1: %\documentstyle[pra,epsfig,aps,preprint]{revtex}
2: \documentstyle[pra,epsfig,aps]{revtex}
3: \input{psfig.sty}
4:
5: \begin{document}
6: \pagestyle{plain}
7: \pagenumbering{arabic}
8: \title{Force and kinetic barriers to unzipping of the DNA double helix}
9:
10: \author{Simona Cocco$^1$,
11: R\'emi Monasson$^{2,3}$ and John F. Marko$^1$}
12: \address{$^1$ Department of Physics,
13: The University of Illinois at Chicago, \\ 845 West Taylor Street, Chicago
14: IL 60607-7059\\
15: $^{2}$ The James Franck Institute, The University of Chicago, \\
16: 5640 South Ellis Avenue, Chicago IL 60637;\\
17: $^{3}$ CNRS-Laboratoire de Physique Th\'eorique de l'ENS, \\
18: 24 rue Lhomond, 75231 Paris
19: cedex 05, France}
20: \date{\today}
21:
22: \maketitle
23: \begin{abstract}
24: A theory of the unzipping of double-stranded (ds) DNA is presented,
25: and is compared to recent micromanipulation experiments. It is shown
26: that the interactions which stabilize the double helix and the elastic
27: rigidity of single strands (ss) simply determine the sequence dependent
28: $\approx 12$ pN
29: force threshold for DNA strand separation. Using a semi-microscopic
30: model of the binding between nucleotide strands, we show that the
31: greater rigidity of the strands when formed into dsDNA,
32: relative to that of isolated strands, gives rise to a potential
33: barrier to unzipping. The effects of this barrier are derived
34: analytically. The force to keep the
35: extremities of the molecule at a fixed distance, the kinetic rates
36: for strand unpairing at fixed applied force, and the rupture force as a
37: function of loading rate are calculated.
38: The dependence of the kinetics and of the rupture force on molecule
39: length is also analyzed.
40: \end{abstract}
41:
42:
43: %\vskip 10pt
44:
45: {\bf Introduction:}
46: In cells, proteins apply forces to unzip and stretch DNA. These
47: forces can be studied in single-molecule experiments
48: (Fig.~\ref{dessin})\cite{Ess,Leg,Lee,Rie,Stru,Str,Bon98}, and are of
49: biophysical as well as biological interest. Our focus here is
50: primarily on unzipping experiments where forces are applied across the
51: double helix to adjacent 5' and 3' strands
52: (Fig.~\ref{dessin}A)\cite{Ess,Rie,Thom,Lub,Cac}.
53: In experiments, the control parameters may be the force $f$ itself,
54: the distance between the last base pairs $2r$, or the rate of
55: force increase or `loading rate' (Fig.~\ref{dessin}B).
56: We discuss the results expected in all these situations.
57:
58: We first use a thermodynamical equilibrium approach to show that the
59: sequence-dependent force associated with unzipping of large DNAs,
60: $f_u \simeq 12 $ piconewton (pN),
61: can be simply deduced from the known free
62: energy of DNA denaturation and the elasticity of
63: single-stranded DNA.
64: The unzipping experiments of Essevaz-Roulet {\em et al}
65: (Fig.~\ref{dessin}A) \cite{Ess} and Rief {\em et
66: al} (Fig.~\ref{dessin}D) \cite{Rie} are accurately described at this
67: macroscopic level.
68:
69: Other experimentally observable aspects of unzipping can only be
70: investigated using a more detailed description of base-pairing interactions.
71: We therefore present a semi-microscopic model which accounts for
72: hydrogen bonds and stacking interactions \cite{Pro,Pey,Cul,Coc99,Coc00}.
73: We show that a free-energy potential barrier
74: originates from the greater range of conformational fluctuation of
75: DNA strands when isolated, relative to when they are bound together
76: to form dsDNA (Fig.~\ref{potb175}). Our model can be investigated in detail
77: and allows precise calculation of the effects of this barrier
78: for the initiation of unzipping and the kinetics of strand dissociation.
79:
80: We compute the force necessary to keep apart the two extremities of
81: the DNA molecules at some distance $2\,r$, as well
82: as the shape of the opening fork (Fig.~\ref{force}).
83: Due to the potential barrier, this
84: force is much larger at small $r$ (and can reach some hundreds of pN)
85: than the asymptotic value $f_u$ at large $r$. Analysis of unzipping
86: in thermal equilibrium at the high level of precision possible in AFM
87: experiments would allow unambiguous verification of this predicted
88: force barrier.
89:
90: The barrier makes strand dissociation an activated process with
91: dynamics that can be analyzed using nucleation theory\cite{Lan69}.
92: Unzipping starts with a transition `bubble' a few ($\leq 4$) bases
93: long (Fig.~\ref{dessinbulle}).
94: We calculate the free energy of this bubble, and
95: determine how the dissociation rate depends on
96: applied force and molecule length (Fig.~\ref{temps}). Results
97: are compared to the experiments of Bonnet {\em et al.} \cite{Bon98}
98: and of P\"orschke \cite{Por}.
99:
100: Extending Evans' theory for the breaking of single bonds \cite{Eva97}
101: to the case of a one-dimensional polymer \cite{Seb00}, we then
102: calculate the most probable rupture force when the
103: DNA molecule is subjected to a force which increases at a
104: constant `loading rate' (Fig.~\ref{loading}). The dependence of the
105: rupture force upon loading rate and molecular length
106: could be quantitatively tested by AFM unzipping experiments;
107: these results also shed light on AFM DNA-stretching experiments of
108: Struntz {\em et al.}\cite{Stru} and of Rief {\em et al.}\cite{Rie}.
