MENU
  • Scitation Home
SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE

Thank you

For your interest in the The Journal of Chemical Physics

Check for updates on crossmark
Prev Next
No Access
Published Online: 11 November 2013
Accepted: October 2013

Characterizing N-dimensional anisotropic Brownian motion by the distribution of diffusivities

J. Chem. Phys. 139, 184105 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4828860
Mario Heidernätsch, Michael Bauer, and Günter Radonsa)
more...View Affiliations
  • Original article: JCP: BioChemical Physics 7 (11), 11B607_1 (2013)
    • ABSTRACT
    Anisotropic diffusion processes emerge in various fields such as transport in biological tissue and diffusion in liquid crystals. In such systems, the motion is described by a diffusion tensor. For a proper characterization of processes with more than one diffusion coefficient, an average description by the mean squared displacement is often not sufficient. Hence, in this paper, we use the distribution of diffusivities to study diffusion in a homogeneous anisotropic environment. We derive analytical expressions of the distribution and relate its properties to an anisotropy measure based on the mean diffusivity and the asymptotic decay of the distribution. Both quantities are easy to determine from experimental data and reveal the existence of more than one diffusion coefficient, which allows the distinction between isotropic and anisotropic processes. We further discuss the influence on the analysis of projected trajectories, which are typically accessible in experiments. For the experimentally most relevant cases of two- and three-dimensional anisotropic diffusion, we derive specific expressions, determine the diffusion tensor, characterize the anisotropy, and demonstrate the applicability for simulated trajectories.

    ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

    We thank Sven Schubert for stimulating discussions and valuable suggestions. We gratefully acknowledge financial support from the Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) for funding of the research unit FOR 877 “From Local Constraints to Macroscopic Transport.” We also appreciated valuable suggestions of the anonymous referees, which helped to improve the paper considerably.

