).
320 >
321 > \begin{table*}
322 > \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
323 > \begin{center}
324 > \caption{Potential parameters used for molecular-scale coarse-grained
325 > lipid simulations}
326 > \begin{tabular}{llccc}
327 > \hline
328 >  & &  Head & Chain & Solvent \\
329 > \hline
330 > $d$ (\AA) & & varied & 4.6  & 4.7 \\
331 > $l$ (\AA) & & $= d$ & 13.8 & 4.7 \\
332 > $\epsilon^s$ (kcal/mol) & & 0.185 & 1.0 & 0.8 \\
333 > $\epsilon_r$ (well-depth aspect ratio)& & 1 & 0.2 &  1 \\
334 > $m$ (amu) & & 196 & 760 & 72.06 \\
335 > $\overleftrightarrow{\mathsf I}$ (amu \AA$^2$) & & & & \\
336 > \multicolumn{2}c{$I_{xx}$} & 1125 & 45000 & N/A \\
337 > \multicolumn{2}c{$I_{yy}$} & 1125 & 45000 & N/A \\
338 > \multicolumn{2}c{$I_{zz}$} &  0 &    9000 & N/A \\
339 > $\mu$ (Debye) & & varied & 0 & 0 \\
340 > \end{tabular}
341 > \label{mdtab:parameters}
342 > \end{center}
343 > \end{minipage}
344 > \end{table*}
345 >
346 > \section{Experimental Methodology}
347 > \label{mdsec:experiment}
348 >
349 > The parameters that were systematically varied in this study were the
350 > size of the head group ($\sigma_h$), the strength of the dipole moment
351 > ($\mu$), and the temperature of the system.  Values for $\sigma_h$
352 > ranged from 5.5 \AA\ to 6.5 \AA.  If the width of the tails is taken
353 > to be the unit of length, these head groups correspond to a range from
354 > $1.2 d$ to $1.41 d$.  Since the solvent beads are nearly identical in
355 > diameter to the tail ellipsoids, all distances that follow will be
356 > measured relative to this unit of distance.  Because the solvent we
357 > are using is non-polar and has a dielectric constant of 1, values for
358 > $\mu$ are sampled from a range that is somewhat smaller than the 20.6
359 > Debye dipole moment of the PC head groups.
360 >
361 > To create unbiased bilayers, all simulations were started from two
362 > perfectly flat monolayers separated by a 26 \AA\ gap between the
363 > molecular bodies of the upper and lower leaves.  The separated
364 > monolayers were evolved in a vacuum with $x-y$ anisotropic pressure
365 > coupling. The length of $z$ axis of the simulations was fixed and a
366 > constant surface tension was applied to enable real fluctuations of
367 > the bilayer. Periodic boundary conditions were used, and $480-720$
368 > lipid molecules were present in the simulations, depending on the size
369 > of the head beads.  In all cases, the two monolayers spontaneously
370 > collapsed into bilayer structures within 100 ps. Following this
371 > collapse, all systems were equilibrated for $100$ ns at $300$ K.
372 >
373 > The resulting bilayer structures were then solvated at a ratio of $6$
374 > solvent beads (24 water molecules) per lipid. These configurations
375 > were then equilibrated for another $30$ ns. All simulations utilizing
376 > the solvent were carried out at constant pressure ($P=1$ atm) with
377 > $3$D anisotropic coupling, and small constant surface tension
378 > ($\gamma=0.015$ N/m). Given the absence of fast degrees of freedom in
379 > this model, a time step of $50$ fs was utilized with excellent energy
380 > conservation.  Data collection for structural properties of the
381 > bilayers was carried out during a final 5 ns run following the solvent
382 > equilibration.  Orientational correlation functions and diffusion
383 > constants were computed from 30 ns simulations in the microcanonical
384 > (NVE) ensemble using the average volume from the end of the constant
385 > pressure and surface tension runs.  The timestep on these final
386 > molecular dynamics runs was 25 fs.  No appreciable changes in phase
387 > structure were noticed upon switching to a microcanonical ensemble.
