ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/xDissertation/md.tex
Revision: 3362
Committed: Fri Mar 7 01:53:18 2008 UTC (16 years, 4 months ago) by xsun
Content type: application/x-tex
File size: 45314 byte(s)
Log Message:
writing up the dissertation.

File Contents

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