ViewVC Help
View File | Revision Log | Show Annotations | View Changeset | Root Listing
root/group/trunk/xDissertation/md.tex
Revision: 3383
Committed: Wed Apr 16 21:56:34 2008 UTC (17 years ago) by xsun
Content type: application/x-tex
File size: 45819 byte(s)
Log Message:
formatting check

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
105 molecules]{Three different representations of DPPC lipid molecules,
106 including the chemical structure, an atomistic model, and the
107 head-body ellipsoidal coarse-grained model used in this
108 work.\label{mdfig:lipidModels}}
109 \end{figure}
110
111 Our simple molecular-scale lipid model for studying the ripple phase
112 is based on two facts: one is that the most essential feature of lipid
113 molecules is their amphiphilic structure with polar head groups and
114 non-polar tails. Another fact is that the majority of lipid molecules
115 in the ripple phase are relatively rigid (i.e. gel-like) which makes
116 some fraction of the details of the chain dynamics negligible. Figure
117 \ref{mdfig:lipidModels} shows the molecular structure of a DPPC
118 molecule, as well as atomistic and molecular-scale representations of
119 a DPPC molecule. The hydrophilic character of the head group is
120 largely due to the separation of charge between the nitrogen and
121 phosphate groups. The zwitterionic nature of the PC headgroups leads
122 to abnormally large dipole moments (as high as 20.6 D), and this
123 strongly polar head group interacts strongly with the solvating water
124 layers immediately surrounding the membrane. The hydrophobic tail
125 consists of fatty acid chains. In our molecular scale model, lipid
126 molecules have been reduced to these essential features; the fatty
127 acid chains are represented by an ellipsoid with a dipolar ball
128 perched on one end to represent the effects of the charge-separated
129 head group. In real PC lipids, the direction of the dipole is
130 nearly perpendicular to the tail, so we have fixed the direction of
131 the point dipole rigidly in this orientation.
132
133 The ellipsoidal portions of the model interact via the Gay-Berne
134 potential which has seen widespread use in the liquid crystal
135 community. Ayton and Voth have also used Gay-Berne ellipsoids for
136 modeling large length-scale properties of lipid
137 bilayers.\cite{Ayton01} In its original form, the Gay-Berne potential
138 was a single site model for the interactions of rigid ellipsoidal
139 molecules.\cite{Gay1981} It can be thought of as a modification of the
140 Gaussian overlap model originally described by Berne and
141 Pechukas.\cite{Berne72} The potential is constructed in the familiar
142 form of the Lennard-Jones function using orientation-dependent
143 $\sigma$ and $\epsilon$ parameters,
144 \begin{multline}
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}
149 \right. \\
150 \left. - \left(\frac{\sigma_0}{r_{ij}-\sigma({\mathbf{\hat u}_i},
151 {\mathbf{\hat u}_j}, {\mathbf{\hat
152 r}_{ij}})+\sigma_0}\right)^6\right]
153 \label{mdeq:gb}
154 \end{multline}
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{multline}
176 \sigma({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf \hat{r}}_{ij}) = \\
177 \sigma_0 \left[ 1 - \left\{ \frac{ \chi \alpha^2 ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf
178 \hat{r}}_{ij} ) + \chi \alpha^{-2} ({\bf \hat{u}}_j \cdot {\bf
179 \hat{r}}_{ij} ) - 2 \chi^2 ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf
180 \hat{r}}_{ij} )({\bf \hat{u}}_j \cdot {\bf
181 \hat{r}}_{ij} ) ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf \hat{u}}_j)}{1 - \chi^2
182 \left({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf \hat{u}}_j\right)^2} \right\}
183 \right]^{-1/2}
184 \end{multline}
185
186 Gay-Berne ellipsoids also have an energy scaling parameter,
187 $\epsilon^s$, which describes the well depth for two identical
188 ellipsoids in a {\it side-by-side} configuration. Additionally, a well
189 depth aspect ratio, $\epsilon^r = \epsilon^e / \epsilon^s$, describes
190 the ratio between the well depths in the {\it end-to-end} and
191 side-by-side configurations. As in the range parameter, a set of
192 mixing and anisotropy variables can be used to describe the well
193 depths for dissimilar particles,
194 \begin {eqnarray*}
195 \epsilon_0 & = & \sqrt{\epsilon^s_i * \epsilon^s_j} \\ \\
196 \epsilon^r & = & \sqrt{\epsilon^r_i * \epsilon^r_j} \\ \\
197 \chi' & = & \frac{1 - (\epsilon^r)^{1/\mu}}{1 + (\epsilon^r)^{1/\mu}}
198 \\ \\
199 \alpha'^2 & = & \left[1 + (\epsilon^r)^{1/\mu}\right]^{-1}
200 \end{eqnarray*}
201 The form of the strength function is somewhat complicated,
202 \begin{eqnarray*}
203 \epsilon({\bf \hat{u}}_{i}, {\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf \hat{r}}_{ij}) & = &