388 > All simulations were performed using the {\sc oopse} molecular
389 > modeling program.\cite{Meineke2005}
390 >
391 > A switching function was applied to all potentials to smoothly turn
392 > off the interactions between a range of $22$ and $25$ \AA.  The
393 > switching function was the standard (cubic) function,
394 > \begin{equation}
395 > s(r) =
396 >        \begin{cases}
397 >        1 & \text{if $r \le r_{\text{sw}}$},\\
398 >        \frac{(r_{\text{cut}} + 2r - 3r_{\text{sw}})(r_{\text{cut}} - r)^2}
399 >        {(r_{\text{cut}} - r_{\text{sw}})^3}
400 >        & \text{if $r_{\text{sw}} < r \le r_{\text{cut}}$}, \\
401 >        0 & \text{if $r > r_{\text{cut}}$.}
402 >        \end{cases}
403 > \label{mdeq:dipoleSwitching}
404 > \end{equation}
405 >
406 > \section{Results}
407 > \label{mdsec:results}
408 >
409 > The membranes in our simulations exhibit a number of interesting
410 > bilayer phases.  The surface topology of these phases depends most
411 > sensitively on the ratio of the size of the head groups to the width
412 > of the molecular bodies.  With heads only slightly larger than the
413 > bodies ($\sigma_h=1.20 d$) the membrane exhibits a flat bilayer.
414 >
415 > Increasing the head / body size ratio increases the local membrane
416 > curvature around each of the lipids.  With $\sigma_h=1.28 d$, the
417 > surface is still essentially flat, but the bilayer starts to exhibit
418 > signs of instability.  We have observed occasional defects where a
419 > line of lipid molecules on one leaf of the bilayer will dip down to
420 > interdigitate with the other leaf.  This gives each of the two bilayer
421 > leaves some local convexity near the line defect.  These structures,
422 > once developed in a simulation, are very stable and are spaced
423 > approximately 100 \AA\ away from each other.
424 >
425 > With larger heads ($\sigma_h = 1.35 d$) the membrane curvature
426 > resolves into a ``symmetric'' ripple phase.  Each leaf of the bilayer
427 > is broken into several convex, hemicylinderical sections, and opposite
428 > leaves are fitted together much like roof tiles.  There is no
429 > interdigitation between the upper and lower leaves of the bilayer.
430 >
431 > For the largest head / body ratios studied ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) the
432 > local curvature is substantially larger, and the resulting bilayer
433 > structure resolves into an asymmetric ripple phase.  This structure is
434 > very similar to the structures observed by both de~Vries {\it et al.}
435 > and Lenz {\it et al.}.  For a given ripple wave vector, there are two
436 > possible asymmetric ripples, which is not the case for the symmetric
437 > phase observed when $\sigma_h = 1.35 d$.
438 >
439 > \begin{figure}
440 > \centering
441 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdPhaseCartoon.pdf}
442 > \caption{The role of the ratio between the head group size and the
443 > width of the molecular bodies is to increase the local membrane
444 > curvature.  With strong attractive interactions between the head
445 > groups, this local curvature can be maintained in bilayer structures
446 > through surface corrugation.  Shown above are three phases observed in
447 > these simulations.  With $\sigma_h = 1.20 d$, the bilayer maintains a
448 > flat topology.  For larger heads ($\sigma_h = 1.35 d$) the local
449 > curvature resolves into a symmetrically rippled phase with little or
450 > no interdigitation between the upper and lower leaves of the membrane.
451 > The largest heads studied ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) resolve into an
452 > asymmetric rippled phases with interdigitation between the two
453 > leaves.\label{mdfig:phaseCartoon}}
454 > \end{figure}
455 >
456 > Sample structures for the flat ($\sigma_h = 1.20 d$), symmetric
457 > ($\sigma_h = 1.35 d$, and asymmetric ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) ripple
458 > phases are shown in Figure \ref{mdfig:phaseCartoon}.  