109:
110: {\bf Thermodynamic Description of Unzipping:}
111: An unstressed double helix is stabilized against spontaneously
112: dissociating into its two strands by the interaction free energy per
113: base pair, which from a thermodynamic perspective we may take
114: to be some average amount $g_0$. Although dependent on sequence,
115: we may consider $g_0 = -1.4 k_BT$, the value determined from single molecule
116: experiments on an AT rich sequence in $\lambda$ phage \cite{Str},
117: as a reference for the free energy difference between dsDNA and
118: separated ssDNAs. Our emphasis is on an
119: understanding of the free-energy balance in unzipping rather
120: than to study inhomogenous sequence effects\cite{Thom,Lub}.
121:
122: In the presence of applied torque
123: $\Gamma$ and unzipping force $f$ (Fig.~\ref{dessin}B)
124: the free energy difference per base pair
125: between unzipped and base-paired DNA strands is
126: \begin{equation} \label{deltag}
127: \Delta g (\Gamma,f) = g_{\rm ssDNA} - g_{\rm dsDNA}
128: = -g_0 + \theta_0 \Gamma + 2\, g_{\rm s}(f)
129: \end{equation}
130: When $\Delta g < 0$, opening is thermodynamically favorable.
131: The last two terms represent mechanical work done per base pair
132: unzipping the double helix. In order, they are the work
133: done by the torque ($\theta_0 = 2\pi/10.5$ is simply the change in
134: strand winding angle during conversion of dsDNA to separated strands),
135: and the stretching free energy of the unzipped single strands.
136:
137: The function $g_{\rm s}(f)$ in (\ref{deltag})
138: is the ssDNA stretching free energy
139: per base at fixed force. The leading factor of 2 simply reflects the
140: fact that two bases of ssDNA are created for each base-pair of dsDNA
141: which is unzipped. The ssDNA elastic behavior is complicated by
142: nucleotide-interaction effects \cite{Maier}, but
143: experimental force-extension curves for $\lambda$ phage ssDNA in 150 mM
144: Na$^+$ are well described by a freely-jointed chain-like (FJCL) elastic
145: response for forces $>1$ pN, with Kuhn length $d= 15 $\AA ~ \cite{bus,Rie}.
146: The corresponding free energy for forces up to $\approx 20$ pN is
147: \begin{equation} \label{forfjc}
148: g_{\rm s}^{FJCL} (f) =
149: - k_B T \;\frac{l_{ss}}{d}\; \log\left[\sinh(d \, f / [k_B T])
150: \over d \, f / [k_B T] \right ]
151: \end{equation}
152: where the contour length per base pair is
153: $l_{ss}=27$ $\mu$m$/48.5$ kb $\simeq 5.6$ \AA.
154:
155: At zero applied force, $g_{\rm s}(0)=0$, thus ssDNA is stable when
156: $\Gamma < \Gamma_u = g_0/\theta_0 = -2.4 k_B T$, in good agreement
157: with an experimental estimate of the twisting torque needed to
158: denature an AT rich sequence in a $\lambda$ phage DNA \cite{Str}
159: (the sign indicates a left-handed dsDNA-unwinding torque). In this
160: case, the work done by the torque during opening is simply $-g_0 = 1.4
161: k_B T$ per base pair.
162:
163: In the opposite case where torque is zero ({\em i.e.} for dsDNA with no
164: constraint of its strand linking number), the critical unzipping force
165: (at which $\Delta g(f)=0$)
166: is $f_u ^{FJCL} = 11$~pN. These results are in good agreement with the
167: mid-range of unzipping forces encountered with experiments on
168: inhomogeneous-sequence DNAs by Essevaz-Roulet {\em et al.}
169: (Fig.~\ref{dessin}A: 12 pN threshold to start, then 10 to 15 pN during
170: unzipping $\lambda$-DNA\cite{Ess}).
171: Data of Rief {\em et al.}
172: (Fig.~\ref{dessin}D; $20 \pm 3$ pN for poly(dG-dC), $9 \pm 3$ pN for
173: poly(dA-dT)\cite{Rie}) gives via (\ref{deltag}) denaturation free energies of
174: 1.1 and 3.5 $k_B T$ per AT and GC base pair respectively, in
175: good agreement with thermodynamical data\cite{Breslauer}.
176: Finally, the projected length of one ssDNA nucleotide along the
177: force direction at the unzipping transition is given as
178: $d_u^{FJCL}\simeq 4$\AA.
179: Bockelman {\it et al.} used a similar theory
180: to analyze unzipping force dependence on sequence\cite{Ess}.
181:
182: The inset of Fig.~\ref{force} shows the curve in the torque-force plane on
183: which $\Delta g = 0$, which is the `phase boundary' separating dsDNA
184: and unzipped ssDNAs. This boundary is predicted to have the shape $f_u
185: \propto (\Gamma - \Gamma_u )^{1/2}$ for small $f_u$.
186:
187: For forces up to 15 pN, (\ref{forfjc}) is approximated to
188: $0.15 k_B T$ accuracy by the simple quadratic form
189: %$g ^{G}_{\rm s} (f) = - f^2/C$
190: \begin{equation} \label{forgau}
191: g ^{G}_{\rm s} (f) = - \frac {f^2}{C} \qquad .
192: \end{equation}
193: where the ssDNA effective elastic constant is $C=0.12 \, k_B T/$\AA $^2$.
194: Using this form allows analytical solution for the unzipping force,
195: $f_u ^{G}=( C \, |g_0|/2)^{1/2} =$ 12 pN \cite{Lub,Cac,Seb00};
196: at this force the projection of ssDNA monomer length
197: along the force direction is $d_u^{G} = (2|g_0|/C)^{1/2} \simeq 5$\AA.
198: This quadratic approximation is quantitatively nearly equivalent to
199: the nonlinear model (\ref{forfjc}) at forces up to $\approx 15$ pN
200: (e.g. note the accord between the torque-force `phase boundaries'
201: in Fig. 3, inset);
202: this will be key to the continuum theory below.
