ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/matt_papers/canidacy_paper/canidacy_paper.tex
Revision: 110
Committed: Mon Sep 16 22:10:09 2002 UTC (22 years, 10 months ago) by mmeineke
Content type: application/x-tex
File size: 21967 byte(s)
Log Message:
made some final revisions, and started to add some figures

File Contents

# Content
1 \documentclass[11pt]{article}
2
3 \usepackage{graphicx}
4 \usepackage{color}
5 \usepackage{floatflt}
6 \usepackage{amsmath}
7 \usepackage{amssymb}
8 \usepackage[ref]{overcite}
9
10
11
12 \pagestyle{plain}
13 \pagenumbering{arabic}
14 \oddsidemargin 0.0cm \evensidemargin 0.0cm
15 \topmargin -21pt \headsep 10pt
16 \textheight 9.0in \textwidth 6.5in
17 \brokenpenalty=10000
18 \renewcommand{\baselinestretch}{1.2}
19 \renewcommand\citemid{\ } % no comma in optional reference note
20
21
22 \begin{document}
23
24
25 \title{A Mesoscale Model for Phospholipid Simulations}
26
27 \author{Matthew A. Meineke\\
28 Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry\\
29 University of Notre Dame\\
30 Notre Dame, Indiana 46556}
31
32 \date{\today}
33 \maketitle
34
35 \section{Background and Research Goals}
36
37 Simulations of phospholipid bilayers are, by necessity, quite
38 complex. The lipid molecules are large molecules containing many
39 atoms, and the head group of the lipid will typically contain charge
40 separated ions which set up a large dipole within the molecule. Adding
41 to the complexity are the number of water molecules needed to properly
42 solvate the lipid bilayer, typically 25 water molecules for every
43 lipid molecule. Because of these factors, many current simulations are
44 limited in both length and time scale due to to the sheer number of
45 calculations performed at every time step and the lifetime of the
46 researcher. A typical
47 simulation\cite{saiz02,lindahl00,venable00,Marrink01} will have around
48 64 phospholipids forming a bilayer approximately 40~$\mbox{\AA}$ by
49 50~$\mbox{\AA}$ with roughly 25 waters for every lipid. This means
50 there are on the order of 8,000 atoms needed to simulate these systems
51 and the trajectories are integrated for times up to 10 ns.
52
53 These limitations make it difficult to study certain biologically
54 interesting phenomena that don't fit within the short time and length
55 scale requirements. One such phenomena is the existence of the ripple
56 phase ($P_{\beta'}$) of the bilayer between the gel phase
57 ($L_{\beta'}$) and the fluid phase ($L_{\alpha}$). The $P_{\beta'}$
58 phase has been shown to have a ripple period of
59 100-200~$\mbox{\AA}$.\cite{katsaras00,sengupta00} A simulation of this
60 length scale would require approximately 1,300 lipid molecules and
61 roughly 25 waters for every lipid to fully solvate the bilayer. With
62 the large number of atoms involved in a simulation of this magnitude,
63 steps \emph{must} be taken to simplify the system to the point where
64 the numbers of atoms becomes reasonable.
65
66 Another system of interest would be drug molecule diffusion through
67 the membrane. Due to the fluid-like properties of a lipid membrane,
68 not all diffusion takes place at membrane channels. It is of interest
69 to study certain molecules that may incorporate themselves directly
70 into the membrane. These molecules may then have an appreciable
71 waiting time (on the order of nanoseconds) within the
72 bilayer. Simulation of such a long time scale again requires
73 simplification of the system in order to lower the number of
74 calculations needed at each time step or to increase the length of
75 each time step.
76
77
78 \section{Methodology}
79
80 \subsection{Length and Time Scale Simplifications}
81
82 The length scale simplifications are aimed at increasing the number of
83 molecules that can be simulated without drastically increasing the
84 computational cost of the simulation. This is done through a
85 combination of substituting less expensive interactions for expensive
86 ones and decreasing the number of interaction sites per
87 molecule. Namely, point charge distributions are replaced with
88 dipoles, and unified atoms are used in place of water, phospholipid
89 head groups, and alkyl groups.