459 >
460 > It is reasonable to ask how well the parameters we used can produce
461 > bilayer properties that match experimentally known values for real
462 > lipid bilayers.  Using a value of $l = 13.8$ \AA~for the ellipsoidal
463 > tails and the fixed ellipsoidal aspect ratio of 3, our values for the
464 > area per lipid ($A$) and inter-layer spacing ($D_{HH}$) depend
465 > entirely on the size of the head bead relative to the molecular body.
466 > These values are tabulated in table \ref{mdtab:property}.  Kucera {\it
467 > et al.}  have measured values for the head group spacings for a number
468 > of PC lipid bilayers that range from 30.8 \AA\ (DLPC) to 37.8 \AA\ (DPPC).
469 > They have also measured values for the area per lipid that range from
470 > 60.6
471 > \AA$^2$ (DMPC) to 64.2 \AA$^2$
472 > (DPPC).\cite{NorbertKucerka04012005,NorbertKucerka06012006} Only the
473 > largest of the head groups we modeled ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) produces
474 > bilayers (specifically the area per lipid) that resemble real PC
475 > bilayers.  The smaller head beads we used are perhaps better models
476 > for PE head groups.
477 >
478 > \begin{table*}
479 > \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
480 > \begin{center}
481 > \caption{Phase, bilayer spacing, area per lipid, ripple wavelength
482 > and amplitude observed as a function of the ratio between the head
483 > beads and the diameters of the tails.  Ripple wavelengths and
484 > amplitudes are normalized to the diameter of the tail ellipsoids.}
485 > \begin{tabular}{lccccc}
486 > \hline
487 > $\sigma_h / d$ & type of phase & bilayer spacing (\AA) & area per
488 > lipid (\AA$^2$) & $\lambda / d$ & $A / d$\\
489 > \hline
490 > 1.20 & flat & 33.4 & 49.6 & N/A & N/A \\
491 > 1.28 & flat & 33.7 & 54.7 & N/A & N/A \\
492 > 1.35 & symmetric ripple & 42.9 & 51.7 & 17.2 & 2.2 \\
493 > 1.41 & asymmetric ripple & 37.1 & 63.1 & 15.4 & 1.5 \\
494 > \end{tabular}
495 > \label{mdtab:property}
496 > \end{center}
497 > \end{minipage}
498 > \end{table*}
499 >
500 > The membrane structures and the reduced wavelength $\lambda / d$,
501 > reduced amplitude $A / d$ of the ripples are summarized in Table
502 > \ref{mdtab:property}. The wavelength range is $15 - 17$ molecular bodies
503 > and the amplitude is $1.5$ molecular bodies for asymmetric ripple and
504 > $2.2$ for symmetric ripple. These values are reasonably consistent
505 > with experimental measurements.\cite{Sun96,Katsaras00,Kaasgaard03}
506 > Note, that given the lack of structural freedom in the tails of our
507 > model lipids, the amplitudes observed from these simulations are
508 > likely to underestimate of the true amplitudes.
509 >
510 > \begin{figure}
511 > \centering
512 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdTopDown.pdf}
513 > \caption{Top views of the flat (upper), symmetric ripple (middle),
514 > and asymmetric ripple (lower) phases.  Note that the head-group
515 > dipoles have formed head-to-tail chains in all three of these phases,
516 > but in the two rippled phases, the dipolar chains are all aligned {\it
517 > perpendicular} to the direction of the ripple.  Note that the flat
518 > membrane has multiple vortex defects in the dipolar ordering, and the
519 > ordering on the lower leaf of the bilayer can be in an entirely
520 > different direction from the upper leaf.\label{mdfig:topView}}
521 > \end{figure}
522 >
523 > The orientational ordering in the system is observed by $P_2$ order
524 > parameter, which is calculated from Eq.~\ref{mceq:opmatrix}
525 > in Ch.~\ref{chap:mc}. Here, $\hat{\bf u}_i$ can refer either to the
526 > principal axis of the molecular body or to the dipole on the head
527 > group of the molecule. Since the molecular bodies are perpendicular to
528 > the head group dipoles, it is possible for the director axes for the
529 > molecular bodies and the head groups to be completely decoupled from
530 > each other.