204 \epsilon_{0} \epsilon_{1}^{\nu}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i}.{\bf \hat{u}}_{j})
205 \epsilon_{2}^{\mu}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf
206 \hat{r}}_{ij}) \\ \\
207 \epsilon_{1}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j}) & = &
208 \left[1-\chi^{2}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i}.{\bf
209 \hat{u}}_{j})^{2}\right]^{-1/2}
210 \end{eqnarray*}
211 \begin{multline*}
212 \epsilon_{2}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf \hat{r}}_{ij})
213 = \\
214 1 - \left\{ \frac{ \chi' \alpha'^2 ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf
215 \hat{r}}_{ij} ) + \chi' \alpha'^{-2} ({\bf \hat{u}}_j \cdot {\bf
216 \hat{r}}_{ij} ) - 2 \chi'^2 ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf
217 \hat{r}}_{ij} )({\bf \hat{u}}_j \cdot {\bf
218 \hat{r}}_{ij} ) ({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf \hat{u}}_j)}{1 - \chi'^2
219 \left({\bf \hat{u}}_i \cdot {\bf \hat{u}}_j\right)^2} \right\},
220 \end{multline*}
221 although many of the quantities and derivatives are identical with
222 those obtained for the range parameter. Ref. \citen{Luckhurst90}
223 has a particularly good explanation of the choice of the Gay-Berne
224 parameters $\mu$ and $\nu$ for modeling liquid crystal molecules. An
225 excellent overview of the computational methods that can be used to
226 efficiently compute forces and torques for this potential can be found
227 in Ref. \citen{Golubkov06}
228
229 The choices of parameters we have used in this study correspond to a
230 shape anisotropy of 3 for the chain portion of the molecule. In
231 principle, this could be varied to allow for modeling of longer or
232 shorter chain lipid molecules. For these prolate ellipsoids, we have:
233 \begin{equation}
234 \begin{array}{rcl}
235 d & < & l \\
236 \epsilon^{r} & < & 1
237 \end{array}
238 \end{equation}
239 A sketch of the various structural elements of our molecular-scale
240 lipid / solvent model is shown in figure \ref{mdfig:lipidModel}. The
241 actual parameters used in our simulations are given in table
242 \ref{mdtab:parameters}.
243
244 \begin{figure}
245 \centering
246 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/md2LipidModel.pdf}
247 \caption[The parameters defining the behavior of the lipid
248 models]{The parameters defining the behavior of the lipid
249 models. $\sigma_h / d$ is the ratio of the head group to body
250 diameter. Molecular bodies had a fixed aspect ratio of 3.0. The
251 solvent model was a simplified 4-water bead ($\sigma_w \approx d$)
252 that has been used in other coarse-grained simulations. The dipolar
253 strength (and the temperature and pressure) were the only other
254 parameters that were varied systematically.\label{mdfig:lipidModel}}
255 \end{figure}
256
257 To take into account the permanent dipolar interactions of the
258 zwitterionic head groups, we have placed fixed dipole moments
259 $\mu_{i}$ at one end of the Gay-Berne particles. The dipoles are
260 oriented at an angle $\theta = \pi / 2$ relative to the major axis.
261 These dipoles are protected by a head ``bead'' with a range parameter
262 ($\sigma_h$) which we have varied between $1.20 d$ and $1.41 d$. The
263 head groups interact with each other using a combination of
264 Lennard-Jones,
265 \begin{equation}
266 V_{ij}(r_{ij}) = 4\epsilon_h \left[\left(\frac{\sigma_h}{r_{ij}}\right)^{12} -
267 \left(\frac{\sigma_h}{r_{ij}}\right)^6\right],
268 \end{equation}
269 and dipole-dipole,
270 \begin{equation}
271 V_{ij}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf
272 \hat{r}}_{ij})) = \frac{|\mu|^2}{4 \pi \epsilon_0 r_{ij}^3}
273 \left[ \hat{\bf u}_i \cdot \hat{\bf u}_j - 3 (\hat{\bf u}_i \cdot
274 \hat{\bf r}_{ij})(\hat{\bf u}_j \cdot \hat{\bf r}_{ij}) \right]
275 \end{equation}
276 potentials.
277 In these potentials, $\mathbf{\hat u}_i$ is the unit vector pointing
278 along dipole $i$ and $\mathbf{\hat r}_{ij}$ is the unit vector
279 pointing along the inter-dipole vector $\mathbf{r}_{ij}$.
280
281 Since the charge separation distance is so large in zwitterionic head
282 groups (like the PC head groups), it would also be possible to use
283 either point charges or a ``split dipole'' approximation,
284 \begin{equation}
285 V_{ij}({\bf \hat{u}}_{i},{\bf \hat{u}}_{j},{\bf
286 \hat{r}}_{ij})) = \frac{1}{{4\pi \epsilon_0 }}\left[ {\frac{{\mu _i \cdot \mu _j }}{{R_{ij}^3 }} -
287 \frac{{3\left( {\mu _i \cdot r_{ij} } \right)\left( {\mu _i \cdot
288 r_{ij} } \right)}}{{R_{ij}^5 }}} \right]
289 \end{equation}
290 where $\mu _i$ and $\mu _j$ are the dipole moments of sites $i$ and
291 $j$, $r_{ij}$ is vector between the two sites, and $R_{ij}$ is given
292 by,
293 \begin{equation}
294 R_{ij} = \sqrt {r_{ij}^2 + \frac{{d_i^2 }}{4} + \frac{{d_j^2
295 }}{4}}.