203:
204: {\bf Semi-Microscopic Model of Strand Binding:}
205: Features at the nucleotide scale relevant to the onset of unzipping are
206: ignored in models like (1). We therefore move to a model which uses
207: the distances $2\,r(n)$ between corresponding $n$th base pairs of
208: the two strands, as degrees of freedom. The energy of the DNA strands is:
209: \begin{equation} \label{ham}
210: H = \int_0^N dn \left\{ {1 \over 2} m \big( r(n) \big) \left( dr \over dn
211: \right)^2 + U\big( r(n) \big) \right\}
212: \end{equation}
213: This model is similar to models previously used to describe
214: thermal denaturation\cite{Pey,Cul}. The precise form of (\ref{ham})
215: follows from our previously developed model for denaturation by
216: torque \cite{Coc99,Coc00} by integration over angular degrees of
217: freedom, followed by continuum limit for the base index $n$.
218:
219: The first term in (\ref{ham}) describes interactions between neighboring
220: bases along each strand, and must depend strongly on the
221: inter-base half-distance $r(n)$, since conformational fluctuations of
222: the strands are highly quenched inside the double helix, relative to those
223: along ssDNA. The strand rigidity is
224: $m(r) = E\, e^{-b(r-R_0)} + C$,
225: where $R_0 = 10$ \AA ~ is the double
226: helix radius, and where $1/b=0.6$ \AA ~ is the separation at which
227: the strand rigidity changes from its double-helix value $E+C$, to the much
228: smaller ssDNA value $C$. We use the value $C = 0.12$ $k_B T/$\AA$^2$
229: from the previous section.
230: The rigidity of the strands inside the double helix has been
231: determined from Raman measurements of internal vibrations of
232: dsDNA, to be $E = 58 k_B T/$\AA$^2$\cite{Coc00,Ura81}.
233:
234: The second term in (\ref{ham}) is a potential, acting between
235: the two strands, made up of the
236: hydrogen-bonding energy between corresponding bases,
237: plus a torque energy:
238: $U(r) = U_H (r) - \Gamma R_1/r$
239: where $R_1 = 6$ \AA\cite{Coc99}.
240: We use the Morse potential form\cite{Mor} for the
241: hydrogen bonding interaction\cite{Pro,Pey}:
242: $U_H(r) = D [ (e^{-a(r-R)} - 1)^2 - 1]$, with $D=5.84 k_B T$ and
243: $a = 6.3$ \AA$^{-1}$ (Fig.~\ref{potb175} inset).
244:
245: In thermal equilibrium, strand unpairing is described by the
246: partition function
247: $Z = \int {\cal D}r(n) ~ e^{-H/k_B T}$.
248: $Z$ can be computed by use of a continuum transfer
249: matrix technique along the $n$ coordinate, leading to a Schr\"odinger-like
250: equation:
251: \begin{equation} \label{sc}
252: \left[ -{(k_B T)^2 \over 2\, m(r)} \, \frac{\partial ^2}{\partial r ^2}
253: + V(r) \right] \psi(r) = g\, \psi(r) \qquad .
254: \end{equation}
255: The free-energy potential $V(r)=U(r) + (k_B T/2)\ln[m(r)/m(\infty)]$
256: includes an entropic contribution due to the
257: decrease in the rigidity $m(r)$ with strand unbinding.
258: This entropic potential (Fig.~\ref{potb175}) arises
259: when going from the path integral
260: to the Schr\"odinger equation \cite{deg} with non constant mass\cite{Cul},
261: and here it generates a large force barrier to the
262: initiation of unzipping, which strongly affects the kinetics
263: of strand separation.
264:
265: The lowest eigenvalue $g_0$ is the equilibrium free energy, and the
266: corresponding $\psi_0(r)$ describes thermal fluctuations of distance
267: between the two strands. For $g\geq 0$ the eigenvalue
268: spectrum becomes continuous, corresponding to the appearance of
269: completely separated ssDNAs at $g=0$. When DNA is the thermodynamical
270: favorable state $g_0 < 0$ represents the free energy per base pair of
271: a long dsDNA, relative to separated ssDNAs. The fluctuations of $r$
272: are confined to the Morse well, so $g_0$ is well approximated if we
273: take $V(r) = V(R_0)+ U_H(r)-U_H(R_0)$ and $m(r)=m(R_0)$ for which
274: (\ref{sc}) is exactly soluble\cite{Mor}. Inside the well,
275: $\psi _0(r)$ is the Morse ground state \cite{Mor}; outside the well it
276: can be computed using the WKB approximation\cite{Boh}.
277: Using the parameters listed above, and at zero torque, the lowest
278: eigenvalue is $g_0 = -1.4 k_B T$, in accord with the corresponding
279: number assumed in the previous section. Application of an unwinding
280: torque gradually increases $g_0$ until at $\Gamma_u = -2.4 k_B T$ it
281: becomes zero and the DNA unwinds, exactly as occurs in the
282: thermodynamic model of the previous section (Fig. 3, inset).
283:
284: {\bf Force required to hold ssDNA ends at a given distance}:
285: This situation can be analyzed simply
286: in terms of $\psi_0(r)$, without further computation. This is because,
287: for a semi-infinite dsDNA, the function $\psi_0(r)$ corresponding to
288: $g_0$ is the probability distribution for the two ssDNA ends to fluctuate
289: a distance $2r$ apart. Therefore the free energy associated with a
290: fluctuation which separates the two ssDNA ends by a distance $2r$ (or
291: equivalently the total work done separating the two ends to a distance
292: $2r$) is
293: \begin{equation}
294: W(r) = -k_B T\log\psi_0(r)
295: \end{equation}
296: up to an additive constant which is unimportant for our analysis.
297: %In a rough approximation consisting in
298: Note that, neglecting surface interactions,
299: this is half the free energy associated
300: to separate a distance $2r$ in the middle of a long dsDNA,
301: since an interior `bubble' is made of two `forks'.
302:
303: The unzipping force that must be supplied to hold the two ssDNA ends a
304: distance $2r$ (Fig.~\ref{dessin}B)
305: apart is thus just the derivative of (6), $f(r) =
306: dW(r)/d(2r)$. This is in Fig.~\ref{force}, which displays a large
307: force barrier of $\approx 270$ pN as the strands are forced apart.