90
91 The replacement of charge distributions with dipoles allows us to
92 replace an interaction that has a relatively long range ($\frac{1}{r}$
93 for the coulomb potential) with that of a relatively short range
94 ($\frac{1}{r^{3}}$ for dipole - dipole potentials). Combined with
95 Verlet neighbor lists,\cite{allen87:csl} this should result in an
96 algorithm wich scales linearly with increasing system size. This is in
97 comparison to the Ewald sum\cite{leach01:mm} needed to compute
98 periodic replicas of the coulomb interactions, which scales at best by
99 $N \ln N$.
100
101 The second step taken to simplify the number of calculations is to
102 incorporate unified models for groups of atoms. In the case of water,
103 we use the soft sticky dipole (SSD) model developed by
104 Ichiye\cite{liu96:new_model,liu96:monte_carlo,chandra99:ssd_md}
105 (Section~\ref{sec:ssdModel}). For the phospholipids, a unified head
106 atom with a dipole will replace the atoms in the head group, while
107 unified $\text{CH}_2$ and $\text{CH}_3$ atoms will replace the alkyl
108 units in the tails (Section~\ref{sec:lipidModel}).
109
110 The time scale simplifications are introduced so that we can take
111 longer time steps. By increasing the size of the time steps taken by
112 the simulation, we are able to integrate a given length of time using
113 fewer calculations. However, care must be taken that any
114 simplifications used, still conserve the total energy of the
115 simulation. In practice, this means taking steps small enough to
116 resolve all motion in the system without accidently moving an object
117 too far along a repulsive energy surface before it feels the effect of
118 the surface.
119
120 In our simulation we have chosen to constrain all bonds to be of fixed
121 length. This means the bonds are no longer allowed to vibrate about
122 their equilibrium positions. Bond vibrations are typically the fastest
123 periodic motion in a dynamics simulation. By taking this action, we
124 are able to take time steps of 3 fs while still maintaining constant
125 energy. This is in contrast to the 1 fs time step typically needed to
126 conserve energy when bonds lengths are allowed to oscillate.
127
128 \subsection{The Soft Sticky Water Model}
129 \label{sec:ssdModel}
130
131 \begin{figure}
132 \begin{center}
133 \includegraphics[width=50mm]{ssd.epsi}
134 \caption{The SSD model with the oxygen and hydrogen atoms drawn in for reference.}
135 \end{center}
136 \label{fig:ssdModel}
137 \end{figure}
138
139 The water model used in our simulations is a modified soft
140 Stockmayer-sphere model.\cite{stevens95} Like the Stockmayer-sphere, the SSD
141 model consists of a Lennard-Jones interaction site and a
142 dipole both located at the water's center of mass (Figure
143 \ref{fig:ssdModel}). However, the SSD model extends this by adding a
144 tetrahedral potential to correct for hydrogen bonding.
145
146 The SSD water potential for a pair of water molecules is then given by
147 the following equation:
148 \begin{equation}
149 V_{\text{SSD}} = V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{i\!j}) + V_{\text{dp}}(\mathbf{r}_{i\!j},
150 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})
151 + V_{\text{sp}}(\mathbf{r}_{i\!j},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},
152 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})
153 \label{eq:ssdTotPot}
154 \end{equation}
155 where $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$ is the vector between molecules $i$ and $j$,
156 and $\boldsymbol{\Omega}$ is the orientation of molecule $i$ or $j$
157 respectively. $V_{\text{LJ}}$ is the Lennard-Jones potential:
158 \begin{equation}
159 V_{\text{LJ}} =
160 4\epsilon_{ij} \biggl[
161 \biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{12}
162 - \biggl(\frac{\sigma_{ij}}{r_{ij}}\biggr)^{6}
163 \biggr]
164 \label{eq:lennardJonesPot}
165 \end{equation}
166 here $\sigma_{ij}$
167 scales the length of the interaction, and $\epsilon_{ij}$ scales the
168 energy of the potential. For SSD, $\sigma_{\text{SSD}} = 3.051 \mbox{
169 \AA}$ and $\epsilon_{\text{SSD}} = 0.152\text{ kcal/mol}$.
