Advertisement

Water models for interfacial water simulations

  • MinMin Xue
  • WanLin GuoEmail author
Article Special Topic: Current Progress in Solid Mechanics and Physical Mechanics
  • 19 Downloads

Abstract

Interfacial water is of fundamental importance in many technological fields, such as biological processes, chemical reactions and lubrications. A prevalent way to study the structure and dynamics of interfacial water is carrying out molecular dynamics simulations with empirical potential water models. However, discrepant results have been reported due to their different charge geometries and target properties. Here we investigated the interfacial water structures on smooth surfaces of varying hydrophobicity at low temperatures by comprehensive molecular dynamics simulations with the prevailing water models. It is shown that the choice of the water model can significantly change the water structure on the hydrophilic surface, while has a minor effect on the contact angle on a hydrophobic surface. Furthermore, zero-dimensional ice pyramids and one-dimensional icicles were formed under the regulation of external charges injected to the substrate or imposed electric field, respectively. These results offer new insights into the water structures on different surfaces and reasonable choice of parameters in molecular simulations, and the development of water models.

water models Lennard-Jones potential hydrogen bonds square ice hexagonal ice pyramidal ice icicle 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    Tait M J, Franks F. Water in biological systems. Nature, 1971, 230: 91–94CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Chaplin M. Do we underestimate the importance of water in cell biology? Nat Rev Mol Cell Biol, 2006, 7: 861–866CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Ball P. Water as an active constituent in cell biology. Chem Rev, 2008, 108: 74–108CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Franks F. Royal Society of Chemistry. Cambridge: Royal Society of Chemistry, 2000Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheung M S, García A E, Onuchic J N. Protein folding mediated by solvation: Water expulsion and formation of the hydrophobic core occur after the structural collapse. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA, 2002, 99: 685–690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Fuxreiter M, Mezei M, Simon I, et al. Interfacial water as a “Hydration Fingerprint” in the noncognate complex of bam HI. BioPhys J, 2005, 89: 903–911CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Shen R, Guo W, Zhong W. Hydration valve controlled non-selective conduction of Na+ and K+ in the NaK channel. BioChim Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Biomembranes, 2010, 1798: 1474–1479CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Shen R, Guo W. Ion binding properties and structure stability of the NaK channel. BioChim Biophysica Acta (BBA)-Biomembranes, 2009, 1788: 1024–1032CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shen R, Guo W L, Zhong W Y, et al. Dynamic hydration valve controlled ion permeability and stability of NaK channel. Nature Precedings, 2008, doi:  https://doi.org/10.1038/npre.2008.2045.1 Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Carrasco J, Hodgson A, Michaelides A. A molecular perspective of water at metal interfaces. Nat Mater, 2012, 11: 667–674CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Björneholm O, Hansen M H, Hodgson A, et al. Water at interfaces. Chem Rev, 2016, 116: 7698–7726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Maier S, Salmeron M. How does water wet a surface? Acc Chem Res, 2015, 48: 2783–2790CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cerdá J, Michaelides A, Bocquet M L, et al. Novel water overlayer growth on Pd(111) characterized with scanning tunneling microscopy and density functional theory. Phys Rev Lett, 2004, 93: 116101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Maier S, Stass I, Cerdá J I, et al. Unveiling the mechanism of water partial dissociation on Ru(0001). Phys Rev Lett, 2014, 112: 126101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Standop S, Redinger A, Morgenstern M, et al. Molecular structure of the H2O wetting layer on Pt (111). Phys Rev B, 2010, 82: 161412CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Shiotari A, Sugimoto Y. Ultrahigh-resolution imaging of water networks by atomic force microscopy. Nat Commun, 2017, 8: 14313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Algara-Siller G, Lehtinen O, Wang F C, et al. Square ice in graphene nanocapillaries. Nature, 2015, 519: 443–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bernal J D, Fowler R H. A theory of water and ionic solution, with particular reference to hydrogen and hydroxyl ions. J Chem Phys, 1933, 1: 515–548CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ouyang