308: The barrier peak occurs for a half-separation $r-R_0 = 0.5$ \AA, and
309: then decays to the long-molecule unzipping force
310: $f_u \simeq 12$ pN by $r-R_0 \approx 4$ \AA.
311: At large distances, the work done per base pair by unzipping is
312: $2 f_u d_u \simeq 3 k_B T$, twice as much as the denaturation free
313: energy $-g_0$; this is because the force
314: must unzip the DNA, and extend the highly flexible ssDNAs.
315: The peak force is large compared to the fluctuations in force
316: associated with sequence\cite{Ess}.
317: The force barrier will not be observable in large-scale unzipping
318: experiments\cite{Ess}, but should be observable in AFM studies. A
319: stiff cantilever with roughly 0.1 \AA ~ thermal noise should be used
320: to measure the force barrier as a function of essentially fixed
321: opening distance.
322:
323: In this fixed-distance experiment, one might
324: also measure the shape of the opening `fork', by determining
325: the relation between opening distance and base position,
326: $n(r)$ (Fig.~\ref{dessin}B).
327: % There is of course a probability distribution
328: %for $n(r)$, but because the forces needed to unzip dsDNA are
329: %sufficient to appreciably stretch out ssDNA (see previous section),
330: %this distribution is well described by its peak.
331: The most probable configuration $n(r)$
332: satisfies the equation of motion associated with (\ref{sc}),
333: which expresses force balance along the chain,
334: % including the
335: %effect of harmonic fluctuations (i.e. including the entropic potential
336: %of (\ref{sc})
337: \begin{equation} \label{classic}
338: m(r) {d^2 r \over dn^2} + \frac 12 {m'(r)}
339: \left( dr \over dn \right)^2 = V'(r)
340: \end{equation}
341: We integrate (\ref{classic}) to obtain $r(n)$,
342: the shape of the opening `fork'.
343: Starting from the opening point where
344: $r=R_0$ and $dr/dn=0$, $n(r) = 2 [E\,(r-R_0)/V'(R_0)]^{1/2}$. Far from
345: the opening point $n(r) = r/d_u^{G}\simeq r/(5$\AA )\cite{Cac}.
346:
347: {\bf Unzipping kinetics at fixed force:}
348: Many experiments on short (10-100 bp) dsDNAs
349: (\cite{Lee,Stru,Bon98,Por} and caption of Fig.~\ref{dessin})
350: probe the kinetics of strand separation.
351: The equilibrium results discussed above are a starting point for
352: a kinetic theory of unzipping based on nucleation theory\cite{Lan69}.
353: The Schr\"odinger equation (\ref{sc}) with the
354: fluctuation-corrected potential $V(r)$ describes dsDNA and ssDNA as
355: locally stable molecular states.
356: The general problem faced in unzipping kinetics is the transition
357: from an initially metastable state
358: (dsDNA or ssDNA, depending on the force, see below)
359: to a final, stable (lower-free-energy) state.
360: Strand dissociation requires the whole polymer chain
361: to cross the free energy potential barrier of $V(r)$ (Fig. 2), which
362: makes the transition rate strongly length and force dependent.
363: Using the effective potential $V(r)$ (including the entropic
364: barrier) corresponds to averaging over microscopic fluctuations
365: of individual bases, restricting us to consider unzipping rates slow
366: compared to those of these microscopic fluctuations (the
367: experimentally relevant regime).
368:
369: The transition rate (equivalently the inverse lifetime) has the
370: form familiar from transition-state theory \cite{Lan69}:
371: \begin{equation} \label{rate}
372: \nu = \nu_0 \; e^{-G^*/k_B T}
373: \end{equation}
374: It requires the activation free energy $G^*$ of a transition state,
375: relative to the initial metastable state.
376: The transition state is the saddle-point configuration of the
377: free energy, with one unstable direction leading monotonically
378: down to the initial and final states, and is the dominant
379: transition pathway\cite{Lan69}.
380:
381: Our transition states are just the partially unzipped
382: configurations $r^*(n)$ determined from (\ref{classic}), for force-dependent
383: boundary conditions consistent with the initial
384: ($r_i$) and final ($r_f$) states.
385: The activation free energy is
386: \begin{eqnarray}
387: \label{activation}
388: G^* &=& H[r^*(n)] + (k_B T/2)\int dn \ln[m[r^*(n)]/m(\infty)]
389: - 2 f r^*(0) - G_{m} \nonumber \\
390: &=&\int _{r_{i}} ^{r_{f}} dr \, \sqrt{ 2 \, m(r) \, (V(r)-g_{m})}
391: \ - \ 2\, f \,(r_{f}-r_{i}) \qquad ,
392: \end{eqnarray}
393: i.e. the free energy associated with (\ref{classic}) minus the
394: free energy of the metastable state $(G_{m}= N g_{m})$
395: from which the transitions occur.
396: $G^*$ is in practice the free energy of the
397: few-base-pair `bubble' portion of the transition state which
398: separates the unzipped and double-stranded regions.
399:
400: Finally, the rate prefactor $\nu_0$ is the linear growth rate of
401: unstable perturbations around the saddle-point configuration\cite{Lan69}.
402: We assume viscous dynamics with a friction coefficient per base
403: $\zeta = 6\pi\eta R_0$
404: (water viscosity $\eta = 1\times 10^{-3} ~ {\rm kg}/({\rm m}\cdot
405: {\rm sec})$). From a detailed calculation we find
406: $\nu_0 \approx Da^2/(4\zeta) = 1\times 10^{12}$ sec$^{-1}$,
407: essentially the ratio of the negative curvature of the
408: Morse potential near the top of the well, to the friction coefficient.
409: We now describe how to compute the dissociation rate
410: and the nucleation bubble shape (i.e. boundary condition $r_i, r_f$)
411: depending on the unzipping force.