531 >
532 > Figure \ref{mdfig:topView} shows snapshots of bird's-eye views of the
533 > flat ($\sigma_h = 1.20 d$) and rippled ($\sigma_h = 1.35, 1.41 d$)
534 > bilayers.  The directions of the dipoles on the head groups are
535 > represented with two colored half spheres: blue (phosphate) and yellow
536 > (amino).  For flat bilayers, the system exhibits signs of
537 > orientational frustration; some disorder in the dipolar head-to-tail
538 > chains is evident with kinks visible at the edges between differently
539 > ordered domains.  The lipids can also move independently of lipids in
540 > the opposing leaf, so the ordering of the dipoles on one leaf is not
541 > necessarily consistent with the ordering on the other.  These two
542 > factors keep the total dipolar order parameter relatively low for the
543 > flat phases.
544 >
545 > With increasing head group size, the surface becomes corrugated, and
546 > the dipoles cannot move as freely on the surface. Therefore, the
547 > translational freedom of lipids in one layer is dependent upon the
548 > position of the lipids in the other layer.  As a result, the ordering of
549 > the dipoles on head groups in one leaf is correlated with the ordering
550 > in the other leaf.  Furthermore, as the membrane deforms due to the
551 > corrugation, the symmetry of the allowed dipolar ordering on each leaf
552 > is broken. The dipoles then self-assemble in a head-to-tail
553 > configuration, and the dipolar order parameter increases dramatically.
554 > However, the total polarization of the system is still close to zero.
555 > This is strong evidence that the corrugated structure is an
556 > anti-ferroelectric state.  It is also notable that the head-to-tail
557 > arrangement of the dipoles is always observed in a direction
558 > perpendicular to the wave vector for the surface corrugation.  This is
559 > a similar finding to what we observed in our earlier work on the
560 > elastic dipolar membranes.\cite{sun:031602}
561 >
562 > The $P_2$ order parameters (for both the molecular bodies and the head
563 > group dipoles) have been calculated to quantify the ordering in these
564 > phases.  Figure \ref{mdfig:rP2} shows that the $P_2$ order parameter for
565 > the head-group dipoles increases with increasing head group size. When
566 > the heads of the lipid molecules are small, the membrane is nearly
567 > flat. Since the in-plane packing is essentially a close packing of the
568 > head groups, the head dipoles exhibit frustration in their
569 > orientational ordering.
570 >
571 > The ordering trends for the tails are essentially opposite to the
572 > ordering of the head group dipoles. The tail $P_2$ order parameter
573 > {\it decreases} with increasing head size. This indicates that the
574 > surface is more curved with larger head / tail size ratios. When the
575 > surface is flat, all tails are pointing in the same direction (normal
576 > to the bilayer surface).  This simplified model appears to be
577 > exhibiting a smectic A fluid phase, similar to the real $L_{\beta}$
578 > phase.  We have not observed a smectic C gel phase ($L_{\beta'}$) for
579 > this model system.  Increasing the size of the heads results in
580 > rapidly decreasing $P_2$ ordering for the molecular bodies.