170 $V_{\text{dp}}$ is the dipole potential:
171 \begin{equation}
172 V_{\text{dp}}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},
173 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) = \frac{1}{4\pi\epsilon_{0}} \biggl[
174 \frac{\boldsymbol{\mu}_{i} \cdot \boldsymbol{\mu}_{j}}{r^{3}_{ij}}
175 -
176 \frac{3(\boldsymbol{\mu}_i \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) %
177 (\boldsymbol{\mu}_j \cdot \mathbf{r}_{ij}) }
178 {r^{5}_{ij}} \biggr]
179 \label{eq:dipolePot}
180 \end{equation}
181 where $\boldsymbol{\mu}_i$ is the dipole vector of molecule $i$,
182 $\boldsymbol{\mu}_i$ takes its orientation from
183 $\boldsymbol{\Omega}_i$. The SSD model specifies a dipole magnitude of
184 2.35~D for water.
185
186 The hydrogen bonding is modeled by the $V_{\text{sp}}$
187 term of the potential. Its form is as follows:
188 \begin{equation}
189 V_{\text{sp}}(\mathbf{r}_{i\!j},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},
190 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) =
191 v^{\circ}[s(r_{ij})w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},
192 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})
193 +
194 s'(r_{ij})w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},
195 \boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})]
196 \label{eq:spPot}
197 \end{equation}
198 Where $v^\circ$ scales strength of the interaction.
199 $w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$
200 and
201 $w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$
202 are responsible for the tetrahedral potential and a correction to the
203 tetrahedral potential respectively. They are,
204 \begin{equation}
205 w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) =
206 \sin\theta_{ij} \sin 2\theta_{ij} \cos 2\phi_{ij}
207 + \sin \theta_{ji} \sin 2\theta_{ji} \cos 2\phi_{ji}
208 \label{eq:spPot2}
209 \end{equation}
210 and
211 \begin{equation}
212 \begin{split}
213 w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j}) =
214 &(\cos\theta_{ij}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ij} + 0.8)^2 \\
215 &+ (\cos\theta_{ji}-0.6)^2(\cos\theta_{ji} + 0.8)^2 - 2w^{\circ}
216 \end{split}
217 \label{eq:spCorrection}
218 \end{equation}
219 The angles $\theta_{ij}$ and $\phi_{ij}$ are defined by the spherical
220 coordinates of the position of molecule $j$ in the reference frame
221 fixed on molecule $i$ with the z-axis aligned with the dipole moment.
222 The correction
223 $w^{x}_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$
224 is needed because
225 $w_{ij}(\mathbf{r}_{ij},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{i},\boldsymbol{\Omega}_{j})$
226 vanishes when $\theta_{ij}$ is $0^\circ$ or $180^\circ$.
227
228 Finally, the sticky potential is scaled by a cutoff function,
229 $s(r_{ij})$, that scales smoothly between 0 and 1. It is represented
230 by:
231 \begin{equation}
232 s(r_{ij}) =
233 \begin{cases}
234 1& \text{if $r_{ij} < r_{L}$}, \\
235 \frac{(r_{U} - r_{ij})^2 (r_{U} + 2r_{ij}
236 - 3r_{L})}{(r_{U}-r_{L})^3}&
237 \text{if $r_{L} \leq r_{ij} \leq r_{U}$},\\
238 0& \text{if $r_{ij} \geq r_{U}$}.
239 \end{cases}
240 \label{eq:spCutoff}
241 \end{equation}
242
243 Despite the apparent complexity of Equation \ref{eq:spPot}, the SSD
244 model is still computationally inexpensive. This is due to Equation
245 \ref{eq:spCutoff}. With $r_{L}$ being 2.75~$\mbox{\AA}$ and $r_{U}$
246 being equal to either 3.35~$\mbox{\AA}$ for $s(r_{ij})$ or
247 4.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ for $s'(r_{ij})$, the sticky potential is only active
248 over an extremely short range, and then only with other SSD
249 molecules. Therefore, it's predominant interaction is through the
250 point dipole and the Lennard-Jones sphere. Of these, only the dipole
251 interaction can be considered ``long-range''.