296 \end{equation}
297 Here, $d_i$ and $d_j$ are charge separation distances associated with
298 each of the two dipolar sites. This approximation to the multipole
299 expansion maintains the fast fall-off of the multipole potentials but
300 lacks the normal divergences when two polar groups get close to one
301 another.
302
303 For the interaction between nonequivalent uniaxial ellipsoids (in this
304 case, between spheres and ellipsoids), the spheres are treated as
305 ellipsoids with an aspect ratio of 1 ($d = l$) and with an well depth
306 ratio ($\epsilon^r$) of 1 ($\epsilon^e = \epsilon^s$). The form of
307 the Gay-Berne potential we are using was generalized by Cleaver {\it
308 et al.} and is appropriate for dissimilar uniaxial
309 ellipsoids.\cite{Cleaver96}
310
311 The solvent model in our simulations is similar to the one used by
312 Marrink {\it et al.} in their coarse grained simulations of lipid
313 bilayers.\cite{Marrink2004} The solvent bead is a single site that
314 represents four water molecules (m = 72 amu) and has comparable
315 density and diffusive behavior to liquid water. However, since there
316 are no electrostatic sites on these beads, this solvent model cannot
317 replicate the dielectric properties of water. Note that although we
318 are using larger cutoff and switching radii than Marrink {\it et al.},
319 our solvent density at 300 K remains at 0.944 g cm$^{-3}$, and the
320 solvent diffuses at 0.43 \AA$^2 ps^{-1}$ (only twice as fast as liquid
321 water).
322
323 \begin{table*}
324 \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
325 \begin{center}
326 \caption{POTENTIAL PARAMETERS USED FOR MOLECULAR SCALE COARSE-GRAINED
327 LIPID SIMULATIONS}
328 \begin{tabular}{llccc}
329 \hline
330 & & Head & Chain & Solvent \\
331 \hline
332 $d$ (\AA) & & varied & 4.6 & 4.7 \\
333 $l$ (\AA) & & $= d$ & 13.8 & 4.7 \\
334 $\epsilon^s$ (kcal/mol) & & 0.185 & 1.0 & 0.8 \\
335 $\epsilon_r$ (well-depth aspect ratio)& & 1 & 0.2 & 1 \\
336 $m$ (amu) & & 196 & 760 & 72.06 \\
337 $\overleftrightarrow{\mathsf I}$ (amu \AA$^2$) & & & & \\
338 \multicolumn{2}c{$I_{xx}$} & 1125 & 45000 & N/A \\
339 \multicolumn{2}c{$I_{yy}$} & 1125 & 45000 & N/A \\
340 \multicolumn{2}c{$I_{zz}$} & 0 & 9000 & N/A \\
341 $\mu$ (Debye) & & varied & 0 & 0 \\
342 \end{tabular}
343 \label{mdtab:parameters}
344 \end{center}
345 \end{minipage}
346 \end{table*}
347
348 \section{Simulation Methodology}
349 \label{mdsec:simulation}
350
351 The parameters that were systematically varied in this study were the
352 size of the head group ($\sigma_h$), the strength of the dipole moment
353 ($\mu$), and the temperature of the system. Values for $\sigma_h$
354 ranged from 5.5 \AA\ to 6.5 \AA. If the width of the tails is taken
355 to be the unit of length, these head groups correspond to a range from
356 $1.2 d$ to $1.41 d$. Since the solvent beads are nearly identical in
357 diameter to the tail ellipsoids, all distances that follow will be
358 measured relative to this unit of distance. Because the solvent we
359 are using is non-polar and has a dielectric constant of 1, values for
360 $\mu$ are sampled from a range that is somewhat smaller than the 20.6
361 Debye dipole moment of the PC head groups.
362
363 To create unbiased bilayers, all simulations were started from two
364 perfectly flat monolayers separated by a 26 \AA\ gap between the
365 molecular bodies of the upper and lower leaves. The separated
366 monolayers were evolved in a vacuum with $x-y$ anisotropic pressure
367 coupling. The length of $z$ axis of the simulations was fixed and a
368 constant surface tension was applied to enable real fluctuations of
369 the bilayer. Periodic boundary conditions were used, and $480-720$
370 lipid molecules were present in the simulations, depending on the size
371 of the head beads. In all cases, the two monolayers spontaneously
372 collapsed into bilayer structures within 100 ps. Following this
373 collapse, all systems were equilibrated for $100$ ns at $300$ K.
374
375 The resulting bilayer structures were then solvated at a ratio of $6$
376 solvent beads (24 water molecules) per lipid. These configurations
377 were then equilibrated for another $30$ ns. All simulations utilizing
378 the solvent were carried out at constant pressure ($P=1$ atm) with
379 $3$D anisotropic coupling, and small constant surface tension
380 ($\gamma=0.015$ N/m). Given the absence of fast degrees of freedom in
381 this model, a time step of $50$ fs was utilized with excellent energy
382 conservation. Data collection for structural properties of the
383 bilayers was carried out during a final 5 ns run following the solvent
384 equilibration. Orientational correlation functions and diffusion
385 constants were computed from 30 ns simulations in the microcanonical
386 (NVE) ensemble using the average volume from the end of the constant
387 pressure and surface tension runs. The timestep on these final
388 molecular dynamics runs was 25 fs. No appreciable changes in phase
389 structure were noticed upon switching to a microcanonical ensemble.
