Continuum theories of electrolytes are widely used to
describe physical processes in various biological systems. Although these are well-established theories in macroscopic situations, it is
not clear from the outset that they should work in small systems whose
dimensions are comparable to or smaller than the Debye length. Here, we
test the validity of the mean-field approximation in Poisson
Boltzmann
theory by comparing its predictions with those of Brownian dynamics
simulations. For this purpose we use spherical and cylindrical
boundaries and a catenary shape similar to that of the acetylcholine
receptor channel. The interior region filled with electrolyte is
assumed to have a high dielectric constant, and the exterior region
representing protein a low one. Comparisons of the force on a test ion
obtained with the two methods show that the shielding effect due to
counterions is overestimated in Poisson
Boltzmann theory when the ion
is within a Debye length of the boundary. As the ion gets closer to the
boundary, the discrepancy in force grows rapidly. The implication for
membrane channels, whose radii are typically smaller than the Debye
length, is that Poisson
Boltzmann theory cannot be used to obtain
reliable estimates of the electrostatic potential energy and force on
an ion in the channel environment.
 |
INTRODUCTION |
During the last decades continuum theories of
electrolytes have found a new niche in the description of physical
processes in the salty waters of cells (Weiss, 1996
; Evans and
Wennerström, 1999
). Continuum theories were originally developed
for bulk electrolytes early in the century, and their validity has been
firmly established since then (Bockris and Reddy, 1970
). The more
recent applications in biology usually involve mesoscopic systems, and
it is not clear from the outset that the assumptions made for bulk
solutions are justified for solutions confined to small volumes. Of
these, the mean-field approximation that assumes the potential can be
determined from a continuous distribution of the mobile charges in an
electrolyte is most suspect. The basic question is whether the
predicted concentrations in continuum theories, which represent the
space average of ion densities, are in accordance with those obtained
from Brownian dynamics by time-averaging motions of individual ions. In
this respect, the Debye length provides a useful guide. If the system size is much larger than the Debye length, as in the case of large proteins and membrane surfaces, then the mean-field approximation inherent in the continuum theories should be relatively safe. However, membrane pores that transport ions across a cell
usually have radii smaller than the Debye length (Hille, 1992
), and the use of continuum theories in such systems is questionable. Applications of continuum theories to membrane channels have nevertheless flourished in recent years (for reviews see, for example, Levitt, 1986
; Cooper et
al., 1985
; Eisenberg, 1996
, 1999
). One reason for the popularity of the
continuum theories that deal with concentrations of ions, rather than
individual ions, used to be that the alternative methods were
computationally intractable. This is still true for molecular dynamics
simulations, where motions of both ions and water molecules in the
system are traced using Newton's law (Roux and Karplus, 1994
). To
study ion permeation across a membrane channel using molecular
dynamics, one needs supercomputers that are several orders of magnitude
faster than currently available. In comparison, the situation with
Brownian dynamics (BD), where only the motion of ions are traced, is
much better. BD simulations of conductance in realistic
three-dimensional geometries are now routinely performed on
supercomputers (Li et al., 1998
; Chung et al., 1998
, 1999
; Hoyles et
al., 1998a
). As stressed in a recent series of commentaries on ion
permeation (Levitt, 1999
; McClesky, 1999
; Miller, 1999
; Nonner et al.,
1999
), the time is ripe for a realistic assessment of continuum
theories as models of ion channels, and if they fail the tests, to move
on to more accurate theories.
In this and the accompanying article (Corry et al., 2000
) we try to
provide such a test for two prominent continuum theories: Poisson
Boltzmann (PB) in this article and Poisson
Nernst
Planck in
the next one. PB theory has become an important tool for studying proteins and membranes, leading to many insights on the key role played
by electrostatic interactions (Honig and Nicholls, 1995
). The
availability of efficient computer programs for solving the PB equation
(Davis and McCammon, 1990
; Sharp and Honig, 1990
) has increased its use
tremendously during the last decade. In ion channels, the PB equation
was initially used to include the effects of ionic atmosphere on the
potential energy profile of an ion in schematic channel models (Levitt,
1985
; Jordan et al., 1989
; Cai and Jordan, 1990
). More recently, the PB
calculation of potential energy profiles has been extended to realistic
channel structures in numerous articles (Sankararamakrishnan et al.,
1996
; Weetman et al., 1997
; Adcock et al., 1998
; Cheng et al., 1998
; Rostovtseva et al., 1998
; Sansom et al., 1998
; Smejtek et al., 1999
;
Dieckmann et al., 1999
; Ranatunga et al., 1999
). In PB calculations, ionic shielding greatly reduces the potential energy of an ion in a
channel compared with that of a single ion calculated from Poisson's
equation. To assess the reliability of the PB calculations, it is
important to check that this shielding effect is not an artefact of the
mean-field assumption in a relatively narrow channel environment.
The total electrostatic force acting on an ion inside and near the
vicinity of a channel determines its dynamic behavior. Therefore, it is
the most important quantity to check in judging the accuracy of the PB
theory. Here we test the validity of the mean-field approximation in
the PB theory by comparing its predictions for the force on a test ion
and potential energy, and concentration profiles with those obtained
from BD simulations. BD is eminently suitable for this task because the
motion of all the ions in the system are traced individually according
to the Langevin equation. Therefore, a long-time average of physical
quantities should accurately reflect the actual physical behavior of
the system. The main point of this article is demonstrated by using a
spherical geometry that serves as a generic example of an electrolyte
confined in a small volume. Cylindrical channels with varying radii
provide testing grounds for schematic channel models, while a catenary shape similar to that of the acetylcholine receptor channel is used for
tests in a more realistic geometry.
