MENU
  • Scitation Home
SUBMIT YOUR ARTICLE

Thank you

For your interest in the The Journal of Chemical Physics (JCP)

Check for updates on crossmark
Prev Next
Open
Published Online: 29 May 2013
Accepted: May 2013

Geometrical effects on energy transfer in disordered open quantum systems

J. Chem. Phys. 138, 204309 (2013); https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4807084
M. Mohseni1,2, A. Shabani3,4, S. Lloyd5, Y. Omar2,6, and H. Rabitz3
more...View Affiliations
Abstract
We explore various design principles for efficient excitation energy transport in complex quantum systems. We investigate energy transfer efficiency in randomly disordered geometries consisting of up to 20 chromophores to explore spatial and spectral properties of small natural/artificial Light-Harvesting Complexes (LHC). We find significant statistical correlations among highly efficient random structures with respect to ground state properties, excitonic energy gaps, multichromophoric spatial connectivity, and path strengths. These correlations can even exist beyond the optimal regime of environment-assisted quantum transport. For random configurations embedded in spatial dimensions of 30 Å or 50 Å, we observe that the transport efficiency saturates to its maximum value if the systems contain around 7 or 14 chromophores, respectively. Remarkably, these optimum values coincide with the number of chlorophylls in the Fenna-Matthews-Olson protein complex and LHC II monomers, respectively, suggesting a potential natural optimization with respect to chromophoric density.

ACKNOWLEDGMENTS

We thank A. Ishizaki, M. Sarovar, and K. B. Whaley, for useful discussions. We acknowledge funding from DARPA under the QuBE program, NSF, ENI, ISI, NEC, Lockheed Martin, Intel, and from project IT-PQuantum, as well as from Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia (Portugal), namely, through programme POCTI/POCI/PTDC, and projects SFRH/BPD/71897/2010, PEst-OE/EEI/LA0008/2013 and PTDC/EEA-TEL/103402/2008 QuantPrivTel, partially funded by EU-FEDER, and from the European Union's Seventh Framework Programme (FP7/2007-2013) under Grant Agreement No. 318287.