390 All simulations were performed using the {\sc oopse} molecular
391 modeling program.\cite{Meineke2005}
392
393 A switching function was applied to all potentials to smoothly turn
394 off the interactions between a range of $22$ and $25$ \AA. The
395 switching function was the standard (cubic) function,
396 \begin{equation}
397 s(r) =
398 \begin{cases}
399 1 & \text{if $r \le r_{\text{sw}}$},\\
400 \frac{(r_{\text{cut}} + 2r - 3r_{\text{sw}})(r_{\text{cut}} - r)^2}
401 {(r_{\text{cut}} - r_{\text{sw}})^3}
402 & \text{if $r_{\text{sw}} < r \le r_{\text{cut}}$}, \\
403 0 & \text{if $r > r_{\text{cut}}$.}
404 \end{cases}
405 \label{mdeq:dipoleSwitching}
406 \end{equation}
407
408 \section{Results}
409 \label{mdsec:results}
410
411 The membranes in our simulations exhibit a number of interesting
412 bilayer phases. The surface topology of these phases depends most
413 sensitively on the ratio of the size of the head groups to the width
414 of the molecular bodies. With heads only slightly larger than the
415 bodies ($\sigma_h=1.20 d$) the membrane exhibits a flat bilayer.
416
417 Increasing the head / body size ratio increases the local membrane
418 curvature around each of the lipids. With $\sigma_h=1.28 d$, the
419 surface is still essentially flat, but the bilayer starts to exhibit
420 signs of instability. We have observed occasional defects where a
421 line of lipid molecules on one leaf of the bilayer will dip down to
422 interdigitate with the other leaf. This gives each of the two bilayer
423 leaves some local convexity near the line defect. These structures,
424 once developed in a simulation, are very stable and are spaced
425 approximately 100 \AA\ away from each other.
426
427 With larger heads ($\sigma_h = 1.35 d$) the membrane curvature
428 resolves into a ``symmetric'' ripple phase. Each leaf of the bilayer
429 is broken into several convex, hemicylinderical sections, and opposite
430 leaves are fitted together much like roof tiles. There is no
431 interdigitation between the upper and lower leaves of the bilayer.
432
433 For the largest head / body ratios studied ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) the
434 local curvature is substantially larger, and the resulting bilayer
435 structure resolves into an asymmetric ripple phase. This structure is
436 very similar to the structures observed by both de~Vries {\it et al.}
437 and Lenz {\it et al.}. For a given ripple wave vector, there are two
438 possible asymmetric ripples, which is not the case for the symmetric
439 phase observed when $\sigma_h = 1.35 d$.
440
441 \begin{figure}
442 \centering
443 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdPhaseCartoon.pdf}
444 \caption[ three phases observed in the simulations]{The role of the
445 ratio between the head group size and the width of the molecular
446 bodies is to increase the local membrane curvature. With strong
447 attractive interactions between the head groups, this local curvature
448 can be maintained in bilayer structures through surface corrugation.
449 Shown above are three phases observed in these simulations. With
450 $\sigma_h = 1.20 d$, the bilayer maintains a flat topology. For
451 larger heads ($\sigma_h = 1.35 d$) the local curvature resolves into a
452 symmetrically rippled phase with little or no interdigitation between
453 the upper and lower leaves of the membrane. The largest heads studied
454 ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) resolve into an asymmetric rippled phases with
455 interdigitation between the two leaves.\label{mdfig:phaseCartoon}}
456 \end{figure}
457
458 Sample structures for the flat ($\sigma_h = 1.20 d$), symmetric
459 ($\sigma_h = 1.35 d$, and asymmetric ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) ripple
460 phases are shown in Figure \ref{mdfig:phaseCartoon}.
461
462 It is reasonable to ask how well the parameters we used can produce
463 bilayer properties that match experimentally known values for real
464 lipid bilayers. Using a value of $l = 13.8$ \AA~for the ellipsoidal
465 tails and the fixed ellipsoidal aspect ratio of 3, our values for the
466 area per lipid ($A$) and inter-layer spacing ($D_{HH}$) depend
467 entirely on the size of the head bead relative to the molecular body.
468 These values are tabulated in table \ref{mdtab:property}. Kucera {\it
469 et al.} have measured values for the head group spacings for a number
470 of PC lipid bilayers that range from 30.8 \AA\ (DLPC) to 37.8 \AA\ (DPPC).
471 They have also measured values for the area per lipid that range from
472 60.6
473 \AA$^2$ (DMPC) to 64.2 \AA$^2$
474 (DPPC).\cite{NorbertKucerka04012005,NorbertKucerka06012006} Only the
475 largest of the head groups we modeled ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) produces
476 bilayers (specifically the area per lipid) that resemble real PC
477 bilayers. The smaller head beads we used are perhaps better models
478 for PE head groups.
479
480 \begin{table*}
481 \begin{center}
482 \caption{PHASE, BILAYER SPACING, AREA PER LIPID, RIPPLE WAVELENGTH AND
483 AMPLITUDE OBSERVED AS A FUNCTION OF THE RATIO BETWEEN THE HEAD BEADS
484 AND THE DIAMETERS OF THE TAILS}
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 \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
496 %\centering
497 \vspace{2mm}
498 Ripple wavelengths and amplitudes are normalized to the diameter of
499 the tail ellipsoids.