581 >
582 > \begin{figure}
583 > \centering
584 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdRP2.pdf}
585 > \caption{The $P_2$ order parameters for head groups (circles) and
586 > molecular bodies (squares) as a function of the ratio of head group
587 > size ($\sigma_h$) to the width of the molecular bodies ($d$). \label{mdfig:rP2}}
588 > \end{figure}
589 >
590 > In addition to varying the size of the head groups, we studied the
591 > effects of the interactions between head groups on the structure of
592 > lipid bilayer by changing the strength of the dipoles.  Figure
593 > \ref{mdfig:sP2} shows how the $P_2$ order parameter changes with
594 > increasing strength of the dipole.  Generally, the dipoles on the head
595 > groups become more ordered as the strength of the interaction between
596 > heads is increased and become more disordered by decreasing the
597 > interaction strength.  When the interaction between the heads becomes
598 > too weak, the bilayer structure does not persist; all lipid molecules
599 > become dispersed in the solvent (which is non-polar in this
600 > molecular-scale model).  The critical value of the strength of the
601 > dipole depends on the size of the head groups.  The perfectly flat
602 > surface becomes unstable below $5$ Debye, while the  rippled
603 > surfaces melt at $8$ Debye (asymmetric) or $10$ Debye (symmetric).
604 >
605 > The ordering of the tails mirrors the ordering of the dipoles {\it
606 > except for the flat phase}. Since the surface is nearly flat in this
607 > phase, the order parameters are only weakly dependent on dipolar
608 > strength until it reaches $15$ Debye.  Once it reaches this value, the
609 > head group interactions are strong enough to pull the head groups
610 > close to each other and distort the bilayer structure. For a flat
611 > surface, a substantial amount of free volume between the head groups
612 > is normally available.  When the head groups are brought closer by
613 > dipolar interactions, the tails are forced to splay outward, first forming
614 > curved bilayers, and then inverted micelles.
615 >
616 > When $\sigma_h=1.28 d$, the $P_2$ order parameter decreases slightly
617 > when the strength of the dipole is increased above $16$ Debye. For
618 > rippled bilayers, there is less free volume available between the head
619 > groups. Therefore increasing dipolar strength weakly influences the
620 > structure of the membrane.  However, the increase in the body $P_2$
621 > order parameters implies that the membranes are being slightly
622 > flattened due to the effects of increasing head-group attraction.
623 >
624 > A very interesting behavior takes place when the head groups are very
625 > large relative to the molecular bodies ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) and the
626 > dipolar strength is relatively weak ($\mu < 9$ Debye). In this case,
627 > the two leaves of the bilayer become totally interdigitated with each
628 > other in large patches of the membrane.   With higher dipolar
629 > strength, the interdigitation is limited to single lines that run
630 > through the bilayer in a direction perpendicular to the ripple wave
631 > vector.
632 >
633 > \begin{figure}
634 > \centering
635 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdSP2.pdf}
636 > \caption{The $P_2$ order parameters for head group dipoles (a) and
637 > molecular bodies (b) as a function of the strength of the dipoles.
638 > These order parameters are shown for four values of the head group /
639 > molecular width ratio ($\sigma_h / d$). \label{mdfig:sP2}}
640 > \end{figure}
641 >
642 > Figure \ref{mdfig:tP2} shows the dependence of the order parameters on
643 > temperature.  As expected, systems are more ordered at low
644 > temperatures, and more disordered at high temperatures.  All of the
645 > bilayers we studied can become unstable if the temperature becomes
646 > high enough.  The only interesting feature of the temperature
647 > dependence is in the flat surfaces ($\sigma_h=1.20 d$ and
648 > $\sigma_h=1.28 d$).  Here, when the temperature is increased above
649 > $310$K, there is enough jostling of the head groups to allow the
650 > dipolar frustration to resolve into more ordered states.  This results
651 > in a slight increase in the $P_2$ order parameter above this
652 > temperature.
653 >
654 > For the rippled surfaces ($\sigma_h=1.35 d$ and $\sigma_h=1.41 d$),
655 > there is a slightly increased orientational ordering in the molecular
656 > bodies above $290$K.  Since our model lacks the detailed information
657 > about the behavior of the lipid tails, this is the closest the model
658 > can come to depicting the ripple ($P_{\beta'}$) to fluid
659 > ($L_{\alpha}$) phase transition.  What we are observing is a
660 > flattening of the rippled structures made possible by thermal
661 > expansion of the tightly-packed head groups.  The lack of detailed
662 > chain configurations also makes it impossible for this model to depict
663 > the ripple to gel ($L_{\beta'}$) phase transition.