252
253 \subsection{The Phospholipid Model}
254 \label{sec:lipidModel}
255
256 \begin{figure}
257 \begin{center}
258 \includegraphics[angle=-90,width=80mm]{lipidModel.epsi}
259 \caption{A representation of the lipid model. $\phi$ is the torsion angle, $\theta$ is the bend angle, $\mu$ is the dipole moment of the head group, and n is the chain length. \vspace{5mm}}
260 \end{center}
261 \label{fig:lipidModel}
262 \end{figure}
263
264 The lipid molecules in our simulations are unified atom models. Figure
265 \ref{fig:lipidModel} shows a schematic for one of our
266 lipids. The Head group of the phospholipid is replaced by a single
267 Lennard-Jones sphere with a freely oriented dipole placed at it's
268 center. The magnitude of the dipole moment is 20.6 D, chosen to match
269 that of DPPC\cite{Cevc87}. The tail atoms are unified $\text{CH}_2$
270 and $\text{CH}_3$ atoms and are also modeled as Lennard-Jones
271 spheres. The total potential for the lipid is represented by Equation
272 \ref{eq:lipidModelPot}.
273
274 \begin{equation}
275 V_{\text{lipid}} =
276 \sum_{i}V_{i}^{\text{internal}}
277 + \sum_i \sum_{j>i} \sum_{\text{$\alpha$ in $i$}}
278 \sum_{\text{$\beta$ in $j$}}
279 V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{\alpha_{i}\beta_{j}})
280 +\sum_i\sum_{j>i}V_{\text{dp}}(r_{1_i,1_j},\Omega_{1_i},\Omega_{1_j})
281 \label{eq:lipidModelPot}
282 \end{equation}
283 where,
284 \begin{equation}
285 V_{i}^{\text{internal}} =
286 \sum_{\text{bends}}V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma})
287 + \sum_{\text{torsions}}V_{\text{tors.}}(\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta})
288 + \sum_{\alpha} \sum_{\beta>\alpha}V_{\text{LJ}}(r_{\alpha \beta})
289 \label{eq:lipidModelPotInternal}
290 \end{equation}
291
292 The non-bonded interactions, $V_{\text{LJ}}$ and $V_{\text{dp}}$, are
293 the Lennard-Jones and dipole-dipole interactions respectively. For the
294 bonded potentials, only the bend and the torsional potentials are
295 calculated. The bond potential is not calculated, and the bond lengths
296 are constrained via RATTLE.\cite{leach01:mm} The bend potential is of
297 the form:
298 \begin{equation}
299 V_{\text{bend}}(\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma})
300 = k_{\theta}\frac{(\theta_{\alpha\beta\gamma} - \theta_0)^2}{2}
301 \label{eq:bendPot}
302 \end{equation}
303 Where $k_{\theta}$ sets the stiffness of the bend potential, and $\theta_0$
304 sets the equilibrium bend angle. The torsion potential was given by:
305 \begin{equation}
306 V_{\text{tors.}}(\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta})
307 = c_1 [1+\cos\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta}]
308 + c_2 [1 - \cos(2\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta})]
309 + c_3 [1 + \cos(3\phi_{\alpha\beta\gamma\zeta})]
310 \label{eq:torsPot}
311 \end{equation}
312 All parameters for bonded and non-bonded potentials in the tail atoms
313 were taken from TraPPE.\cite{Siepmann1998} The bonded interactions for
314 the head atom were also taken from TraPPE, however it's dipole moment
315 and mass were based on the properties of the phosphatidylcholine head
316 group. The Lennard-Jones parameter for the head group was chosen such
317 that it was roughly twice the size of a $\text{CH}_3$ atom, and it's
318 well depth was set to be approximately equal to that of $\text{CH}_3$.
319
320 \section{Initial Simulation: 25 lipids in water}
321 \label{sec:5x5}
322
323 \subsection{Starting Configuration and Parameters}
324 \label{sec:5x5Start}
325
326 \begin{figure}
327 \begin{center}
328 \includegraphics[width=70mm]{5x5-initial.eps}
329 \caption{The starting configuration of the 25 lipid system. A box is drawn around the periodic image.}
330 \end{center}
331 \label{fig:5x5Start}
332 \end{figure}
333
334 \begin{figure}
335 \begin{center}
336 \includegraphics[width=70mm]{5x5-6.27ns.eps}
337 \caption{The 25 lipid system at 6.27~ns}
338 \end{center}
339 \label{fig:5x5Final}
340 \end{figure}
341
342 Our first simulation is an array of 25 single chain lipids in a sea
343 of water (Figure \ref{fig:5x5Start}). The total number of water
344 molecules is 1386, giving a final of water concentration of 70\%
345 wt. The simulation box measures 34.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$
346 x 39.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ with periodic boundary conditions imposed. The
347 system is simulated in the micro-canonical (NVE) ensemble with an
348 average temperature of 300~K.