500 \label{mdtab:property}
501 \end{minipage}
502 \end{center}
503 \end{table*}
504
505 The membrane structures and the reduced wavelength $\lambda / d$,
506 reduced amplitude $A / d$ of the ripples are summarized in Table
507 \ref{mdtab:property}. The wavelength range is $15 - 17$ molecular bodies
508 and the amplitude is $1.5$ molecular bodies for asymmetric ripple and
509 $2.2$ for symmetric ripple. These values are reasonably consistent
510 with experimental measurements.\cite{Sun96,Katsaras00,Kaasgaard03}
511 Note, that given the lack of structural freedom in the tails of our
512 model lipids, the amplitudes observed from these simulations are
513 likely to underestimate of the true amplitudes.
514
515 \begin{figure}
516 \centering
517 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdTopDown.pdf}
518 \caption[Top views of the flat, symmetric ripple, and asymmetric
519 ripple phases]{Top views of the flat (upper), symmetric ripple
520 (middle), and asymmetric ripple (lower) phases. Note that the
521 head-group dipoles have formed head-to-tail chains in all three of
522 these phases, but in the two rippled phases, the dipolar chains are
523 all aligned {\it perpendicular} to the direction of the ripple. Note
524 that the flat membrane has multiple vortex defects in the dipolar
525 ordering, and the ordering on the lower leaf of the bilayer can be in
526 an entirely different direction from the upper
527 leaf.\label{mdfig:topView}}
528 \end{figure}
529
530 The orientational ordering in the system is observed by $P_2$ order
531 parameter, which is calculated from Eq.~\ref{mceq:opmatrix}
532 in Ch.~\ref{chap:mc}. Here, $\hat{\bf u}_i$ can refer either to the
533 principal axis of the molecular body or to the dipole on the head
534 group of the molecule. Since the molecular bodies are perpendicular to
535 the head group dipoles, it is possible for the director axes for the
536 molecular bodies and the head groups to be completely decoupled from
537 each other.
538
539 Figure \ref{mdfig:topView} shows snapshots of bird's-eye views of the
540 flat ($\sigma_h = 1.20 d$) and rippled ($\sigma_h = 1.35, 1.41 d$)
541 bilayers. The directions of the dipoles on the head groups are
542 represented with two colored half spheres: blue (phosphate) and yellow
543 (amino). For flat bilayers, the system exhibits signs of
544 orientational frustration; some disorder in the dipolar head-to-tail
545 chains is evident with kinks visible at the edges between differently
546 ordered domains. The lipids can also move independently of lipids in
547 the opposing leaf, so the ordering of the dipoles on one leaf is not
548 necessarily consistent with the ordering on the other. These two
549 factors keep the total dipolar order parameter relatively low for the
550 flat phases.
551
552 With increasing head group size, the surface becomes corrugated, and
553 the dipoles cannot move as freely on the surface. Therefore, the
554 translational freedom of lipids in one layer is dependent upon the
555 position of the lipids in the other layer. As a result, the ordering of
556 the dipoles on head groups in one leaf is correlated with the ordering
557 in the other leaf. Furthermore, as the membrane deforms due to the
558 corrugation, the symmetry of the allowed dipolar ordering on each leaf
559 is broken. The dipoles then self-assemble in a head-to-tail
560 configuration, and the dipolar order parameter increases dramatically.
561 However, the total polarization of the system is still close to zero.
562 This is strong evidence that the corrugated structure is an
563 anti-ferroelectric state. It is also notable that the head-to-tail
564 arrangement of the dipoles is always observed in a direction
565 perpendicular to the wave vector for the surface corrugation. This is
566 a similar finding to what we observed in our earlier work on the
567 elastic dipolar membranes.\cite{sun:031602}
568
569 The $P_2$ order parameters (for both the molecular bodies and the head
570 group dipoles) have been calculated to quantify the ordering in these
571 phases. Figure \ref{mdfig:rP2} shows that the $P_2$ order parameter for
572 the head-group dipoles increases with increasing head group size. When
573 the heads of the lipid molecules are small, the membrane is nearly
574 flat. Since the in-plane packing is essentially a close packing of the
575 head groups, the head dipoles exhibit frustration in their
576 orientational ordering.
577
578 The ordering trends for the tails are essentially opposite to the
579 ordering of the head group dipoles. The tail $P_2$ order parameter
580 {\it decreases} with increasing head size. This indicates that the
581 surface is more curved with larger head / tail size ratios. When the
582 surface is flat, all tails are pointing in the same direction (normal
583 to the bilayer surface). This simplified model appears to be
584 exhibiting a smectic A fluid phase, similar to the real $L_{\beta}$
585 phase. We have not observed a smectic C gel phase ($L_{\beta'}$) for
586 this model system. Increasing the size of the heads results in
587 rapidly decreasing $P_2$ ordering for the molecular bodies.