    REFERENCES
    Section:
    Previous sectionNext section

    1. 1. N. G. van Kampen, J. Phys. Chem. Solids 49, 673 (1988). https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-3697(88)90199-0 , Google ScholarCrossref
    2. 2. M. Christensen and J. B. Pedersen, J. Chem. Phys. 119, 5171 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1597476 , Google ScholarScitation
    3. 3. E. Bringuier, Eur. J. Phys. 32, 975 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1088/0143-0807/32/4/012 , Google ScholarCrossref
    4. 4. B. Schulz, D. Täuber, F. Friedriszik, H. Graaf, J. Schuster, and C. von Borczyskowski, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 12, 11555 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1039/c004042h , Google ScholarCrossref
    5. 5. B. Schulz, D. Täuber, J. Schuster, T. Baumgärtel, and C. von Borczyskowski, Soft Matter 7, 7431 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1039/c1sm05434a , Google ScholarCrossref
    6. 6. D. Täuber and C. von Borczyskowski, Int. J. Mol. Sci. 14, 19506 (2013). https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms141019506 , Google ScholarCrossref
    7. 7. J. Bechhoefer, J.-C. Géminard, L. Bocquet, and P. Oswald, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 4922 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.79.4922 , Google ScholarCrossref
    8. 8. Selected Papers on Noise and Stochastic Processes, edited by N. Wax (Dover Publications, New York, 1954). Google Scholar
    9. 9. M. J. Saxton and K. Jacobson, Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 26, 373 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.biophys.26.1.373 , Google ScholarCrossref
    10. 10. M. Dahan, S. Lévi, C. Luccardini, P. Rostaing, B. Riveau, and A. Triller, Science 302, 442 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1088525 , Google ScholarCrossref
    11. 11. D. T. Chen, E. R. Weeks, J. C. Crocker, M. F. Islam, R. Verma, J. Gruber, A. J. Levine, T. C. Lubensky, and A. G. Yodh, Phys. Rev. Lett. 90, 108301 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.90.108301 , Google ScholarCrossref
    12. 12. T. G. Mason, K. Ganesan, J. H. van Zanten, D. Wirtz, and S. C. Kuo, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 3282 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.79.3282 , Google ScholarCrossref
    13. 13. K. McHale, A. J. Berglund, and H. Mabuchi, Nano Lett. 7, 3535 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1021/nl0723376 , Google ScholarCrossref
    14. 14. N. P. Wells, G. A. Lessard, and J. H. Werner, Anal. Chem. 80, 9830 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1021/ac8021899 , Google ScholarCrossref
    15. 15. J.-H. Spille, T. Kaminski, H.-P. Königshoven, and U. Kubitscheck, Opt. Express 20, 19697 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1364/OE.20.019697 , Google ScholarCrossref
    16. 16. C. Ribrault, A. Triller, and K. Sekimoto, Phys. Rev. E 75, 021112 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.75.021112 , Google ScholarCrossref
    17. 17. J. Kärger, D. M. Ruthven, and D. N. Theodorou, Diffusion in Nanoporous Materials (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2012). Google ScholarCrossref
    18. 18. I. Hanasaki and Y. Isono, Phys. Rev. E 85, 051134 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.85.051134 , Google ScholarCrossref
    19. 19. M. Bauer, R. Valiullin, G. Radons, and J. Kärger, J. Chem. Phys. 135, 144118 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3647875 , Google ScholarScitation
    20. 20. D. Täuber, I. Trenkmann, and C. von Borczyskowski, Langmuir 29, 3583 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1021/la3043796 , Google ScholarCrossref
    21. 21. S. Krause, P. F. Aramendia, D. Täuber, and C. von Borczyskowski, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 13, 1754 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1039/c0cp01713b , Google ScholarCrossref
    22. 22. S. Krause, D. Kowerko, R. Börner, C. G. Hübner, and C. von Borczyskowski, ChemPhysChem 12, 303 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201000678 , Google ScholarCrossref
    23. 23. C. Hellriegel, J. Kirstein, and C. Bräuchle, New J. Phys. 7, 23 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/7/1/023 , Google ScholarCrossref
    24. 24. F. Höfling and T. Franosch, Rep. Prog. Phys. 76, 046602 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/0034-4885/76/4/046602 , Google ScholarCrossref
    25. 25. T. Albers and G. Radons, EPL 102, 40006 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1209/0295-5075/102/40006 , Google ScholarCrossref
    26. 26. M. Magdziarz, A. Weron, K. Burnecki, and J. Klafter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 103, 180602 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.103.180602 , Google ScholarCrossref
    27. 27. R. Grima, S. N. Yaliraki, and M. Barahona, J. Phys. Chem. B 114, 5380 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp9025865 , Google ScholarCrossref
    28. 28. P. Bräuer, A. Brzank, L. A. Clark, R. Q. Snurr, and J. Kärger, Adsorption 12, 417 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10450-006-0569-6 , Google ScholarCrossref
    29. 29. M. Pumpa and F. Cichos, J. Phys. Chem. B 116, 14487 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp307403w , Google ScholarCrossref
    30. 30. M. Arrio-Dupont, G. Foucault, M. Vacher, P. F. Devaux, and S. Cribier, Biophys. J. 78, 901 (2000). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(00)76647-1 , Google ScholarCrossref
    31. 31. M. K. Aliev and A. N. Tikhonov, Mol. Cell. Biochem. 358, 105 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1007/s11010-011-0926-y , Google ScholarCrossref
    32. 32. A. Illaste, M. Laasmaa, P. Peterson, and M. Vendelin, Biophys. J. 102, 739 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2012.01.012 , Google ScholarCrossref
    33. 33. B. A. Smith, W. R. Clark, and H. M. McConnell, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 76, 5641 (1979). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.76.11.5641 , Google ScholarCrossref
    34. 34. Y. Bouligand, Compt. Rend. Chem. 11, 281 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.crci.2007.10.001 , Google ScholarCrossref
    35. 35. P.-G. de Gennes and J. Prost, The Physics of Liquid Crystals, 2nd ed., International Series of Monographs on Physics Vol. 83 (Clarendon Press, Oxford, 1995). Google Scholar
    36. 36. H. Risken, The Fokker-Planck Equation: Methods of Solution and Applications, 2nd ed., Springer Series in Synergetics Vol. 18 (Springer, Berlin, 1989). Google ScholarCrossref
    37. 37. W. S. Price, NMR Studies of Translational Motion: Principles and Applications, Cambridge Molecular Science (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, New York, 2009). Google ScholarCrossref
    38. 38. M. J. Saxton, Biophys. J. 72, 1744 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0006-3495(97)78820-9 , Google ScholarCrossref
    39. 39. X. Michalet and A. J. Berglund, Phys. Rev. E 85, 061916 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.85.061916 , Google ScholarCrossref
    40. 40. N. Monnier, S.-M. Guo, M. Mori, J. He, P. Lénárt, and M. Bathe, Biophys. J. 103, 616 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bpj.2012.06.029 , Google ScholarCrossref
    41. 41. J. F. Kenney and E. S. Keeping, Mathematics of Statistics: Part 2, 2nd ed. (Van Nostrand, Princeton, NJ, 1951). Google Scholar
    42. 42. P. J. Smith, Am. Stat. 49, 217 (1995). https://doi.org/10.1080/00031305.1995.10476146 , Google ScholarCrossref
    43. 43. S. Hess, D. Frenkel, and M. P. Allen, Mol. Phys. 74, 765 (1991). https://doi.org/10.1080/00268979100102561 , Google ScholarCrossref
    44. 44. A. Dembo and O. Zeitouni, Stochastic Proc. Appl. 23, 91 (1986). https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4149(86)90018-9 , Google ScholarCrossref
    45. 45. F. Campillo and F. Le Gland, Stochastic Proc. Appl. 33, 245 (1989). https://doi.org/10.1016/0304-4149(89)90041-0 , Google ScholarCrossref
    46. 46. A. L. Cauchy, Oeuvres Complètes d'Augustin Cauchy 2 (Gauthier-Villars et fils, Paris, 1829), Vol. 9, pp. 174–195. Google Scholar
    47. 47. K. Fan and G. Pall, Can. J. Math. 9, 298 (1957). https://doi.org/10.4153/CJM-1957-036-1 , Google ScholarCrossref
    48. 48. J. F. C. Kingman, Q. J. Math. 12, 283 (1961). https://doi.org/10.1093/qmath/12.1.283 , Google ScholarCrossref
    49. 49. M. Y. An, J. Econ. Theory 80, 350 (1998). https://doi.org/10.1006/jeth.1998.2400 , Google ScholarCrossref
    50. 50. M. Bagnoli and T. Bergstrom, J. Econ. Theory 26, 445 (2005). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00199-004-0514-4 , Google ScholarCrossref
    51. 51. R. C. Gupta and N. Balakrishnan, Metrika 75, 181 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1007/s00184-010-0321-9 , Google ScholarCrossref
    1. © 2013 AIP Publishing LLC.

    Article Metrics

    Views
    122
    Citations
    Crossref 11
    Web of Science
    ISI 12

    Altmetric

    Please Note: The number of views represents the full text views from December 2016 to date. Article views prior to December 2016 are not included.