349
350 \subsection{Results}
351 \label{sec:5x5Results}
352
353 Figure \ref{fig:5x5Final} shows a snapshot of the system at
354 6.27~ns. Note that the system has spontaneously self assembled into a
355 bilayer. Discussion of the length scales of the bilayer will follow in
356 this section. However, it is interesting to note a key qualitative
357 property of the system revealed by this snapshot, the tail chains are
358 tilted to the bilayer normal. This is usually indicative of the gel
359 ($L_{\beta'}$) phase. In this system, the box size is probably too
360 small for the bilayer to relax to the fluid ($P_{\alpha}$) phase. This
361 demonstrates a need for an isobaric-isothermal ensemble where the box
362 size may relax or expand to keep the system at a 1~atm.
363
364 The simulation was analyzed using the radial distribution function,
365 $g(r)$, which has the form:
366 \begin{equation}
367 g(r) = \frac{V}{N_{\text{pairs}}}\langle \sum_{i} \sum_{j > i}
368 \delta(|\mathbf{r} - \mathbf{r}_{ij}|) \rangle
369 \label{eq:gofr}
370 \end{equation}
371 Equation \ref{eq:gofr} gives us information about the spacing of two
372 species as a function of radius. Essentially, if the observer were
373 located at atom $i$ and were looking out in all directions, $g(r)$
374 shows the relative density of atom $j$ at any given radius, $r$,
375 normalized by the expected density of atom $j$ at $r$. In a
376 homogeneously mixed fluid, $g(r)$ will approach 1 at large $r$, as a
377 fluid contains no long range structure to contribute peaks in the
378 number density.
379
380 For the species containing dipoles, a second pair wise distribution
381 function was used, $g_{\gamma}(r)$. It is of the form:
382 \begin{equation}
383 g_{\gamma}(r) = \langle \sum_i \sum_{j>i}
384 (\cos \gamma_{ij}) \delta(| \mathbf{r} - \mathbf{r}_{ij}|) \rangle
385 \label{eq:gammaofr}
386 \end{equation}
387 Where $\gamma_{ij}$ is the angle between the dipole of atom $j$ with
388 respect to the dipole of atom $i$. This correlation will vary between
389 $+1$ and $-1$ when the two dipoles are perfectly aligned and
390 anti-aligned respectively. This then gives us information about how
391 directional species are aligned with each other as a function of
392 distance.
393
394 Figure \ref{fig:5x5HHCorr} shows the two self correlation functions
395 for the Head groups of the lipids. The first peak in the $g(r)$ at
396 4.03~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the nearest neighbor separation of the heads of
397 two lipids. This corresponds to a maximum in the $g_{\gamma}(r)$ which
398 means that the two neighbors on the same leaf have their dipoles
399 aligned. The broad peak at 6.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the inter-surface
400 spacing. Here, there is a corresponding anti-alignment in the angular
401 correlation. This means that although the dipoles are aligned on the
402 same monolayer, the dipoles will orient themselves to be anti-aligned
403 on a opposite facing monolayer. With this information, the two peaks
404 at 7.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ and 7.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ are head groups on the same
405 monolayer, and they are the second nearest neighbors to the head
406 group. The peak is likely a split peak because of the small statistics
407 of this system. Finally, the peak at 8.0~$\mbox{\AA}$ is likely the
408 second nearest neighbor on the opposite monolayer because of the
409 anti-alignment evident in the angular correlation.