588
589 \begin{figure}
590 \centering
591 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdRP2.pdf}
592 \caption[The $P_2$ order parameters as a function of the ratio of head group
593 size to the width of the molecular bodies]{The $P_2$ order parameters
594 for head groups (circles) and molecular bodies (squares) as a function
595 of the ratio of head group size ($\sigma_h$) to the width of the
596 molecular bodies ($d$). \label{mdfig:rP2}}
597 \end{figure}
598
599 In addition to varying the size of the head groups, we studied the
600 effects of the interactions between head groups on the structure of
601 lipid bilayer by changing the strength of the dipoles. Figure
602 \ref{mdfig:sP2} shows how the $P_2$ order parameter changes with
603 increasing strength of the dipole. Generally, the dipoles on the head
604 groups become more ordered as the strength of the interaction between
605 heads is increased and become more disordered by decreasing the
606 interaction strength. When the interaction between the heads becomes
607 too weak, the bilayer structure does not persist; all lipid molecules
608 become dispersed in the solvent (which is non-polar in this
609 molecular-scale model). The critical value of the strength of the
610 dipole depends on the size of the head groups. The perfectly flat
611 surface becomes unstable below $5$ Debye, while the rippled
612 surfaces melt at $8$ Debye (asymmetric) or $10$ Debye (symmetric).
613
614 The ordering of the tails mirrors the ordering of the dipoles {\it
615 except for the flat phase}. Since the surface is nearly flat in this
616 phase, the order parameters are only weakly dependent on dipolar
617 strength until it reaches $15$ Debye. Once it reaches this value, the
618 head group interactions are strong enough to pull the head groups
619 close to each other and distort the bilayer structure. For a flat
620 surface, a substantial amount of free volume between the head groups
621 is normally available. When the head groups are brought closer by
622 dipolar interactions, the tails are forced to splay outward, first forming
623 curved bilayers, and then inverted micelles.
624
625 When $\sigma_h=1.28 d$, the $P_2$ order parameter decreases slightly
626 when the strength of the dipole is increased above $16$ Debye. For
627 rippled bilayers, there is less free volume available between the head
628 groups. Therefore increasing dipolar strength weakly influences the
629 structure of the membrane. However, the increase in the body $P_2$
630 order parameters implies that the membranes are being slightly
631 flattened due to the effects of increasing head-group attraction.
632
633 A very interesting behavior takes place when the head groups are very
634 large relative to the molecular bodies ($\sigma_h = 1.41 d$) and the
635 dipolar strength is relatively weak ($\mu < 9$ Debye). In this case,
636 the two leaves of the bilayer become totally interdigitated with each
637 other in large patches of the membrane. With higher dipolar
638 strength, the interdigitation is limited to single lines that run
639 through the bilayer in a direction perpendicular to the ripple wave
640 vector.
641
642 \begin{figure}
643 \centering
644 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdSP2.pdf}
645 \caption[The $P_2$ order parameters as a function of the strength of
646 the dipoles.]{The $P_2$ order parameters for head group dipoles (a)
647 and molecular bodies (b) as a function of the strength of the dipoles.
648 These order parameters are shown for four values of the head group /
649 molecular width ratio ($\sigma_h / d$). \label{mdfig:sP2}}
650 \end{figure}
651
652 Figure \ref{mdfig:tP2} shows the dependence of the order parameters on
653 temperature. As expected, systems are more ordered at low
654 temperatures, and more disordered at high temperatures. All of the
655 bilayers we studied can become unstable if the temperature becomes
656 high enough. The only interesting feature of the temperature
657 dependence is in the flat surfaces ($\sigma_h=1.20 d$ and
658 $\sigma_h=1.28 d$). Here, when the temperature is increased above
659 $310$K, there is enough jostling of the head groups to allow the
660 dipolar frustration to resolve into more ordered states. This results
661 in a slight increase in the $P_2$ order parameter above this
662 temperature.
663
664 For the rippled surfaces ($\sigma_h=1.35 d$ and $\sigma_h=1.41 d$),
665 there is a slightly increased orientational ordering in the molecular
666 bodies above $290$K. Since our model lacks the detailed information
667 about the behavior of the lipid tails, this is the closest the model
668 can come to depicting the ripple ($P_{\beta'}$) to fluid
669 ($L_{\alpha}$) phase transition. What we are observing is a
670 flattening of the rippled structures made possible by thermal
671 expansion of the tightly-packed head groups. The lack of detailed
672 chain configurations also makes it impossible for this model to depict
673 the ripple to gel ($L_{\beta'}$) phase transition.
674
675 \begin{figure}
676 \centering
677 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdTP2.pdf}
678 \caption[The $P_2$ order parameters as a function of temperature]{The
679 $P_2$ order parameters for head group dipoles (a) and molecular bodies
680 (b) as a function of temperature. These order parameters are shown
681 for four values of the head group / molecular width ratio ($\sigma_h /
682 d$).\label{mdfig:tP2}}
683 \end{figure}
684
685 Fig. \ref{mdfig:phaseDiagram} shows a phase diagram for the model as a
686 function of the head group / molecular width ratio ($\sigma_h / d$)
687 and the strength of the head group dipole moment ($\mu$). Note that
688 the specific form of the bilayer phase is governed almost entirely by
689 the head group / molecular width ratio, while the strength of the
690 dipolar interactions between the head groups governs the stability of
691 the bilayer phase. Weaker dipoles result in unstable bilayer phases,
692 while extremely strong dipoles can shift the equilibrium to an
693 inverted micelle phase when the head groups are small. Temperature
694 has little effect on the actual bilayer phase observed, although higher
695 temperatures can cause the unstable region to grow into the higher
696 dipole region of this diagram.