412:
413: {\bf Kinetics of unzipping where ssDNA is stable ($f > f_u$):}
414: If a steady force is applied which is slightly bigger than the equilibrium
415: unzipping threshold $f_u$, then the initial dsDNA is metastable
416: relative to separated strands: $\Delta g(f)=-g_0-2 f^2/C <0$ (\ref{deltag}),
417: and formula (\ref{rate})
418: is directly applicable (Fig.~\ref{dessinbulle}A) to calculation of the
419: dissociation rate $\nu_{-}$.
420: The free energy of the initial metastable state is $g_m=g_0$.
421: The transition state in this case is a short
422: ssDNA `nucleus' of $n^*$ bases at the open end ($n=0$) of the dsDNA,
423: with boundary conditions at the ends
424: of fixed force $f$ ($dr/dn = 2 f/m[r(n)]$),
425: and free energy equal to the metastable dsDNA value
426: ($V(r(n)) - 2 f^2/m[r(n)]= g _0$).
427: This determines $r_{i}=r (n^*)$ and $r_{f}=r(0)$.
428:
429: The size of the nucleation `bubble' depends weakly
430: on the force and is $n^*(f) \simeq 4$ bases, independent
431: of the overall DNA molecule length.
432: Therefore, the dissociation
433: time $t_- = 1/\nu_-$ (Fig.~\ref{temps}) is length-independent
434: for forces above $f_u = 12$ pN.
435: The decrease in dissociation time with forces $> f_u$ is
436: due to reduction of $G^*$ by the applied force.
437: Beyond $f_b\simeq 230$~pN, the barrier in $V(r)$ is completely overcome,
438: and unzipping is immediate ($t_{-}=1/\nu_0$).
439: Our computation addresses only the initial unzipping
440: barrier-crossing event and does not include the time necessary to push
441: the fork down the dsDNA, which would introduce a weak molecular-length
442: dependence for forces $> f_u$ in Fig.~\ref{temps}.
443: Fork motion near $f_u$ may also be retarded by additional barriers
444: introduced by inhomogeneous sequence.
445: {\bf Kinetics of unzipping where ssDNA is metastable ($f < f_u$):}
446: Below the equilibrium unzipping force threshold, an infinitely long
447: molecule is stable as a dsDNA. However, relatively short
448: ($<20$ bp) oligomers have a finite
449: strand-dissociation time which can be accelerated by applied force.
450: Here the final ssDNA state is metastable (although with a possibly
451: long lifetime) relative to the initial dsDNA state.
452: Therefore our calculation scheme applies not to
453: unzipping (off-rate $\nu_-$), but instead to {\it annealing} of ssDNAs
454: (on-rate $\nu_+$, Fig.~\ref{dessinbulle}B).
455: We compute the off-rate from the on-rate, using the
456: equilibrium condition $\nu_-/\nu_+ = e^{-N \Delta g(f)/k_BT}$,
457: where $N$ is the number of base-pairs in the molecule, and where
458: $\Delta g(f)$ is the force-dependent free energy difference per base pair
459: between the paired and unpaired states .
460:
461: The calculation of the on-rate requires computation of a saddle point
462: configuration with a nucleation bubble of dsDNA at the end of ssDNAs
463: to which the force is applied (Fig.~\ref{dessinbulle}B).
464: The relevant boundary
465: conditions are analogous to those above, apart from the requirement
466: that the ssDNAs be in close proximity but not base-paired (i.e. slightly
467: outside the potential barrier of Fig.~\ref{potb175}) and the
468: free energy of the metastable initial state equals $ g_m=2\,g_s(f)= - 2 f^2/C$.
469: The dsDNA nucleation `bubble' remains near 4 bp
470: as the force $f$ decreases from $f_u$ to zero, leading to an
471: essentially $N$-independent on-rate $\nu_+$ (again the time necessary
472: for the actual `zipping up' is not included).
473: Then, the $N$-dependence from the energy difference of paired and unpaired
474: DNA results in a strong molecular-length dependence of $\nu_-$
475: as shown in Fig.~\ref{temps} for forces less than $f_u$.
476:
477:
478: At zero force, this becomes a calculation of
479: dissociation time for free dsDNAs in solution with result
480: $t_- = 10^{0.6 N - 6.3}$~sec. The inset of Fig.~\ref{temps} shows
481: this as a function of dsDNA length; a 10 bp dsDNA has a lifetime of
482: roughly 1 sec; the exponential length-dependence results in a 30 bp
483: DNA being stable for $\approx 10^{12}$ sec$\approx 30000$ yr.
484: Our estimate of $t_-$ for $N=5$, $t_-\approx 0.3$ msec, is in agreement
485: with the results of Bonnet {\em et al.} \cite{Bon98} (Fig.~\ref{dessin}E).
486: The prediction for the nucleation bubble size, $n^*=4$, is close to
487: the value $n^*=3$ measured by P\"orschke for a poly(A)poly(U) acid\cite{Por}.
488:
489: {\bf Rupture of dsDNA during gradual loading:}
490: The previous two sections discuss fixed-force experiments; an alternate
491: experiment is to steadily increase force ($f = \lambda t$ where
492: $\lambda$ is the `loading rate' in pN/sec)
493: and then to measure the force at which rupture occurs.
494: Generally, rapid loading rates result in rupture at
495: large forces. We are able to predict the most probable rupture force
496: versus loading rate and molecular length, and our results display a
497: rich range of possibilities (Fig.~\ref{loading}).
498:
499: Using the calculations of off-rates presented above, the probability
500: distribution for rupture with force is\cite{Eva97}
501: \begin{equation}
502: P(f) = \nu_-(N,f) \; \exp \left(
503: - {1 \over \lambda} \int_0^{f} df' \nu_-(N,f') \right)
504: \end{equation}
505: For a number of molecular lengths,
506: Fig.~\ref{loading} shows the location of the peak of this distribution,
507: the most probable rupture force that would be measured experimentally.
508: For sufficiently slow loading rate, rupture occurs at
509: zero force simply by thermal dissociation; for molecules $> 20$ bp
510: thermal dissociation is practically unobservable.