410
411 Figure \ref{fig:5x5CCg} shows the radial distribution function for the
412 $\text{CH}_2$ unified atoms. The spacing of the atoms along the tail
413 chains accounts for the regularly spaced sharp peaks, but the broad
414 underlying peak with its maximum at 4.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the
415 distribution of chain-chain distances between two lipids. The final
416 Figure, Figure \ref{fig:5x5HXCorr}, includes the correlation functions
417 between the Head group and the SSD atoms. The peak in $g(r)$ at
418 3.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ is the distance of closest approach between the two,
419 and $g_{\gamma}(r)$ shows that the SSD atoms will align their dipoles
420 with the head groups at close distance. However, as one increases the
421 distance, the SSD atoms are no longer aligned.
422
423 \section{Second Simulation: 50 randomly oriented lipids in water}
424 \label{sec:r50}
425
426 \subsection{Starting Configuration and Parameters}
427 \label{sec:r50Start}
428
429 \begin{figure}
430 \begin{center}
431 \includegraphics[width=70mm]{r50-initial.eps}
432 \caption{The starting configuration of the 50 lipid system.}
433 \end{center}
434 \label{fig:r50Start}
435 \end{figure}
436
437 \begin{figure}
438 \begin{center}
439 \includegraphics[width=70mm]{r50-2.21ns.eps}
440 \caption{The 50 lipid system at 2.21~ns}
441 \end{center}
442 \label{fig:r50Final}
443 \end{figure}
444
445 The second simulation consists of 50 single chained lipid molecules
446 embedded in a sea of 1384 SSD waters (54\% wt.). The lipids in this
447 simulation were started with random orientation and location (Figure
448 \ref{fig:r50Start} ) The simulation box measured 26.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ x
449 26.6~$\mbox{\AA}$ x 108.4~$\mbox{\AA}$ with periodic boundary conditions
450 imposed. The simulation was run in the NVE ensemble with an average
451 temperature of 300~K.
452
453 \subsection{Results}
454 \label{sec:r50Results}
455
456 Figure \ref{fig:r50Final} is a snapshot of the system at 2.0~ns. Here
457 we see that the system has already aggregated into several micelles
458 and two are even starting to merge. It will be interesting to watch as
459 this simulation continues what the total time scale for the micelle
460 aggregation and bilayer formation will be.
461
462 Figures \ref{fig:r50HHCorr}, \ref{fig:r50CCg}, and \ref{fig:r50} are
463 the same correlation functions for the random 50 simulation as for the
464 previous simulation of 25 lipids. What is most interesting to note, is
465 the high degree of similarity between the correlation functions
466 between systems. Even though the 25 lipid simulation formed a bilayer
467 and the random 50 simulation is still in the micelle stage, both have
468 an inter-surface spacing of 6.5~$\mbox{\AA}$ with the same
469 characteristic anti-alignment between surfaces. Not as surprising, is
470 the consistency of the closest packing statistics between
471 systems. Namely, a head-head closest approach distance of
472 4~$\mbox{\AA}$, and similar findings for the chain-chain and
473 head-water distributions as in the 25 lipid system.
474
475 \section{Future Directions}
476
477 Current simulations indicate that our model is a feasible one, however
478 improvements will need to be made to allow the system to be simulated
479 in the isobaric-isothermal ensemble. This will relax the system to an
480 equilibrium configuration at room temperature and pressure allowing us
481 to compare our model to experimental results. Also, we are in the
482 process of parallelizeing the code for an even greater speedup. This
483 will allow us to simulate the size systems needed to examine phenomena
484 such as the ripple phase and drug molecule diffusion
485
486 Once the work has been completed on the simulation engine, we will
487 then use it to explore the phase diagram for our model. By
488 characterizing how our model parameters affect the bilayer properties,
489 we will tailor our model to more closely match real biological
490 molecules. With this information, we will then incorporate
491 biologically relevant molecules into the system and observe their
492 transport properties across the membrane.
493
494 \section{Acknowledgments}
495
496 I would like to thank Dr. J.Daniel Gezelter for his guidance on this
497 project. I would also like to acknowledge the following for their help
498 and discussions during this project: Christopher Fennell, Charles
499 Vardeman, Teng Lin, Megan Sprague, Patrick Conforti, and Dan
500 Combest. Funding for this project came from the National Science
501 Foundation.
502
503 \pagebreak
504 \bibliographystyle{achemso}
505 \bibliography{canidacy_paper}
506 \end{document}