664 >
665 > \begin{figure}
666 > \centering
667 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdTP2.pdf}
668 > \caption{The $P_2$ order parameters for head group dipoles (a) and
669 > molecular bodies (b) as a function of temperature.
670 > These order parameters are shown for four values of the head group /
671 > molecular width ratio ($\sigma_h / d$).\label{mdfig:tP2}}
672 > \end{figure}
673 >
674 > Fig. \ref{mdfig:phaseDiagram} shows a phase diagram for the model as a
675 > function of the head group / molecular width ratio ($\sigma_h / d$)
676 > and the strength of the head group dipole moment ($\mu$).  Note that
677 > the specific form of the bilayer phase is governed almost entirely by
678 > the head group / molecular width ratio, while the strength of the
679 > dipolar interactions between the head groups governs the stability of
680 > the bilayer phase.  Weaker dipoles result in unstable bilayer phases,
681 > while extremely strong dipoles can shift the equilibrium to an
682 > inverted micelle phase when the head groups are small.   Temperature
683 > has little effect on the actual bilayer phase observed, although higher
684 > temperatures can cause the unstable region to grow into the higher
685 > dipole region of this diagram.
686 >
687 > \begin{figure}
688 > \centering
689 > \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdPhaseDiagram.pdf}
690 > \caption{Phase diagram for the simple molecular model as a function
691 > of the head group / molecular width ratio ($\sigma_h / d$) and the
692 > strength of the head group dipole moment
693 > ($\mu$).\label{mdfig:phaseDiagram}}
694 > \end{figure}
695 >
696 > We have computed translational diffusion constants for lipid molecules
697 > from the mean-square displacement,
698 > \begin{equation}
699 > D = \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{6 t} \langle {|\left({\bf
700 > r}_{i}(t) - {\bf r}_{i}(0) \right)|}^2 \rangle,
701 > \label{mdeq:msdisplacement}
702 > \end{equation}
703 > of the lipid bodies. Translational diffusion constants for the
704 > different head-to-tail size ratios (all at 300 K) are shown in table
705 > \ref{mdtab:relaxation}.  We have also computed orientational correlation
706 > times for the head groups from fits of the second-order Legendre
707 > polynomial correlation function,
708 > \begin{equation}
709 > C_{\ell}(t)  =  \langle P_{\ell}\left({\bf \mu}_{i}(t) \cdot {\bf
710 > \mu}_{i}(0) \right) \rangle
711 > \end{equation}
712 > of the head group dipoles.  The orientational correlation functions
713 > appear to have multiple components in their decay: a fast ($12 \pm 2$
714 > ps) decay due to librational motion of the head groups, as well as
715 > moderate ($\tau^h_{\rm mid}$) and slow ($\tau^h_{\rm slow}$)
716 > components.  The fit values for the moderate and slow correlation
717 > times are listed in table \ref{mdtab:relaxation}.  Standard deviations
718 > in the fit time constants are quite large (on the order of the values
719 > themselves).
720 >
721 > Sparrman and Westlund used a multi-relaxation model for NMR lineshapes
722 > observed in gel, fluid, and ripple phases of DPPC and obtained
723 > estimates of a correlation time for water translational diffusion
724 > ($\tau_c$) of 20 ns.\cite{Sparrman2003} This correlation time
725 > corresponds to water bound to small regions of the lipid membrane.
726 > They further assume that the lipids can explore only a single period
727 > of the ripple (essentially moving in a nearly one-dimensional path to
728 > do so), and the correlation time can therefore be used to estimate a
729 > value for the translational diffusion constant of $2.25 \times
730 > 10^{-11} m^2 s^{-1}$.  The translational diffusion constants we obtain
731 > are in reasonable agreement with this experimentally determined
732 > value. However, the $T_2$ relaxation times obtained by Sparrman and
733 > Westlund are consistent with P-N vector reorientation timescales of
734 > 2-5 ms.  This is substantially slower than even the slowest component
735 > we observe in the decay of our orientational correlation functions.