511:
512: At some loading rate $\lambda_1$, the peak in $P(f)$ jumps to
513: finite force and then increases, with each length of molecule
514: following a different curve. In this regime, the forces at
515: rupture are typically below the equilibrium unzipping
516: threshold $f_u$, since there is time for many thermal
517: attempts at barrier-crossing to the metastable ssDNA state during
518: loading. The length-dependence follows from the calculation of formation
519: of metastable ssDNA discussed above, and has been qualitatively
520: observed for 5'-5' pulling experiments (Fig.~\ref{dessin}C)\cite{Stru}.
521:
522: At a higher loading rate $\lambda_2$ the peak of the rupture force
523: distribution hits $f_u$ which remains the most likely
524: rupture force up to a loading rate $\lambda_3$.
525: For $\lambda > \lambda_2$, dissociation is occuring at forces large enough
526: that the ssDNA final state is stable, resulting in no $N$-dependence.
527: Finally, beyond the very large loading rate
528: $\lambda_3 \approx 10^{5.5}$ pN/sec, the
529: rupture force gradually increases simply because the molecule is
530: unable to respond to the force before it becomes very large.
531: $\lambda_3$ separates equilibrium and nonequilibrium time scales for very
532: long sequences ($N\to \infty$): the rupture force is independent on the
533: loading rate
534: and equal to $f_u$ when $\lambda < \lambda _3$, and increases above.
535:
536:
537: Our framework treats nonequilibrium rupture of a one
538: dimensional object, a development of previous theory\cite{Eva97}
539: necessary for interpretation of unzipping experiments.
540: In light of our detailed predictions, 3'-5' AFM unzipping experiments
541: (Fig.~\ref{dessin}A) should yield interesting results, and would be
542: of help for an accurate determination of the free-energy potential $V(r)$.
543:
544: We thank C. Bouchiat, G. Bonnet, V. Croquette, F. Pincet for useful
545: discussions. Work at UIC was supported by NSF Grant DMR-9734178,
546: by the Petroleum Research Foundation of the American Chemical Society
547: and by the Research Corporation.
548: S. Cocco is partly funded by A. della Riccia grant. R. Monasson is
549: supported in part by the MRSEC Program of the NSF under Award number
550: DMR-9808595.
551:
552:
553: \begin{thebibliography}{99}
554:
555: \bibitem{Ess}
556: Essevaz-Roulet, B., Bockelmann, U. \& Heslot, F. (1997) {\em
557: Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA} {\bf 94}, 11935-11940;\\
558: Bockelmann, U., Essevaz-Roulet, B. \& Heslot, F. (1998) {\em
559: Phys. Rev. E} {\bf 58}, 2386-2394.
560:
561: \bibitem{Leg}
562: Leger, J.F., Robert, J., Bourdieu, L., Chatenay, D. \& Marko, J.F.
563: (1998) {\em Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA} {\bf 95}, 12295-12299.
564:
565: \bibitem{Lee}
566: Lee, G.U., Chrisey, L.A. \& Colton, R.J. (1994) {\em Science} {\bf 266},
567: 771-773.
568:
569: \bibitem{Rie}
570: Rief, M., Clausen-Schaumann, H. \& Gaub, H.E. (1999)
571: {\em Nat. Struct. Biol.} {\bf 6}, 346-349.
572:
573: \bibitem{Stru}
574: Strunz, T., Oroszlan, K., Schafer, R. \& Guntherodt, H.J. (1999) {\em
575: Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA} {\bf 96}, 11277-11282.
576:
577: \bibitem{Str}
578: Strick, T.R., Bensimon, D. \& Croquette, V. (1999) {\em Genetica}
579: {\bf 106}, 57-62.
580:
581: \bibitem{Bon98}
582: Bonnet, G, Krichevsky, O. \& Libchaber, A. (1998)
583: {\em Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA} {\bf 95}, 8602-8606.
584:
585: \bibitem{Thom}
586: Thompson, R.E. \& Siggia, E.D. (1995)
587: {\em Europhys. Lett.} {\bf 31}, 335-340.
588:
589: \bibitem{Lub}
590: Lubensky, D.K. \& Nelson, D.R. (2000)
591: {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 85}, 1572-1575.
592:
593: \bibitem{Cac}
594: Bhattacharjee, S.M. (2000) {\em J. Phys. A.} {\bf 33}, L423-L428.
595:
596: \bibitem{Pro}
597: Prohofsky, E. (1995)
598: {\em Statistical mechanics and stability of macromolecules.}
599: (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge).
600:
601: \bibitem{Pey}
602: Dauxois, T. \& Peyrard, M. (1995) {\em Phys. Rev. E}
603: {\bf 51}, 4027-4040.
604:
605: \bibitem{Cul}
606: Cule, D. \& Hwa, T. (1997) {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 79}, 2375-2378.
607:
608: \bibitem{Coc99}
609: Cocco, S. \& Monasson, R. (1999) {\em Phys. Rev. Lett.} {\bf 83}, 5178-5181.
610: Note that in this previous version the base pair index is discrete.
611: The passage to the continuous and the definition of $R_1$ will be
612: exposed in detail in a forthcoming work.
613:
614: \bibitem{Coc00}
615: Cocco, S. \& Monasson, R. (2000) {\em J. Chem. Phys.} {\bf 112}, 10017-10033.
616:
617: \bibitem{Lan69}
618: Langer, J.S. (1969) {\em Ann. Phys. (N.Y.)} {\bf 34}, 258-275.
619:
620: \bibitem{Por}
621: P\"orschke, D. (1971) {\em J. Mol. Biol.} {\bf 62}, 361-381.
622:
623: \bibitem{Eva97}
624: Evans, E. \& Ritchie, K. (1997) {\em Biophys. J.} {\bf 72}, 1541-1555.
625:
626: \bibitem{Seb00}
627: Sebastian, K.L. (2000) {\em Phys. Rev. E} {\bf 62}, 1128-1132.