REFERENCES

  1. 1. V. May and O. Kuhn, Charge and Energy Transfer Dynamics in Molecular Systems (Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2004). Google Scholar
  2. 2. S. Mukamel, Principles of Nonlinear Optical Spectroscopy (Oxford University Press, USA, 1999). Google Scholar
  3. 3. G. S. Engel, T. R. Calhoun, E. L. Read, T. K. Ahn, T. Mancal, Y. C. Cheng, R. E. Blankenship, and G. R. Fleming, Nature (London) 446, 782 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1038/nature05678 , Google ScholarCrossref
  4. 4. M. Mohseni, P. Rebentrost, S. Lloyd, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, J. Chem. Phys. 129, 174106 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3002335 , Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  5. 5. P. Rebentrost, M. Mohseni, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, J. Phys. Chem. B 113, 9942 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp901724d , Google ScholarCrossref
  6. 6. P. Rebentrost, M. Mohseni, I. Kassal, S. Lloyd, and A. Aspuru-Guzik, New J. Phys. 11, 033003 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/11/3/033003 , Google ScholarCrossref
  7. 7. M. B. Plenio and S. F. Huelga, New J. Phys. 10, 113019 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/10/11/113019 , Google ScholarCrossref
  8. 8. J. Cao and R. Silbey, J. Phys. Chem. A 113, 13825 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp9032589 , Google ScholarCrossref
  9. 9. F. Caruso, A. W. Chin, A. Datta, S. F. Huelga, and M. B. Plenio, Phys. Rev. A 81, 062346 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevA.81.062346 , Google ScholarCrossref
  10. 10. G. Panitchayangkoon, D. Hayes, K. A. Fransted, J. R. Caram, E. Harel, J. Wen, R. E. Blankenship, and G. S. Engel, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 107, 12766 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.1005484107 , Google ScholarCrossref
  11. 11. A. Shabani, M. Mohseni, H. Rabitz, and S. Lloyd, Phys. Rev. E 86, 011915 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.86.011915 , Google ScholarCrossref
  12. 12. M. Mohseni, A. Shabani, H. Rabitz, and S. Lloyd, e-print arXiv:1103.3823. Google Scholar
  13. 13. G. D. Scholes, G. R. Fleming, A. Olaya-Castro, and R. V. Grondelle, Nat. Chem. 3, 763 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nchem.1145 , Google ScholarCrossref
  14. 14. Quantum Effects in Biology, edited by M. Mohseni, Y. Omar, G. Engel, and M. Plenio (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 2013). Google Scholar
  15. 15. S. Lloyd and M. Mohseni, New J. Phys. 12, 075020 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/12/7/075020 , Google ScholarCrossref
  16. 16. D. Abasto, M. Mohseni, S. Lloyd, and P. Zanardi, Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 370, 3750 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2011.0213 , Google ScholarCrossref
  17. 17. R. E. Blankenship, Molecular Mechanism of Photosynthesis (Blackwell Science, London, 2002). Google ScholarCrossref
  18. 18. H. Lee, Y.-C. Cheng, and G. R. Fleming, Science 316, 1462 (2007). https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1142188 , Google ScholarCrossref
  19. 19. Until recently it was believed that the number of chromophores for FMO is seven, but recent studies suggest the existence of an eighth shared chromophore between the FMO three monomers; e.g., please see M. Schmidt am Busch, F. Muh, M. E. A. Madjet, and T. Renger, J. Phys. Chem. Lett. 2, 93 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1021/jz101541b , Google ScholarCrossref
  20. 20. T. R. Calhoun, N. S. Ginsberg, G. S. Schlau-Cohen, Y.-C. Cheng, M. Ballottari, R. Bassi, and G. R. Fleming, J. Phys. Chem. B 113, 16291 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp908300c , Google ScholarCrossref
  21. 21. T. Scholak, F. D. Melo, T. Wellens, F. Mintert, and A. Buchleitner, Phys. Rev. E 83, 021912 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.83.021912 , Google ScholarCrossref
  22. 22. H.-P. Breuer and F. Petruccione, The Theory of Open Quantum Systems (Oxford University Press, New York, 2002). Google Scholar
  23. 23. G. S. Beddard and G. Porter, Nature (London) 260, 366 (1976). https://doi.org/10.1038/260366a0 , Google ScholarCrossref
  24. 24. J. Cao, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 3204 (1997). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.474670 , Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  25. 25. A. Ishizaki and G. R. Fleming, J. Chem. Phys. 130, 234110 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3155214 , Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  26. 26. T. Ritz, S. Park, and K. Schulten, J. Phys. Chem. B 105, 8259 (2001). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp011032r , Google ScholarCrossref
  27. 27. A. Olaya-Castro, C. Fan Lee, F. Fassioli Olsen, and N. F. Johnson, Phys. Rev. B 78, 085115 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.78.085115 , Google ScholarCrossref
  28. 28. S. Hoyer, M. Sarovar, and K. B. Whaley, New J. Phys. 12, 065041 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/12/6/065041 , Google ScholarCrossref
  29. 29. A. Ishizaki and G. R. Fleming, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 106, 17255 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.0908989106 , Google ScholarCrossref
  30. 30. G. D. Scholes, Annu. Rev. Phys. Chem. 54, 57–87 (2003). https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.physchem.54.011002.103746 , Google ScholarCrossref
  31. 31. In this work, whenever it is not specified otherwise, the environmental parameters for the FMO complex are chosen according to the estimated values of reorganization energy 35 cm−1, bath cutoff frequency 50 cm−1, temperature 298 °K, trapping rate of 1 ps, exciton lifetime of 1 ns. Google Scholar
  32. 32. T. Förster, in Modern Quantum Chemistry, Istanbul Lectures, edited by O. Sinanoglu (Academic, New York, 1965), Vol. 3, pp. 93–137. Google Scholar
  33. 33. M. Yang and G. R. Fleming, Chem. Phys. 275, 355 (2002). https://doi.org/10.1016/S0301-0104(01)00540-7 , Google ScholarCrossref
  34. 34. A. Kolli et al., J. Chem. Phys. 137, 174109 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4764100 , Google ScholarScitation, ISI
  35. 35. A. W. Chin et al., Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 370, 3638–3657 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1098/rsta.2011.0224 , Google ScholarCrossref
  36. 36. A. W. Chin et al., Nat. Phys. 9, 113 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys2515 , Google ScholarCrossref
  37. 37. Y.-Z. Ma, R. A. Miller, G. R. Fleming, and M. B. Francis, J. Phys. Chem. B 112, 6887 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1021/jp8006393 , Google ScholarCrossref
  38. 38. R. A. Miller, N. Stephanopoulos, J. M. McFarland, A. S. Rosko, P. L. Geissler, and M. B. Francis, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 6068 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1021/ja909566z , Google ScholarCrossref
  39. 39. S. Jesenko and M. Znidaric, New J. Phys. 14, 093017 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1088/1367-2630/14/9/093017 , Google ScholarCrossref
  40. 40. M. Sarovar, A. Ishizaki, G. R. Fleming, and K. B. Whaley, Nat. Phys. 6, 462 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1038/nphys1652 , Google ScholarCrossref
  41. 41. S. Weiss et al., Phys. Rev. B 77, 195316 (2008). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.77.195316 , Google ScholarCrossref
  42. 42. J. Prior et al., Phys. Rev. Lett. 105, 050404 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevLett.105.050404 , Google ScholarCrossref
  43. 43. A. W. Chin et al., J. Math. Phys. 51, 092109 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1063/1.3490188 , Google ScholarScitation
  44. 44. C. Curutchet et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133, 3078 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1021/ja110053y , Google ScholarCrossref
  45. 45. S. Lloyd, M. Mohseni, A. Shabani, and H. Rabitz, e-print arXiv:1111.4982. Google Scholar
  46. 46. D. M. Eisele et al., Nat. Nanotechnol. 4, 658 (2009). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2009.227 , Google ScholarCrossref
  47. 47. D. M. Eisele et al., Nat. Chem. 4, 655 (2012). https://doi.org/10.1038/nchem.1380 , Google ScholarCrossref
  48. 48. Y. S. Nam et al., J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 1462 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1021/ja908812b , Google ScholarCrossref
  49. 49. X. Dang et al., Nat. Nanotechnol. 6, 377 (2011). https://doi.org/10.1038/nnano.2011.50 , Google ScholarCrossref
  50. © 2013 Author(s).

Article Metrics

Views
340
Citations
Crossref 17
Web of Science
ISI 16

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.