736 > Other than the dipole-dipole interactions, our head groups have no
737 > shape anisotropy which would force them to move as a unit with
738 > neighboring molecules.  This would naturally lead to P-N reorientation
739 > times that are too fast when compared with experimental measurements.
740 >
741 > \begin{table*}
742 > \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
743 > \begin{center}
744 > \caption{Fit values for the rotational correlation times for the head
745 > groups ($\tau^h$) and molecular bodies ($\tau^b$) as well as the
746 > translational diffusion constants for the molecule as a function of
747 > the head-to-body width ratio.  All correlation functions and transport
748 > coefficients were computed from microcanonical simulations with an
749 > average temperture of 300 K.  In all of the phases, the head group
750 > correlation functions decay with an fast librational contribution ($12
751 > \pm 1$ ps).  There are additional moderate ($\tau^h_{\rm mid}$) and
752 > slow $\tau^h_{\rm slow}$ contributions to orientational decay that
753 > depend strongly on the phase exhibited by the lipids.  The symmetric
754 > ripple phase ($\sigma_h / d = 1.35$) appears to exhibit the slowest
755 > molecular reorientation.}
756 > \begin{tabular}{lcccc}
757 > \hline
758 > $\sigma_h / d$ & $\tau^h_{\rm mid} (ns)$ & $\tau^h_{\rm
759 > slow} (\mu s)$ & $\tau^b (\mu s)$ & $D (\times 10^{-11} m^2 s^{-1})$ \\
760 > \hline
761 > 1.20 & $0.4$ &  $9.6$ & $9.5$ & $0.43(1)$ \\
762 > 1.28 & $2.0$ & $13.5$ & $3.0$ & $5.91(3)$ \\
763 > 1.35 & $3.2$ &  $4.0$ & $0.9$ & $3.42(1)$ \\
764 > 1.41 & $0.3$ & $23.8$ & $6.9$ & $7.16(1)$ \\
765 > \end{tabular}
766 > \label{mdtab:relaxation}
767 > \end{center}
768 > \end{minipage}
769 > \end{table*}
770 >
771 > \section{Discussion}
772 > \label{mdsec:discussion}
773 >
774 > Symmetric and asymmetric ripple phases have been observed to form in
775 > our molecular dynamics simulations of a simple molecular-scale lipid
776 > model. The lipid model consists of an dipolar head group and an
777 > ellipsoidal tail.  Within the limits of this model, an explanation for
778 > generalized membrane curvature is a simple mismatch in the size of the
779 > heads with the width of the molecular bodies.  With heads
780 > substantially larger than the bodies of the molecule, this curvature
781 > should be convex nearly everywhere, a requirement which could be
782 > resolved either with micellar or cylindrical phases.
783 >
784 > The persistence of a {\it bilayer} structure therefore requires either
785 > strong attractive forces between the head groups or exclusionary
786 > forces from the solvent phase.  To have a persistent bilayer structure
787 > with the added requirement of convex membrane curvature appears to
788 > result in corrugated structures like the ones pictured in
789 > Fig. \ref{mdfig:phaseCartoon}.  In each of the sections of these
790 > corrugated phases, the local curvature near a most of the head groups
791 > is convex.  These structures are held together by the extremely strong
792 > and directional interactions between the head groups.
793 >
794 > The attractive forces holding the bilayer together could either be
795 > non-directional (as in the work of Kranenburg and
796 > Smit),\cite{Kranenburg2005} or directional (as we have utilized in
797 > these simulations).  The dipolar head groups are key for the
798 > maintaining the bilayer structures exhibited by this particular model;
799 > reducing the strength of the dipole has the tendency to make the
800 > rippled phase disappear.  The dipoles are likely to form attractive
801 > head-to-tail configurations even in flat configurations, but the
802 > temperatures are high enough that vortex defects become prevalent in
803 > the flat phase.  The flat phase we observed therefore appears to be
804 > substantially above the Kosterlitz-Thouless transition temperature for
805 > a planar system of dipoles with this set of parameters.  For this
806 > reason, it would be interesting to observe the thermal behavior of the
807 > flat phase at substantially lower temperatures.