628:
629: \bibitem{bus}
630: Smith, S.B., Cui, Y. \& Bustamante, C. (1996)
631: {\em Science} {\bf 271}, 795--799;
632: Bustamante, C., Smith, S.B., Liphardt, J. \& Smith, D.
633: (2000) {\em Current Opinion in Struct. Biol.} {\bf 10}, 279--285.
634:
635:
636: \bibitem{deg}
637: De Gennes, P.G. (1985), Scaling concepts in polymer physics,
638: Cornell University Press.
639:
640: % strongly reflects the presence
641: %of secondary structures
642:
643: \bibitem{Maier}
644: Maier, B., Bensimon, D. \& Croquette, V. (2000)
645: {\em Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA} {\bf 97}, 12002--12007.
646:
647: %When dsDNA is unzipped at forces $\simeq 10$~pN, secondary structures of
648: %ssDNA are essentially absent, and the Kuhn length $d$ of the
649: %bare ssDNA is expected to be shorter, and closer to the backbone
650: %elementary length.
651:
652: \bibitem{Breslauer}
653: Breslauer K.J., Frank, R., Blocker, H., \& Marky, L.A.
654: (1986) {\em Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA} {\bf 83}, 3746--3750.
655:
656: \bibitem{Ura81}
657: Urabe, H. \& Tominaga, Y. (1981) {\em J. Phys. Soc. Japan} {\bf 50},
658: 3543-3544.
659:
660: \bibitem{Mor}
661: Morse, P.M. (1929) {\em Phys. Rev.} {\bf 34}, 57-64.
662:
663: \bibitem{Boh}
664: Bohm, D. (1951) {\em Quantum Theory}, Prentice-Hall physics series
665: (Prentice-Hall, New-York).
666:
667:
668: \end{thebibliography}
669:
670:
671: \begin{center}
672: $^{\, }$ \vskip 2cm
673: \begin{figure}
674: {\bf A}
675: \includegraphics[height=140pt,angle=0] {fig1a.eps}
676: \hskip 4cm
677: {\bf B}
678: \includegraphics[height=160pt,angle=0] {fig1b.eps}
679: \hskip 8cm \vskip 2cm
680: {\bf C}
681: \includegraphics[height=140pt,angle=0] {fig1c.eps}
682: \hskip 4cm
683: {\bf D}
684: \includegraphics[height=140pt,angle=0] {fig1d.eps}
685: \hskip 8cm \vskip 2cm
686: {\bf E}
687: \includegraphics[height=140pt,angle=0] {fig1e.eps}
688: \vskip 0.5 cm
689: Cocco. Fig~1. Desired size: 2 columns, heigth 6.5 cm.
690: \vskip 1cm
691: \caption{Sketches of some experiments referred to in the text.
692: All experiments are at room temperature and in physiological liquid
693: buffers (PBS or Tris). Arrows symbolize the applied forces. {\bf A}:
694: Unzipping experiment of Essevaz-Roulet {\em et al.} [1]: the
695: 3'-5' extremities of a $\lambda$-phage DNA (49 kbp) are
696: attached to a glass microscope slide (with translational velovity $v
697: =40$ nm/sec) and a polystyrene bead connected to a glass microneedle
698: (with stiffness $k=1.7 $~pN~/$\mu$m). The loading rate equals $
699: \lambda = k v= 0.06$ pN/sec. When the force approaches 12 pN, the DNA
700: starts to open. As unzipping proceeds, the distance between the two
701: single strands extremities is controlled and
702: the force varies between 10 and
703: 15 pN depending on the sequence.
704: {\bf B}: parameters used in the theoretical description: force $f$,
705: torque $\Gamma$ and
706: distance $2\, r$ between the two single strands extremities.
707: {\bf C}: Stretching experiment of
708: Strunz {\em et al.}[5]: a short ssDNA (10, 20 or 30 bp with
709: about 60\% GC content) is attached by one 5'-end to a surface, the
710: complementary ssDNA is attached by the other 5'-end to an AFM tip. On
711: approaching of the surface to the tip, a duplex may form that is
712: loaded on retract until unbinding occurs. The distribution of the
713: rupture forces is obtained for loading rates ranging from 16 to
714: 4000~pN/sec. {\bf D}: Stretching and unzipping experiment of Rief
715: {\em et al.}[4]: DNA of poly(dA-dT) (5100 bp) or poly (dG-dC)
716: (1260 bp) are attached between a gold surface and an AFM tip, and
717: stretched.
718: Through a melting transition, single DNA strands are prepared; these
719: strands upon relaxation reanneal into hairpins as a result of their
720: self-complementary sequences. The forces of unzipping of these
721: hairpins are $20 \pm 3$~pN for poly (dG-dC) and $9 \pm 3$~pN for
722: poly(dA-dT). {\bf E}: Dissociation experiment of Bonnet {\em et
723: al.} [7]: The rate of unzipping, $\nu _-$, and closing,
724: $\nu_+$, of a 5 bp DNA hairpin (CCCAA-TTGGG) is investigated by
725: fluorescence energy transfer and correlation spectroscopy
726: techniques. The hairpin is closed by a loop of 12 to 21 Thymine (T) or
727: Adenine (A). The characteristic time of opening $t_-=1/\nu_-$ is
728: found to be largely independent of the loop length, and equal to
729: $t_-\simeq 0.5$~msec.}
730: \label{dessin}
731: \end{figure}
732: \end{center}
733:
734: \begin{center}
735: \begin{figure}
736: \includegraphics[height=350pt,angle=-90]{fig2.eps}
737: \vskip 0.5 cm
738: Cocco. Fig.~2. Desired sized: 1 column, height 8.5 cm.