 |
THEORETICAL METHODS |
PB theory
PB theory provides a classical electrostatic description of a
system in which fixed external charges, represented by a density
ex, are surrounded by mobile ions in a
dielectric medium. The main assumption of the theory is that at
equilibrium, the distribution of mobile ions in the system can be
approximated by a continuous charge density,
el, given by the Boltzmann factor
|
(1)
|
where n0
is the bulk (or
reference) number density of ions of species
and
z
e is their charge. Here
n0 (in SI units) is related to
concentration c0 (in moles/liter) by
n0 = 1000NAc0, where
NA is Avogadro's number. The average
electric potential
(r) in Eq. 1 is obtained from the
solution of Poisson's equation
|
(2)
|
Combining Eqs. 1 and 2 for a 1:1 electrolyte, which is our main
interest here, we obtain the following PB equation:
|
(3)
|
Apart from a few special cases this equation cannot be solved
analytically. Therefore, a linearized form proposed by Debye and
Hückel (1923)
has been commonly used in practical applications of
the PB equation. Expanding the sinh term in Eq. 3 and keeping only the
leading term in
yields the linear PB equation for a bulk
electrolyte with no fixed charges (
ex = 0)
|
(4)
|
where 1/
is the Debye screening length given by
|
(5)
|
At room temperature (T = 298 K) in water
(
= 80), the Debye length is related to concentration as

1 = 3.07/
Å. Although the
approximation in Eq. 4 is no longer necessary with the availability of
high-speed computers, the intuitive picture of shielding provided by
the Debye
Hückel theory still plays a useful role. Here we use
it to indicate where and why the PB theory may break down. The solution of Eq. 4 in bulk is well known (e.g., McQuarrie, 1976
), and yields the
following screened Coulomb potential around a central ion of radius
a/2
|
(6)
|
The radial density of the screening charge
p(r) is proportional to this potential
|
(7)
|
which is seen to peak at r = 1/
and then
decay exponentially. The volume integral of this shielding charge is of
interest, and for a sphere of radius r, it is given by
|
(8)
|
Equation 8 shows that
q(r)/e
increases monotonically with r, leading to a 25% screening
of the central charge at ~r = 1/
, rising to 80%
at r = 3/
. Thus, for a
c0 = 150 mM electrolyte under bulk
conditions, length scales of ~25-30 Å are required for nearly
complete screening of an ionic charge. When a boundary is imposed at a
smaller distance, the system tries to maintain equilibrium by
increasing the counterion concentration in the volume between the ion
and the boundary. However, because of the physical size of ions and
electrostatic repulsion effects, there is a limit to this increase, and
one anticipates that as the ion gets closer to the boundary, the
counterion density will eventually diverge from the Boltzmann factor,
leading to a much smaller shielding than expected from PB theory. This
prediction can be tested directly by comparing the PB results with
those obtained from BD simulations, where all ions are treated on an
equal footing as particles with a finite size and charge, rather than
as a continuous charge density.
For this purpose, we have solved the PB equation (3) numerically by
using a finite difference algorithm for various boundaries (see
Appendix for details). From the numerical solution of the PB equation,
one obtains the potential at discrete grid points. These potential
values are then fed into the Boltzmann factor (Eq. 1) to determine the
concentration of ions. The components of the force on a test ion at a
particular grid point are calculated by using numerical
differentiation, from the difference of the potential at two opposing
neighboring points in the x, y, and z
directions. The PB program is executed on an
cluster, where a
typical run with 1 Å grid size takes 5-20 min, depending on the
boundary conditions used.
Tests of accuracy
Convergence of the PB solutions is discussed in the Appendix. In
all the situations considered, convergence to a stable solution is
achieved using a tolerance of 10
6 V, which is
sufficiently accurate for our purposes. The input parameter that
influences the accuracy of results most is the grid size used in
discretizing the system. Errors decrease with the grid size, while
computation time increases with it. Therefore, a compromise has to be
made for efficient running of the program with an acceptable range of
errors. Because the force on an ion is the most sensitive quantity to
the grid size, it is used in choosing the optimal size. A range of grid
sizes is considered for the various geometries and configurations
investigated. In the absence of fixed charges in a cylindrical channel,
a uniform grid spacing of 1 Å is found to be adequate. Larger grid
sizes lead to unacceptably large errors in force (e.g., for 2 Å, the relative error could be as high as 100%), while not much is gained by
using a smaller grid (going to 0.5 Å reduces the error by a few
percent). Because as fixed charges in the channel lead to a more rapid
variation in the potential, a smaller grid size (
0.5 Å) needs to be
used in such cases to obtain a similar level of accuracy. With
decreasing grid size, the force gets smaller, i.e., it converges to its
actual value from above. Therefore, as a consequence of these optimal
choices, we anticipate that the presented PB results for forces and
potentials are slightly larger than their actual values.
We have performed a number of tests to ascertain the validity and
accuracy of the numerical solutions of the PB equation. The simplest
test cases are those involving a single ion (zero concentration) where
the PB results can be compared with those obtained from the solution of
Poisson's equation either analytically or using complimentary
numerical methods (e.g., boundary element method, Hoyles et al.,
1998b
). While these do not provide a complete test for the PB
solutions, they nevertheless serve to check the Poisson part of the
program, an important consideration especially in cases with dielectric
boundaries. For an ion in a uniform dielectric medium, the numerical
solution is found to converge to the analytic result,
= e/4
0
r, within a
few percent when a 1 Å grid is used. The accuracy improves when the
grid size is made smaller, as noted above. Other tests are carried out
for a single ion in spherical and cylindrical boundaries, which are
used in the rest of the article. Numerical solutions of the PB equation
in these cases are compared to the solutions of Poisson's equation
obtained with other methods. In all cases, the potential obtained from solution of the PB algorithm is found to agree with the alternative solution to within a few percent. A similar agreement is found for the
force on a test ion.
Tests of the PB solutions in the case of an ion in electrolyte are not
easy to perform, as there are no suitable analytical solutions. We use
instead the linear PB equation for this purpose, for which the solution
for a test ion in bulk is quoted in Eq. 6. In the PB algorithm,
linearizing involves simply switching from Eq. 16 to 17 in the
calculation of the potential, hence such a test should be sufficient in
checking the overall integrity of the program. Both the potential and
concentration obtained from the numerical solution of the PB equation
agree with the analytic results to within a few percent. An analytic
solution can also be obtained for a fixed ion located at the center of a sphere filled with electrolyte. A similar level of agreement is also
found in this case.
Brownian dynamics
Use of Brownian dynamics in studies of ion channels is
relatively new. An introduction to the technique for one-dimensional channels is given by Cooper et al. (1985)
. BD simulations have been
extended to realistic three-dimensional channel geometries quite
recently (Li et al., 1998
; Chung et al., 1998
, 1999
; Hoyles et al.,
1998a
). We refer to these articles for further details, and give only a
brief description of the method here.