697
698 \begin{figure}
699 \centering
700 \includegraphics[width=\linewidth]{./figures/mdPhaseDiagram.pdf}
701 \caption[Phase diagram for the simple molecular model]{Phase diagram
702 for the simple molecular model as a function of the head group /
703 molecular width ratio ($\sigma_h / d$) and the strength of the head
704 group dipole moment ($\mu$).\label{mdfig:phaseDiagram}}
705 \end{figure}
706
707 We have computed translational diffusion constants for lipid molecules
708 from the mean-square displacement,
709 \begin{equation}
710 D = \lim_{t \rightarrow \infty} \frac{1}{6 t} \langle {|\left({\bf
711 r}_{i}(t) - {\bf r}_{i}(0) \right)|}^2 \rangle,
712 \label{mdeq:msdisplacement}
713 \end{equation}
714 of the lipid bodies. Translational diffusion constants for the
715 different head-to-tail size ratios (all at 300 K) are shown in table
716 \ref{mdtab:relaxation}. We have also computed orientational correlation
717 times for the head groups from fits of the second-order Legendre
718 polynomial correlation function,
719 \begin{equation}
720 C_{\ell}(t) = \langle P_{\ell}\left({\bf \mu}_{i}(t) \cdot {\bf
721 \mu}_{i}(0) \right) \rangle
722 \end{equation}
723 of the head group dipoles. The orientational correlation functions
724 appear to have multiple components in their decay: a fast ($12 \pm 2$
725 ps) decay due to librational motion of the head groups, as well as
726 moderate ($\tau^h_{\rm mid}$) and slow ($\tau^h_{\rm slow}$)
727 components. The fit values for the moderate and slow correlation
728 times are listed in table \ref{mdtab:relaxation}. Standard deviations
729 in the fit time constants are quite large (on the order of the values
730 themselves).
731
732 Sparrman and Westlund used a multi-relaxation model for NMR lineshapes
733 observed in gel, fluid, and ripple phases of DPPC and obtained
734 estimates of a correlation time for water translational diffusion
735 ($\tau_c$) of 20 ns.\cite{Sparrman2003} This correlation time
736 corresponds to water bound to small regions of the lipid membrane.
737 They further assume that the lipids can explore only a single period
738 of the ripple (essentially moving in a nearly one-dimensional path to
739 do so), and the correlation time can therefore be used to estimate a
740 value for the translational diffusion constant of $2.25 \times
741 10^{-11} m^2 s^{-1}$. The translational diffusion constants we obtain
742 are in reasonable agreement with this experimentally determined
743 value. However, the $T_2$ relaxation times obtained by Sparrman and
744 Westlund are consistent with P-N vector reorientation timescales of
745 2-5 ms. This is substantially slower than even the slowest component
746 we observe in the decay of our orientational correlation functions.
747 Other than the dipole-dipole interactions, our head groups have no
748 shape anisotropy which would force them to move as a unit with
749 neighboring molecules. This would naturally lead to P-N reorientation
750 times that are too fast when compared with experimental measurements.
751
752 \begin{table*}
753 \begin{center}
754 \caption{FIT VALUES FOR THE ROTATIONAL CORRELATION TIMES FOR THE HEAD
755 GROUPS ($\tau^h$) AND MOLECULAR BODIES ($\tau^b$) AS WELL AS THE
756 TRANSLATIONAL DIFFUSION CONSTANTS FOR THE MOL\-E\-CULE AS A FUNCTION
757 OF THE HEAD-TO-BODY WIDTH RATIO}
758 \begin{tabular}{lcccc}
759 \hline
760 $\sigma_h / d$ & $\tau^h_{\rm mid} (ns)$ & $\tau^h_{\rm
761 slow} (\mu s)$ & $\tau^b (\mu s)$ & $D (\times 10^{-11} m^2 s^{-1})$ \\
762 \hline
763 1.20 & $0.4$ & $9.6$ & $9.5$ & $0.43(1)$ \\
764 1.28 & $2.0$ & $13.5$ & $3.0$ & $5.91(3)$ \\
765 1.35 & $3.2$ & $4.0$ & $0.9$ & $3.42(1)$ \\
766 1.41 & $0.3$ & $23.8$ & $6.9$ & $7.16(1)$ \\
767 \end{tabular}
768 \begin{minipage}{\linewidth}
769 %\centering
770 \vspace{2mm}
771 All correlation functions and transport coefficients were computed
772 from microcanonical simulations with an average temperture of 300 K.
773 In all of the phases, the head group correlation functions decay with
774 an fast librational contribution ($12 \pm 1$ ps). There are
775 additional moderate ($\tau^h_{\rm mid}$) and slow $\tau^h_{\rm slow}$
776 contributions to orientational decay that depend strongly on the phase
777 exhibited by the lipids. The symmetric ripple phase ($\sigma_h / d =
778 1.35$) appears to exhibit the slowest molecular reorientation.