808 >
809 > One feature of this model is that an energetically favorable
810 > orientational ordering of the dipoles can be achieved by forming
811 > ripples.  The corrugation of the surface breaks the symmetry of the
812 > plane, making vortex defects somewhat more expensive, and stabilizing
813 > the long range orientational ordering for the dipoles in the head
814 > groups.  Most of the rows of the head-to-tail dipoles are parallel to
815 > each other and the system adopts a bulk anti-ferroelectric state.  We
816 > believe that this is the first time the organization of the head
817 > groups in ripple phases has been addressed.
818 >
819 > Although the size-mismatch between the heads and molecular bodies
820 > appears to be the primary driving force for surface convexity, the
821 > persistence of the bilayer through the use of rippled structures is a
822 > function of the strong, attractive interactions between the heads.
823 > One important prediction we can make using the results from this
824 > simple model is that if the dipole-dipole interaction is the leading
825 > contributor to the head group attractions, the wave vectors for the
826 > ripples should always be found {\it perpendicular} to the dipole
827 > director axis.  This echoes the prediction we made earlier for simple
828 > elastic dipolar membranes, and may suggest experimental designs which
829 > will test whether this is really the case in the phosphatidylcholine
830 > $P_{\beta'}$ phases.  The dipole director axis should also be easily
831 > computable for the all-atom and coarse-grained simulations that have
832 > been published in the literature.\cite{deVries05}
833 >
834 > Experimental verification of our predictions of dipolar orientation
835 > correlating with the ripple direction would require knowing both the
836 > local orientation of a rippled region of the membrane (available via
837 > AFM studies of supported bilayers) as well as the local ordering of
838 > the membrane dipoles. Obtaining information about the local
839 > orientations of the membrane dipoles may be available from
840 > fluorescence detected linear dichroism (LD).  Benninger {\it et al.}
841 > have recently used axially-specific chromophores
842 > 2-(4,4-difluoro-5,7-dimethyl-4-bora-3a,4a-diaza-s-indacene-3-pentanoyl)-1-hexadecanoyl-sn-glycero-3-phospocholine
843 > ($\beta$-BODIPY FL C5-HPC or BODIPY-PC) and 3,3'
844 > dioctadecyloxacarbocyanine perchlorate (DiO) in their
845 > fluorescence-detected linear dichroism (LD) studies of plasma
846 > membranes of living cells.\cite{Benninger:2005qy} The DiO dye aligns
847 > its transition moment perpendicular to the membrane normal, while the
848 > BODIPY-PC transition dipole is parallel with the membrane normal.
849 > Without a doubt, using fluorescence detection of linear dichroism in
850 > concert with AFM surface scanning would be difficult experiments to
851 > carry out.  However, there is some hope of performing experiments to
852 > either verify or falsify the predictions of our simulations.
853 >
854 > Although our model is simple, it exhibits some rich and unexpected
855 > behaviors.  It would clearly be a closer approximation to reality if
856 > we allowed bending motions between the dipoles and the molecular
857 > bodies, and if we replaced the rigid ellipsoids with ball-and-chain
858 > tails.  However, the advantages of this simple model (large system
859 > sizes, 50 fs time steps) allow us to rapidly explore the phase diagram
860 > for a wide range of parameters.  Our explanation of this rippling
861 > phenomenon will help us design more accurate molecular models for
862 > corrugated membranes and experiments to test whether or not
863 > dipole-dipole interactions exert an influence on membrane rippling.

Diff Legend

Removed lines
+ Added lines
< Changed lines
> Changed lines