In BD, the motion of individual ions are simulated using the Langevin
equation:
|
(9)
|
where mi,
qi, and vi
are the mass, charge and velocity of the ith ion. In Eq. 9,
the effect of the surrounding water molecules is represented by an
average frictional force with a friction coefficient
mi
i, and a
stochastic force FR arising from random
collisions. The last term in Eq. 9 is the total electric force acting
on the ion due to other ions, fixed and induced surface charges at the
channel boundary, and the applied membrane potential. It is computed by
solving Poisson's equation for a given channel boundary using an
iterative numerical method as detailed in Hoyles et al. (1996
, 1998b
).
Rather than solving Poisson's equation at each time step, which would
be computationally prohibitive, a system of lookup tables is used
(Hoyles et al., 1998a
). The electric field and potential due to one-
and two-ion configurations are precalculated at a number of grid points
and stored in a set of tables. During simulations, the potential and
field at desired points are reconstructed by interpolating between the
table entries and using the superposition principle. For this purpose,
the total electric potential
i experienced by
an ion i is broken into four pieces
|
(10)
|
where the sum over j runs over all the other ions in
the system. In Eq. 10,
X,i is the external
potential due to the applied field, fixed charges in the protein wall,
and charges induced by these;
S,i is the self
potential due to the surface charges induced by the ion i on
the channel boundary;
I,ij is the image potential due to the charges induced by the ion j; and
C,ij is the Coulomb potential due to the ion
j. The first three potential terms in Eq. 10 are stored in,
respectively, three-, two-, and five-dimensional tables (dimension is
reduced by one in the latter two cases by exploiting the azimuthal
symmetry of the system's geometry). Similar tables are constructed for
each component of the electric field, which are calculated from the
gradient of the potential at the grid points.
The Coulomb interaction between two ions is modified by the addition of
a repulsive 1/r9 potential, which
arises from the overlap of their electron clouds (Pauling, 1942
)
|
(11)
|
where r is the ion-ion distance,
ri, i = 1, 2, are the
Pauling radii of ions, and F0 is the
magnitude of the short range force at contact, which is estimated from
the ST2 water model used in molecular dynamics as
F0 = 2 ×10
10
N (Stillinger and Rahman, 1974
). As demonstrated below, the
1/r9 potential emulates the
hard-sphere collisions in the primitive model quite well, and hence is
adequate for the purpose of comparing PB and BD approaches. However,
because the ion pair potential for
Na+-Cl
has a minimum at
contact, it leads to some anomalous results in narrow channels (see
below). While this is not directly relevant to the main theme of the
paper, it is still of interest to point out the source of this anomaly
and show that it can be resolved when one uses realistic ion
ion
potentials obtained from molecular dynamics simulations. The hydration
forces between two ions add further structure to the ion pair potential
in the form of damped oscillations (Guàrdia et al., 1991a
, b
),
which can be approximately represented by
|
(12)
|
Here the oscillation length aw = 2.76 Å is given by the water diameter and the other parameters are
determined by fitting Eq. 12 to the potentials of mean force given by
Guàrdia et al. (1991a
, b
). For anion-cation pairs,
Rc = r1 + r2, but for like ions the contact
distance is pushed further to Rc = r1 + r2 + 1.6 Å. The origin of the
hydration force R is slightly shifted from
Rc; by +0.2 Å for like ions and by
0.2 Å otherwise. The exponential drop parameter is determined as
ae = 1 Å for all ion pairs. Finally,
the overall strength of the potential is
U0 = 8.5, 2.5 and 1.4 kT
for Na
Cl, Na
Na, and Cl
Cl pairs, respectively.
To prevent ions from entering the protein or leaving the system, a
hard-wall potential is activated when the ions are at 1 Å distance
from the channel or reservoir boundaries, which elastically scatters
them. This simple interaction that treats ions as billiard balls with a
finite radius is adequate for the purposes of this study. Note that to
be precise, the range of the wall potential should correspond to the
radius of the ion in question, but for simplicity we have used the same
range for all ions. Because only one type of ion
(Na+) is present in narrow channels in BD
simulations, this approximation is not likely to influence the results.
A more pertinent question here is the effect of finite ion size in
comparisons of BD and PB results. Because ions are represented with a
continuous charge density in PB theory, they could occupy the channel
right up to the boundary, whereas in BD they are prevented from coming
closer than 1 Å to the boundary (that is assuming they carry a point charge at their center). This issue of consistency between the two
theories will be addressed in the next section when we compare them in
cylindrical channels.
The Langevin equation (9) is solved at discrete time steps following
the algorithm devised by van Gunsteren and Berendsen (1982)
.
Throughout, a time step of
t = 100 fs is used.
Initially, the ions are assigned random positions in the reservoirs,
except for the test ion, which is held in a fixed position. Velocities are also assigned randomly according to the Boltzmann distribution. For
successive simulations, the final positions and velocities of the ions
in the previous simulation are used as initial positions and velocities
in the next trial. A single ion is held in place for a period of 20,000 time steps, while the system reaches equilibrium. After this, the
system is allowed to evolve for a further 200,000 or 1,000,000 time
steps. At each time step, the force acting on the fixed ion (and other
ions) is calculated, and from the time average of these, a value for
the force is computed. Each simulation is repeated from between 5 to 16 times to obtain a value for the average force on an ion at each
position along the central axis of the system. The duration of
simulations is varied from 150 to 300 ns according to the statistical
accuracy of the results. The potential profile of an ion is constructed
by integrating the force curve along a given path. Average values of
the concentration of ions at different points in the system are also
obtained for each individual run. The BD program is written in FORTRAN,
vectorized and executed on a supercomputer (Fujitsu VPP-300). With 48 ions in the system, the CPU time needed to complete a simulation period of 1.0 µs (10 million time steps) is ~16 h.