J F, Bettens R P A. Modelling water: A lifetime enigma. CHIMIA, 2015, 69: 104–111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Guillot B. A reappraisal of what we have learnt during three decades of computer simulations on water. J Mol Liquids, 2002, 101: 219–260CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Kumar H, Dasgupta C, Maiti P K. Structure, dynamics and thermodynamics of single-file water under confinement: Effects of polarizability of water molecules. RSC Adv, 2015, 5: 1893–1901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Liu L, Patey G N. Simulations of water transport through carbon nanotubes: How different water models influence the conduction rate. J Chem Phys, 2014, 141: 18C518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Harrach M F, Drossel B. Structure and dynamics of TIP3P, TIP4P, and TIP5P water near smooth and atomistic walls of different hydro-affinity. J Chem Phys, 2014, 140: 174501CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Nakamura Y, Ohno T. Structure of water confined inside carbon nanotubes and water models. Mater Chem Phys, 2012, 132: 682–687CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Ji Q, Pellenq R J M, Van Vliet K J. Comparison of computational water models for simulation of calcium-silicate-hydrate. Comput Mater Sci, 2012, 53: 234–240CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Huggins D J. Correlations in liquid water for the TIP3P-Ewald, TIP4P-2005, TIP5P-Ewald, and SWM4-NDP models. J Chem Phys, 2012, 136: 064518CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Torii H. Comparison of different potential models in the calculations of the infrared and polarized Raman spectra and the transient infrared absorption anisotropy of the OH stretching mode of liquid water. J Mol Liquids, 2007, 136: 274–280CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Jorgensen W L, Chandrasekhar J, Madura J D, et al. Comparison of simple potential functions for simulating liquid water. J Chem Phys, 1983, 79: 926–935CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Berendsen H J C, Grigera J R, Straatsma T P. The missing term in effective pair potentials. J Phys Chem, 1987, 91: 6269–6271CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Abascal J L F, Vega C. A general purpose model for the condensed phases of water: TIP4P/2005. J Chem Phys, 2005, 123: 234505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Mahoney M W, Jorgensen W L. A five-site model for liquid water and the reproduction of the density anomaly by rigid, nonpolarizable potential functions. J Chem Phys, 2000, 112: 8910–8922CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Abraham M J, Murtola T, Schulz R, et al. GROMACS: High performance molecular simulations through multi-level parallelism from laptops to supercomputers. SoftwareX, 2015, 1–2: 19–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Humphrey W, Dalke A, Schulten K. VMD: Visual molecular dynamics. J Mol Graphics, 1996, 14: 33–38CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Kalé L, Skeel R, Bhandarkar M, et al. NAMD2: Greater scalability for parallel molecular dynamics. J Comput Phys, 1999, 151: 283–312CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Plimpton S. Fast parallel algorithms for short-range molecular dynamics. J Comput Phys, 1995, 117: 1–19CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Essmann U, Perera L, Berkowitz M L, et al. A smooth particle mesh Ewald method. J Chem Phys, 1995, 103: 8577–8593CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Berendsen H J C, Postma J P M, van Gunsteren W F, et al. Molecular dynamics with coupling to an external bath. J Chem Phys, 1984, 81: 3684–3690CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Wei N, Lv C, Xu Z. Wetting of graphene oxide: A molecular dynamics study. Langmuir, 2014, 30: 3572–3578CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Shih C J, Wang Q H, Lin S, et al. Breakdown in the wetting transparency of graphene. Phys Rev Lett, 2012, 109: 176101CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Jiao S, Duan C, Xu Z. Structures and thermodynamics of water encapsulated by graphene. Sci Rep, 2017, 7: 2646CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Luzar A, Chandler D. Effect of environment on hydrogen bond dynamics in liquid water. Phys Rev Lett, 1996, 76: 928–931CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Qiu H, Guo W. Electromelting of confined monolayer ice. Phys Rev Lett, 2013, 110: 195701CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Science China Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Key Laboratory for Intelligent Nano Materials and Devices of the Ministry of Education, State Key Laboratory of Mechanics and Control of Mechanical Structures, and Institute of NanoscienceNanjing University of Aeronautics and AstronauticsNanjingChina

Personalised recommendations