779 \label{mdtab:relaxation}
780 \end{minipage}
781 \end{center}
782 \end{table*}
783
784 \section{Discussion}
785 \label{mdsec:discussion}
786
787 Symmetric and asymmetric ripple phases have been observed to form in
788 our molecular dynamics simulations of a simple molecular-scale lipid
789 model. The lipid model consists of an dipolar head group and an
790 ellipsoidal tail. Within the limits of this model, an explanation for
791 generalized membrane curvature is a simple mismatch in the size of the
792 heads with the width of the molecular bodies. With heads
793 substantially larger than the bodies of the molecule, this curvature
794 should be convex nearly everywhere, a requirement which could be
795 resolved either with micellar or cylindrical phases.
796
797 The persistence of a {\it bilayer} structure therefore requires either
798 strong attractive forces between the head groups or exclusionary
799 forces from the solvent phase. To have a persistent bilayer structure
800 with the added requirement of convex membrane curvature appears to
801 result in corrugated structures like the ones pictured in
802 Fig. \ref{mdfig:phaseCartoon}. In each of the sections of these
803 corrugated phases, the local curvature near a most of the head groups
804 is convex. These structures are held together by the extremely strong
805 and directional interactions between the head groups.
806
807 The attractive forces holding the bilayer together could either be
808 non-directional (as in the work of Kranenburg and
809 Smit),\cite{Kranenburg2005} or directional (as we have utilized in
810 these simulations). The dipolar head groups are key for the
811 maintaining the bilayer structures exhibited by this particular model;
812 reducing the strength of the dipole has the tendency to make the
813 rippled phase disappear. The dipoles are likely to form attractive
814 head-to-tail configurations even in flat configurations, but the
815 temperatures are high enough that vortex defects become prevalent in
816 the flat phase. The flat phase we observed therefore appears to be
817 substantially above the Kosterlitz-Thouless transition temperature for
818 a planar system of dipoles with this set of parameters. For this
819 reason, it would be interesting to observe the thermal behavior of the
820 flat phase at substantially lower temperatures.
821
822 One feature of this model is that an energetically favorable
823 orientational ordering of the dipoles can be achieved by forming
824 ripples. The corrugation of the surface breaks the symmetry of the
825 plane, making vortex defects somewhat more expensive, and stabilizing
826 the long range orientational ordering for the dipoles in the head
827 groups. Most of the rows of the head-to-tail dipoles are parallel to
828 each other and the system adopts a bulk anti-ferroelectric state. We
829 believe that this is the first time the organization of the head
830 groups in ripple phases has been addressed.
831
832 Although the size-mismatch between the heads and molecular bodies
833 appears to be the primary driving force for surface convexity, the
834 persistence of the bilayer through the use of rippled structures is a
835 function of the strong, attractive interactions between the heads.
836 One important prediction we can make using the results from this
837 simple model is that if the dipole-dipole interaction is the leading
838 contributor to the head group attractions, the wave vectors for the
839 ripples should always be found {\it perpendicular} to the dipole
840 director axis. This echoes the prediction we made earlier for simple
841 elastic dipolar membranes, and may suggest experimental designs which
842 will test whether this is really the case in the phosphatidylcholine
843 $P_{\beta'}$ phases. The dipole director axis should also be easily
844 computable for the all-atom and coarse-grained simulations that have
845 been published in the literature.\cite{deVries05}
846
847 Experimental verification of our predictions of dipolar orientation
848 correlating with the ripple direction would require knowing both the
849 local orientation of a rippled region of the membrane (available via
850 AFM studies of supported bilayers) as well as the local ordering of
851 the membrane dipoles. Obtaining information about the local
852 orientations of the membrane dipoles may be available from
853 fluorescence detected linear dichroism (LD). Benninger {\it et al.}
854 have recently used axially-specific chromophores
855 2-(4,4-difluoro-5,7-dimethyl-4-bora-3a,4a-diaza-s-indacene-3-pentanoyl)-1-hexadecanoyl-sn-glycero-3-\\
856 phospocholine ($\beta$-BODIPY FL C5-HPC or BODIPY-PC) and 3,3'
857 dioctadecyloxacarbocyanine perchlorate (DiO) in their
858 fluorescence-detected linear dichroism (LD) studies of plasma
859 membranes of living cells.\cite{Benninger:2005qy} The DiO dye aligns
860 its transition moment perpendicular to the membrane normal, while the
861 BODIPY-PC transition dipole is parallel with the membrane normal.
862 Without a doubt, using fluorescence detection of linear dichroism in
863 concert with AFM surface scanning would be difficult experiments to
864 carry out. However, there is some hope of performing experiments to
865 either verify or falsify the predictions of our simulations.
866
867 Although our model is simple, it exhibits some rich and unexpected
868 behaviors. It would clearly be a closer approximation to reality if
869 we allowed bending motions between the dipoles and the molecular
870 bodies, and if we replaced the rigid ellipsoids with ball-and-chain
871 tails. However, the advantages of this simple model (large system
872 sizes, 50 fs time steps) allow us to rapidly explore the phase diagram
873 for a wide range of parameters. Our explanation of this rippling
874 phenomenon will help us design more accurate molecular models for
875 corrugated membranes and experiments to test whether or not
876 dipole-dipole interactions exert an influence on membrane rippling.