A list of the parameters used in the BD simulations is given below:
Dielectric constants:
water = 80,
protein = 2; Masses (in
kg): mNa = 3.8 ×10
26, mCl = 5.9 ×10
26; Diffusion coefficients (in m2 s
1):
DNa = 1.33 ×10
9, DCl = 2.03 ×10
9, (Note that D is
related to the friction constant via D = kT/m
); Ion radii (in
Å): rNa =
0.95, rCl = 1.81;
Temperature: T = 298 K.
 |
RESULTS AND DISCUSSION |
Comparisons of the PB theory with BD simulations are carried out
for three different geometries including a sphere, cylindrical channels
with varying radius, and a catenary-shaped channel. The cylindrical
channels are used in the majority of comparisons because they provide a
prototype channel model that have been used in numerous applications of
the continuum theories to ion channels. The sphere is included for
control studies and pedagogical reasons, and the catenary channel to
show the robustness of the results for a more realistic channel shape.
Each case is discussed in a separate subsection in the following. We
note for future reference that the Debye lengths for 150, 300, and 500 mM solutions are, respectively, 7.9, 5.6, and 4.3 Å.
Electrolyte in a sphere
While our main concern is cylindrical pores, spherical geometry is
useful for purposes of control studies in a bulk-like environment, as
well as in illustrating the effect of a confining dielectric boundary
on shielding of ions in a simple situation. In the following comparisons, a sphere of radius 20 Å containing an electrolyte of
concentration c0 = 500 mM is used. In
BD simulations, this concentration is represented by 10 anions and 10 cations, including the test ion. (The systems used here and in the
following channel models are always chosen to be electroneutral.) The
above choice for concentration is dictated by the BD considerations of
having a sufficient number of ions in the system to obtain good
statistics, but not too many so as to encumber the simulations. Because
the main variable is the distance of the test ion from the boundary, the choice of radius does not have much influence on the results. In
order to compare the results with the analytic solutions of the linear
PB equation (Eqs. 6 and 7), both the cation and anion radii are taken
as 1 Å in the sphere studies. A dielectric constant of
= 80 is used everywhere in bulk simulations. When emulating a protein
boundary,
= 2 is used outside the sphere.
In solving the PB equation, we use a sharp spherical boundary around
the test ion, which emulates a hard wall potential that prevents its
overlap with other ions. Such an infinite potential is not practical to
implement in BD simulations; therefore, a 1/r9 potential is used instead (Eq. 11), which is both easier to handle and more physical. As seen in Fig.
1 A, the two potentials differ near the contact region and overlap once the ions are slightly separated. As a result of the softer potential used in BD, the ions
(especially counterions) are expected to be more broadly distributed
near the contact region of the test ion. This is exemplified in Fig. 1
B, where we compare the radial distribution functions g(r) in PB and BD for a bulk electrolyte. Here
the PB results are obtained by fixing a test cation at the origin and
those of BD by averaging over the ion-ion distributions. To avoid the
finite size effects in BD simulations, ion pairs are included in the average only when at least one of them is inside an imaginary r = 10 Å sphere. The linear PB results (not shown) for
anion-cation distribution is somewhat higher than the nonlinear one at
the maximum but this appears to be mostly due to the finite mesh size used in numerical solutions of PB equation. Otherwise, there is little
difference between the linear and nonlinear PB results, especially at
larger radii. The broadening of the sharp peak at contact in BD
simulations is expected to influence the results at short distances <3
Å. The shifting of counter charge density to smaller radii means that
the BD simulations should provide a better shielding at short distances
compared to the PB theory. At larger distances, the radial distribution
functions overlap, and as far as the force on the test ion is
concerned, one should obtain similar results within the two approaches.
We note that using a hard-wall potential in BD would have led to larger
forces on the test ion at short distances due to less shielding.
However, as will be seen in the comparisons below, this issue is mostly irrelevant because the force results in BD closely follow that of a
single ion. That is, there is little shielding due to counterions, and
therefore details of their interaction with the test ion at short range
cannot have much influence on the results.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 1
(A) Comparison of the hard-wall
(solid line) and 1/r9
(dotted line) ion-ion potentials for a positive
(U++) and negative
(U+ ) test ion around a fixed positive ion
in a 500 mM bulk electrolyte. (B) the resulting radial
distribution functions in PB (solid lines) and BD
(dotted lines) for anions
(g+ ) and cations
(g++) around the fixed ion.
|
|
The shortcomings of the continuum theories of electrolytes in confined
volumes are most succinctly illustrated in a spherical geometry because
it involves a single parameter: the distance of a test ion from the
boundary. In Fig. 2 A, the
force on a test cation held fixed at a given position is plotted as a
function of the radial distance. A single ion (no electrolyte)
experiences a repulsive force due to induced surface charges at the
sphere boundary. This force is shown by the dashed line for reference purposes. As the ion moves from the center of the sphere toward the
dielectric wall, the repulsive force acting on it is seen to increase
steeply. The PB calculations (solid line) exhibit the
expected results from ionic shielding: the force on the test ion due to
the boundary charges is significantly reduced compared to that of a
single ion. In contrast, little shielding is observed in BD
calculations of the force (filled circles with error bars), which follows quite closely the dashed line for the force on a single
ion. The discrepancy between the PB and BD results become appreciable
at 8 Å from the boundary, which corresponds to ~2 Debye lengths. As
the ion gets closer to the boundary, this discrepancy grows, and at the
closest BD simulation point (4 Å), it becomes a factor of 3. We note
that even when
= 80 is used outside the sphere, there is a net
force on the ion because the presence of a boundary results in an
asymmetric distribution of counterions in the radial direction. In both
PB and BD, this force is much smaller than the
= 2 case. For
example, the force acting on an ion located at 4 Å from the boundary
when
= 2 is determined to be 2.5 pN from the PB calculations
and 6.8 pN from the BD calculations. The corresponding values when
= 80 are 0.5 and 1.6 pN. Thus the force on the ion is
mostly due to the reaction field from the dielectric boundary.

View larger version (15K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 2
Test of the PB theory for a 500 mM electrolyte in a
sphere of radius 20 Å. (A) Force acting on a fixed
cation is plotted against its radial position. The solid curve shows
the force obtained from the PB theory and filled circles with error
bars show the BD simulation results. The dashed line indicates the
force in the case of a single ion (c0 = 0). The error bar on BD data points is one standard error of means and
is not shown when it is smaller than the size of the data point.
(B) Concentration of mobile ions in a region of constant
solid angle (30°) between a fixed cation and the spherical boundary.
The average concentration obtained from the PB theory (solid
lines) and the BD simulations [open
(Cl ) and filled (Na+)
circles fitted with the dotted lines]
are plotted against the radial position of the fixed cation.
|
|
The source of the discrepancy is to be sought in the inability of the
counterions in the BD simulations to provide the level of shielding
observed in the PB theory. To see this more clearly, in Fig. 2
B we compare the anion and cation concentrations in the two
theories. The average concentrations in the region between the fixed
ion and the boundary are plotted against the radial position of the
ion. This region is defined by the conical section between the ion and
the boundary with the ion radius as its central axis and subtends a
constant solid angle of 30°. Thus as the ion gets closer to the
boundary, its volume gets smaller. Concentrations in PB are obtained
from the space average of charges in the defined region, whereas in BD
they are obtained from the time-average of ions in this region. The PB
results are shown with the solid lines, and the BD results are
indicated by the open (anions) and filled circles (cations) that are
fitted with the dotted lines. As the test ion approaches the boundary,
the PB theory predicts a rapid rise in the anion concentration, which
is necessitated by the decreasing available volume between the ion and
the boundary. The opposite behavior is observed in the BD simulations;
that is, the anion concentration actually decreases as the ion gets closer to the boundary. The discrepancy between the predictions of the
two theories again becomes appreciable when the ion is ~2 Debye
lengths from the boundary. Thus this example explicitly demonstrates
when the concentrations in the PB theory start to disagree with the
average ion densities obtained from the BD simulations, signaling the
break down of the mean-field approximation.
The above results give a clear indication of the operating range of PB
theory for an electrolyte confined within a dielectric boundary. While
the Boltzmann factor (Eq. 1) puts a limit to the increase in anion
concentration (otherwise there would be a perfect shielding with very
large concentrations to provide it), it clearly does not capture the
whole physical picture. Reflecting on these results, it is clear that
the continuum description that distributes the ionic charges over the
whole volume is ultimately responsible for the failure of the PB
theory. When the integrity of the ionic charges is kept as in the BD
simulations, there is an enormous repulsive force on a counterion (due
to induced surface charges) as it attempts to enter the narrow region
between the test ion and the boundary. This force largely prevents the
anions from entering the narrow region, and is responsible for the drop
in anion concentration in BD. In PB calculations at 500 mM, an average cell with a grid size of 1 Å contains 1/3000 of a unit charge. Distribution of charge into such small units cuts down the
effectiveness of the repulsive force, and hence allows relatively large
anion concentrations to occur in the narrow region. While the total negative charge in this region is only ~30% of a unit charge, the PB
results indicate that even this small amount could still provide a very
effective shielding. This happens because the surface charges induced
on the boundary are proportional to
1/r2, and therefore those charge
elements nearer the boundary can induce proportionately more negative
charges on the surface, which cancel the positive charges induced by
the test ion more efficiently.
Cylindrical channels
We next consider cylindrical channels with rounded corners. The
rounding is necessitated by the fact that sharp corners cause difficulties in numerical solutions of Poisson's equation, and in any
case seems to be closer to reality. The dimensions of the channel are
outlined in Fig. 3, with the channel
obtained by rotating the curve shown in the figure around the symmetry
axis. The radius of the channel is varied from 3 Å to 13 Å in the
comparisons. The height h of the reservoir is adjusted to
keep the volume fixed when the radius is varied. For r = 3 Å, a height of h = 25 Å is used. The dielectric
constants are 2 for protein and 80 for water unless otherwise
specified. An average concentration of 300 mM is used in all the PB
calculations, which is determined from the total cation (or anion)
charge in the system as in the case of the sphere. The BD simulations
are carried out with a total of 24 Na+ and 24 Cl
ions, corresponding to an average
concentration of 300 mM. The reason for using this higher value instead
of the more typical 150 mM is entirely statistical: twice as many ions
leads to better accuracy in the BD simulations. The results are hardly
sensitive to concentration in BD, and exhibit only a logarithmic
dependence in PB calculations. Thus, essentially similar results would
be obtained using a concentration of 150 mM.

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 3
Cylindrical channel models used in comparisons of PB
theory with BD simulations. A three-dimensional channel model is
generated by rotating the cross-section about the central axis by
180°. The cylindrical section is 25 Å in length, and the rounded
corners have a radius of 5 Å. The radius of the cylinder
r is varied from 3 to 11 Å. The reservoir height
h is adjusted so as to keep the total (reservoir and
channel) volume constant when the radius is changed.
|
|
From the view of the dynamics of an ion in a channel environment, the
quantity that is of most interest is the force acting on it at various
positions in the channel. In Fig. 4 we
compare the PB and BD calculations of the z-component of the
force on a test ion as it is moved along the channel axis (only the
positive side is shown since the curves are symmetric around
z = 0). In BD, a test ion is held at a fixed position
on the channel axis, and the z-component of the force acting
on it is tabulated at every 10 time steps, which are averaged at the
end of the simulation. The ion is then moved to another position along
the channel axis, and the measurement is repeated. The shielding effect
in PB is seen to lead to a drastic reduction in force compared to the
BD result in the r = 3 Å channel (Fig. 4
A). As the channel size is increased, the discrepancy
decreases but it remains severalfold (Fig. 4, B and
C). Finally, in the r = 11 Å channel, when
the force itself becomes quite small, the complete shielding
observed in PB theory is reproduced in BD (Fig. 4 D).

View larger version (20K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 4
Test of the PB theory for the cylindrical channel shown
in Fig. 3. The z-component of the force acting on a
fixed cation at various positions along the channel axis is calculated
using the PB theory (solid line) and the BD simulations
(filled circles fitted with the
dotted line). The open circles (where shown) indicate
the BD results obtained using the realistic ion-ion potentials given
in Eq. 12. The radius of the channel is (A) 3 Å,
(B) 4 Å, (C) 7 Å, and
(D) 11 Å. The height of the reservoirs is adjusted to
keep the concentration fixed at 300 mM in all cases. The force on a
single ion (c0 = 0, dashed
line) is also shown, for reference purposes.
|
|
An interesting observation in Fig. 4, A and B is
that the BD results follow rather closely the force on a single ion
when the test ion is near the mouth region, indicating that there is absolutely no shielding there, but deviate from it when the ion is
further inside the channel. Intuitively, one would have expected the
opposite behavior, that is, more shielding of the force as the ion
moves out of the channel. To explain the origin of this shielding in BD
simulations, we have studied the ion distributions in the
r = 3 Å channel when the test ion is at
z = 7.5 Å. The channel is found to be devoid of
charges except at ~z
11 Å, where there is a net
negative unit charge corresponding to an anion trapped in that
location. This anion is firmly attached to the test cation, forming a
dipole, and thus neutralizing the charge on the test ion to some
degree. As pointed out in the Methods section, the short-range ion-ion
potential used in the BD simulations has a minimum at contact (see Eq. 11 and Fig. 1 A), and thus is responsible for this anomalous
behavior. When realistic ion-pair potentials obtained from molecular
dynamics simulations are used instead (Eq. 12), this anomaly disappears
and the force on the test ion follows closely that of a single ion, as
indicated by open circles in Fig. 4, A and B.
Thus, if we discount this anomaly, a fair conclusion of the above study
is that shielding does not play any role in the narrow channels with
r = 3-4 Å.
Another issue that needs to be addressed in comparisons is the effect
of the ion-wall potential (or finite ion size), which is implemented in
BD simulations but ignored in PB calculations. This issue of
consistency between the two theories and its influence on the results
presented can be addressed in two ways. One method is to implement the
finite size of ions in PB equation by multiplying the right-hand side
of Eq. 3 by a space-dependent function that will exclude the ions from
the volume within 1 Å of the boundary (Roux, 1997
). The second method
is to do the opposite, that is, shrink the activation distance of the
hard-wall potential in BD from 1 Å to zero, thus allowing ion centers
to come near the boundary. Because in almost all applications of the PB
theory to ion channels such finite size effects are not considered and
our main purpose is to provide tests for these applications, we prefer
to use the second method here. In Fig. 5
we plot the BD results for the force on a cation in an
r = 3 Å channel as in Fig. 4 A, but with
the activation distance of the hard-wall potential reduced from 1 Å (circles) to 0.5 Å (squares) and 0.1 Å (triangles). It is seen that there are no discernible
differences among the various results, with all falling on the force
curve obtained from the solution of Poisson's equation for a single
ion (dashed line). Thus, even if we ignore the finite size
of ions and allow them to access the whole channel volume as in PB
theory, they decline to take advantage of the extra space offered.
Obviously, the steep increase in image forces as an ion approaches the
dielectric boundary makes these regions rather inhospitable places, a
fact that is missed by the PB theory because smearing of charges
dilutes the effects of the boundary forces. Since the range parameter
of the hard-wall potential does not have any influence on the results,
we will keep using the more realistic 1 Å range in the rest of the
comparisons.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 5
Effect of changing the activation distance of the hard
wall potential in BD simulations. The force on a cation in a
r = 3 Å channel is plotted as in Fig. 4
A but for three distance parameters, 1 Å (circles) to 0.5 Å (squares) and 0.1 Å (triangles). The ion-ion interaction from Eq. 12 is
used in the simulations. All the BD results follow the single ion
results shown by the dashed line. The error bars are not shown to avoid
cluttering.
|
|
A quantity that can be more directly related to ion permeation is the
potential energy profile of an ion which is obtained by integrating the
force curves in Fig. 4. We compare the PB and BD profiles in Fig.
6 for r = 3, 4, and 7 Å channels (the r = 11 Å results are not shown because
both profiles are too small on the scale of the graphs). In the PB
case, shielding reduces the energy barrier seen by a single ion by
roughly an order of magnitude, virtually obliterating it. Ionic
atmosphere is seen to provide some shielding in BD by lowering the
energy barrier, though in the case of the narrow channels
(r = 3-4 Å), this is caused by the short-range
potential used as explained above. If one uses a realistic ion-ion
potential, the energy barrier goes back to that of a single ion
(open circles in Fig. 6, A and B). In
the r = 7 Å channel, shielding is seen to reduce the
barrier of a single ion by more than half. Since a similar result is
obtained with the realistic ion-ion potential, this is likely to be a
genuine result. Nevertheless, the barrier in BD remains larger than the PB result, pointing to a sizable discrepancy despite the reduction in
the potential energy values.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 6
The potential energy profiles in PB (solid
line) and BD (dotted line) obtained by
integrating the force curves in Fig. 4. The dashed line shows the
profile of a single ion. The open circles (where shown) indicate the BD
results with the realistic ion-ion potentials (Eq. 12).
|
|
Compared to the sphere results, the discrepancy between the two
theories is more accentuated in the cylindrical channels because the
access of counterions to a narrow cylinder is further hindered in BD,
while no such hindrance occurs in PB theory. To quantify this
statement, we compare the anion (Fig. 7
A) and cation (Fig. 7 B) concentrations predicted
by PB (solid line) and BD (bars) theories for an
r = 3 Å channel when the test ion is located near the
pore mouth (z = 12.5 Å). In PB calculations, both
anions and cations uniformly occupy the channel at about the average
concentration, except near the test ion when the former shoots to very
large values and the latter dips to zero as expected. This difference in the anion and cation concentrations leads to a net screening charge
of
0.61e in the channel. In stark contrast, both anions and cations are completely excluded from the channel interior in BD.
While there is some excess of counterions near the channel entrance,
these only amount to
0.01e, which is too small to provide any shielding as seen from the force at z = 12.5 Å in
Fig. 4 A. We note that a constant anion concentration of 300 mM throughout the channel would correspond to a total charge of
0.21e. Thus the amount of anion charge is increased
severalfold compared to the background in PB, while it remains
negligibly small in BD.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 7
Variation of the average concentration along an
r = 3 Å channel for cations (A),
and anions (B) when a cation is fixed on the
z axis at z = 12.5 Å (where the
channel starts curving). In BD, the channel is divided into 32 layers
and the average value of the concentration is calculated at each layer.
The PB concentrations are indicated by the solid curve and the BD ones
by the bar graph.
|
|
Rather than repeating the above study for each channel size, which is
not very informative, we demonstrate the changes in concentration by
plotting the total screening charge in the channel as a function of its
radius (Fig. 8 A). This study
is carried out for a cation fixed at z = 12.5 Å, where
the force on an ion is at a maximum. The total screening charge in PB
remains nearly constant with the increasing radius, the slight increase
being due to approaching bulk conditions (note that the screening
charge in the channel remains less than
e because the
channel volume is limited to z = ±15 Å). In BD, this
charge is negligible at r = 3 Å but it steadily rises
with r, converging to the PB value at ~r = 11 Å or 2 Debye lengths. As shown in Fig. 8 B, the force on
the test ion at z = 12.5 Å correlates very well with
the screening charge results in (A). The force in BD
initially coincides with that of a single ion at r = 3 Å (no shielding), and with increasing radius, it gradually converges
to the PB values at around 2 Debye lengths. This study establishes the
domain of validity of PB theory for channels as 2 Debye lengths, below
which the underlying mean-field approximation breaks down to an
increasingly larger degree with decreasing radius.

View larger version (14K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 8
Pore size dependence of the screening charge and force
on a cation held at z = 12.5 Å. (A)
The net screening charge in the channel (from z = 15 to 15 Å) is plotted as a function of the channel radius. The PB
results are shown by the solid line and the BD values by the filled
circles fitted with the dotted line. (B) Force on the
cation as the channel radius is increased. The PB (solid
line), BD (filled circles fitted with a
dotted line) and single ion results (dashed
line) are indicated in the figure.
|
|
So far we have considered only the central axis in comparisons, which
may give the impression that an agreement between the PB and BD results
can be obtained in the larger-size channels (Fig. 4 D).
However, the central axis is a rather special place where the forces
from the boundary charges are at a minimum, and the shielding effects
in BD are maximized due to the azimuthal symmetry. From the sphere
results it is expected that as the ion is moved toward the boundary,
discrepancies between the two theories will resurface. This is quite
obvious for the radial component of the force but not so for the
z-component. In Fig. 9 we
present comparisons of the z-component of the force on a
test ion similar to Fig. 4 D (reproduced at the top) but
along an axis that is offset from the z axis by 4 Å (Fig. 9
B) and 8 Å (Fig. 9 C). Shielding effects are
again overestimated in PB theory compared to BD as the ion approaches
the boundary. To see this more clearly, we show in Fig.
10 how the z-component of
the force changes as the ion is moved radially from the center to the
boundary. Up to 3 Å from the center the two theories agree, that is,
shielding of the force in PB theory is reproduced in BD. But after
that, shielding progressively weakens in BD in contrast to PB theory,
which provides a very good shielding right up to the boundary. Thus,
even in large channels the predictions of the PB theory are bound to
fail as one approaches the channel walls. Such discrepancies in large channels are relevant, for example, in calculation of concentrations near a binding site, but not in ion transport, as ions tend to stay
near the channel axis where the radial force is minimum (Li et al.,
1998
; Corry et al., 2000
).

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 9
Comparison of the z-component of the
force on a test ion in an r = 11 Å channel when it
is offset from the central axis by r = 4 Å (middle) and r = 8 Å (bottom). The top figure is the same as Fig. 4 D.
|
|

View larger version (16K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 10
Comparison of the z-component of the
force on a test ion in an r = 11 Å channel as it
is moved radially from the center to the channel boundary at
z = 8.75 Å.
|
|
The BD results so far clearly indicate that narrow channels with radii
3-4 Å are pretty inhospitable places for ions regardless of their
background concentration. Therefore, for ion permeation to take place
it is essential to reduce the energy barrier of a bare channel by
placing fixed charges of opposite sign on the protein wall. To test the
PB theory in this more realistic case, we place a set of negative
charges in the walls near the each end of an r = 3 Å channel. Eight monopoles with charges
0.09e are spread
evenly around the channel circumference at z = 12.5 Å and z =
12.5 Å, where the channel starts curving.
The PB, BD, and single ion results for the z-component of
the force on a test cation (as in Fig. 4 A) are compared in
Fig. 11 A. The fixed
negative charges on the channel wall reduce the presence of counterions in the channel and the associated shielding, and hence lead to much
larger forces in PB theory compared to Fig. 4 A, in better agreement
with the BD results. The fourfold discrepancy observed in the bare
channel (Fig. 4 A) is now reduced to about a factor of 2. The fixed charges also prevent the occurrence of anomalous shielding in
the channel interior; the BD results now closely track those of the
single ion, reinforcing the earlier conclusion that no shielding is
possible inside a narrow channel. As the test ion is moved away from
the channel, shielding becomes more and more effective and the force in
BD goes gradually from the single ion curve toward the PB result. In
Fig. 11 B we show the potential energy profiles obtained
from the force curves in Fig. 11 A. Besides the usual
discrepancy between PB and BD theories, perhaps a paradoxical result is
that shielding actually increases the energy barrier in BD compared to
that of a single ion. The reason for this ironic result can be seen
from Fig. 11 A; shielding operates when the ion is outside
the channel where the force is attractive, but not inside when it is
repulsive.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 11
Effect of placing fixed charges in the channel wall in
an r = 3 Å channel. (A) Force on a
cation as in Fig. 4 A but with fixed charges.
(B) Potential energy profiles as in Fig. 6
A but with fixed charges.
|
|
As a final study in cylindrical channels, we consider the possibility
that the dielectric constant inside the channel may be smaller than 80, especially in narrow channels. This can be implemented in a
straightforward manner in the PB algorithm where a three-dimensional
grid is used, but it is not so easy in the BD simulations where a
boundary element method is used in solving Poisson's equation. This
problem has been tackled in previous BD simulations (Chung et al.,
1998
, 1999
) by using the reduced value of the dielectric constant,
c, in both the channel and reservoir, and
including the neglected Born energy difference between the
channel-reservoir configurations with
c-80 and
c-
c as a short-range
energy barrier at the channel entrances. We refer to the above
references for details of this implementation in the BD program. The
Born energy difference for a 3 Å channel is calculated using the PB
program at zero concentration, which gives a barrier height of 3.5 kT for
c = 40 and 11.8 kT for
c = 20. In PB calculations
the change in
is implemented in five equal steps from the channel
entrance at z = 17.5 Å to z = 12.5 Å,
and similarly at the other end. The potential energy profiles for
c = 20 and 40 are compared in Fig.
12. The barrier height for a single ion
increases roughly as 1/
c, and a similar trend
is seen in BD. At lower
c, BD results deviate
more from those of single ion because of the appearance of shielding at
the mouth region. We attribute this to the stronger Coulomb attraction
between the test ion and counterions, which increases as
1/
c. The corresponding increase in barrier
height is much faster in PB theory, so that the discrepancy with BD
gets smaller with decreasing
c (but stays severalfold in any case). This faster increase of barrier height in PB
is related to the loss of shielding inside the channel with reduction
in
, which affects the PB results but not BD. Nevertheless, the
overall conclusion remains the same as before; greater shielding in PB
results in much lower energy barriers compared to BD.

View larger version (17K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 12
Effect of changing the dielectric constant in the
channel, c, on the potential profile of a test ion in an
r = 3 Å channel without fixed charges.
(A) c = 20; (B)
c = 40.
|
|
Catenary channel
The above study in cylindrical channels gives a good idea about
the expected working range of the PB theory. To demonstrate the
robustness of those conclusions, we repeat the force and potential energy calculations in a more realistic channel geometry with vestibules. This catenary-shaped channel is generated by rotating the
closed curve shown in Fig. 13 about the
axis of symmetry. The vestibule of this channel is similar in shape to
that visible in the electron microscope pictures of the acetylcholine
receptor channel (Toyoshima and Unwin, 1988
), making this a better
approximation of a real biological ion channel. The vestibules are
generated by a hyperbolic cosine function, z = a cosh(x/a), where a = 4.87 Å. The entrance to the vestibule has a fixed radius of 13 Å. Two such identical vestibules are connected to a cylindrical transmembrane segment of radius 4 Å and length 10 Å. It is assumed for convenience that the vestibules have the same shape and size, although the electron
microscope images show the extracellular vestibule to be larger than
the intracellular vestibule.

View larger version (19K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 13
Diagram showing the cross-section of the catenary
geometry that approximates the shape of the acetylcholine receptor
channel. A three-dimensional channel is generated by rotating the
curves about the central axis by 180°. Vestibules at each side of the
membrane are constructed using a hyperbolic cosine function,
y = a
cosh(x/a) where a = 4.87 Å. The radius at the entrance of the vestibule is 13 Å and at
the cylindrical transmembrane segment 4 Å. Cylindrical reservoirs (not
shown), 30 Å in radius and 22 Å in height, are attached to the
vestibules.
|
|
In Fig. 14 A we show the
z-component of the force as the test ion is moved along the
central axis of the channel. The concentration is maintained at 300 mM
in both the PB calculations and the BD simulations. As before, PB
calculations are shown by the solid line, the BD results are indicated
by the filled circles which are fitted by the dotted line, and the
dashed line shows the force on a single ion. The BD calculations of
force closely track the single ion results in the narrow parts of the
channel (up to z = 10 Å), and reinforce the earlier
conclusion on impossibility of shielding in narrow parts of the
channel. There is a large discrepancy between the PB and BD results in
this region as in Fig. 4, A and B. As the ion is
moved further along the z axis, the channel expands and
shielding becomes more and more effective in BD. This is reflected in
the force values in BD gradually moving from the single ion curve to
the PB results in the z = 10-30 Å range. The
potential energy profiles obtained from the force curves in Fig. 14
A are shown in Fig. 14 B. Shielding is seen to
have reduced the energy barrier of a single ion by 40% in BD; however,
the barrier in BD is still three times larger than the PB result. Thus,
in a channel with vestibules, shielding definitely plays some role but
its effect is nowhere near the PB predictions, where shielding
demolishes the barrier presented to a single ion for all practical
purposes.

View larger version (18K):
[in this window]
[in a new window]
|
FIGURE 14
(A) The z-component of
the force on a cation for a 300 mM electrolyte in a catenary channel is
plotted against its axial position. The force obtained from the PB
theory is shown by the solid curve and the BD results are indicated by
filled circles with error bars fitted with the dotted line. The dashed
line indicates the force in the case of a single ion
(c0 = 0). (B) The
potential energy profiles obtained from the force curves in
(A).
|
|
 |
CONCLUSIONS |
The comparisons of PB theory with BD simulations in various
configurations provide clear answers on the range of validity of the
former. When the distance of an ion from the channel wall is less than
1 Debye length, the PB calculations largely overestimate the shielding
effects and cannot be expected to give reliable values of the force on
and potential energy of an ion. The convergence of the PB and BD
results occurs when the ion's distance from the channel wall is ~2
Debye lengths, depending on the quantity and the geometry considered.
Because the radii of membrane channels are typically smaller than
the Debye length, the PB theory cannot be used to obtain reliable
estimates of electrostatic force and potential energy of an ion in the
channel environment.
Our BD results demonstrate that if the radial profile of a channel is
less than the Debye length throughout, it is unlikely to contain any
counterions. This conclusion is especially reinforced in realistic
channel configurations where fixed charges of opposite sign, which are
necessary for ion permeation, make it virtually impossible for any
counterion to enter the channel (cf. Fig. 11). For such channels, it is
clearly better to use Poisson's equation rather than PB, as no
shielding due to ionic atmosphere is possible. This conclusion appears
ironical in the historical context of the field because PB theory was
advanced as an improvement of Poisson's equation in ion channels.
Channels whose radial profiles exhibit large variations are more
difficult to reconcile with the existing continuum theories because
each is valid in a limited range. For such channels, BD simulations
certainly offer a more reliable method for calculations of forces and
potentials. Nevertheless, if one insists on using a continuum
description, one could presumably extrapolate from Poisson's to the PB
equation as the channel widens by using the BD results as a guide.
We use a finite difference method to solve the PB equation. The
problem is discretized by placing a rectangular grid of points with
cell dimensions hx × hy × hz over the region of interest. The
value of the potential at each grid point represents the average value
of
in the rectangular box centered at the grid point. Each surface
element between neighboring grid points is assigned a dielectric
constant according to the position of the midpoint, that is,
= 80 if it is in the electrolyte and
= 2 if it is outside.
Similarly, a value of 