739: \vskip 1.5cm
740: \caption{Base pair potentials in unit of $k_BT$, as a function of the
741: base radius $r$ (in \AA), without (inset) and with (main picture)
742: entropic contributions. Inset: Morse potential $U(r)$ accounting for
743: the hydrogen bond interaction. Main picture: total potential $V(r)$
744: for zero torque. Once entropic contributions are considered, small $r$
745: values are less favorable and a barrier appears. The free-energy
746: $g_{dsDNA}=g_0$ of the dsDNA is lower than the single strand free-energy
747: $g_{ssDNA}=0$. Note the difference of scales on the horizontal axis
748: between the two figures.}
749: \label{potb175}
750: \end{figure}
751: \end{center}
752:
753: \begin{center}
754: \begin{figure}
755: \includegraphics[height=350pt,angle=-90] {fig3.eps}
756: \vskip 0.5 cm
757: Cocco. Fig~3. Desired size: 1 column, height 8.5 cm.
758: \vskip 1.5cm
759: \caption{Force $f(r)$ (in pN) to be exerted on the DNA to keep extremities at
760: a distance $2\, r$ apart (in \AA). The peak force $f \simeq 270$~pN, reached at
761: $r\simeq 10.5$~\AA, is much larger than the asymptotic
762: value $\simeq 12$~pN, equal to the equilibrium force $f_u$ (at zero torque,
763: and in the Gaussian approximation)
764: for unzipping a large portion of the molecule.
765: Inset: phase diagram, in the plane of torque $\Gamma$ ($k_B T$)
766: and of force $f$ (pN). The lines shows
767: the critical unzipping force $f_u$ as a function of $\Gamma$
768: with formula (2) (full line) and formula (3) (dashed line) for
769: the stretching free energy of the single strand. Below
770: the line, dsDNA is the stable thermodynamical configuration while for forces
771: larger than $f_u (\Gamma)$, denaturation takes place. $f_u$ vanishes at the
772: critical torque $\Gamma _u \simeq -2.4 \; k_BT$, and is equal to
773: 11 pN (full line) and 12 pN (dashed line) at zero torque.}
774: \label{force}
775: \label{diag}
776: \end{figure}
777: \end{center}
778:
779: \newpage
780: \begin{center}
781: \begin{figure}
782: {\bf A}
783: \includegraphics[height=140pt,angle=0] {fig4a.eps}
784: \vskip 2cm
785: %\hskip 20cm
786: \includegraphics[height=130pt,angle=0] {fig4b.eps}
787: \begin{flushleft} {\bf B} \end{flushleft}
788: \vskip 0.5 cm
789: Cocco. Fig~4. Desired size: 2 columns, height 6.5 cm.
790: \vskip 2cm
791: \caption{Transitions states involved in the theoretical calculation of
792: the kinetic rates. {\bf A} - Unzipping: opening of dsDNA is favorable
793: at forces $f> f_u$, and the unzipping rate $\nu_-$ is calculated
794: directly. The nucleation bubble is of ($\simeq 4$) base pairs, weakly
795: depending on the force.
796: {\bf B} - Annealing: when $f<f_u$, dsDNA is
797: thermodynamically stable; the dissociation rate $\nu _-$ is obtained
798: indirectly through the calculation of the annealing rate $\nu _+$ of
799: the metastable ssDNA, $\nu _-= \nu_+ e^{- N \Delta g (f)/k_B T},$
800: where $\Delta g(f)>0$ is the excess of free-energy per bp of ssDNA
801: with respect to dsDNA. The nucleation bubble is of ($\simeq 2$)
802: base pairs.}
803: \label{dessinbulle}
804: \end{figure}
805: \end{center}
806:
807: \begin{center}
808: \begin{figure}
809: \includegraphics[height=350pt,angle=-90] {fig5.eps}
810: \vskip 0.5 cm
811: Cocco. Fig~5. Desired size: 1 column, height 8.5 cm.
812: \vskip 1.5 cm
813: \caption{Time of dissociation $t_-$ (in sec) as a
814: function of the force $f$ (in pN). Three regimes can be distinguished.
815: For $f<f_u=12$~pN,
816: the dissociation times depend on the length $N$ of the sequence
817: ($N=10,20,30$~bp from bottom to top). For $f_u<f< f_b=230$~pN,
818: the dissociation time is length independent and decreases, as
819: the energetic barrier to overcome, lowers. For
820: $f>f_b$, no barrier is left and dissociation is immediate.
821: The slope of the logarithm of $t_-$ near $f_u$ is
822: $d \log t_{-}/d f = - 8$ \AA~$(f>f_u)$,
823: $-2 d_u N +31$ \AA~with $d_u = 5$\AA~$(f<f_u)$.
824: Inset: Time of thermal dissociation $t_-$
825: (for zero force) as a function of the number of base pairs $N$.}
826: \label{temps}
827: \label{tempszero}
828: \end{figure}
829: \end{center}
830:
831: \newpage
832: \begin{center}
833: \begin{figure}
834: \includegraphics[height=350pt,angle=-90] {fig6.eps}
835: \vskip 0.5 cm
836: Cocco. Fig~6. Desired size: 1 column, height 8.5 cm.
837: \vskip 1.5cm
838: \caption{Rupture force (pN) as a function of
839: the loading rate $\lambda$ (pN/sec) for
840: five different molecule lengths $N$=10, 20, 30, 50 and 100.
841: Arrows indicate the different critical loading rates for $N=10$.
842: Below $\lambda_1$ (=$10^{\,0.8}$ for $N=10$), rupture occurs at essentially
843: zero force through thermal dissociation.
844: For loading rates ranging from $\lambda _1$ up to $\lambda_2$
845: (=$10^{\,4.6}$ for $N=10$), the rupture
846: force is finite, and thermal tunneling is responsible
847: for the strong dependence
848: on $N$, until the force reaches the equilibrium
849: value $f_u= 12$~pN. For larger loading rates, the rupture force
850: is length independent. It increases again as $\lambda > \lambda _3 =
851: 10^{\,5.5}$~pN/sec,
852: since the molecule is unable to respond to the force before it becomes very large.}
853: \label{loading}
854: \end{figure}
855: \end{center}
856:
857:
858: \end{document}
859:
860: