Electrostatic solvation and mobility in uniform and non-uniform electric fields: From simple ions to proteins

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

1 Citation (Scopus)

Abstract

A number of observations related to interfacial electrostatics of polar liquids question the traditional assumption of dielectric theories that bulk dielectric properties can be continuously extended to the dividing surface separating the solute from the solvent. The deficiency of this approximation can be remedied by introducing local interface susceptibilities and the interface dielectric constant. Asymmetries of ionic hydration thermodynamics and of the mobility between cations and anions can be related to different propensities of the water molecules to orient their dipole toward and outward from solutes of opposite charges. This electrostatic asymmetry is reflected in different interface dielectric constants for cations and anions. The interface of water with neutral solutes is spontaneously polarized due to preferential water orientations in the interface. This phenomenon is responsible for a nonzero cavity potential directly related to a nonzero surface charge. This connection predicts that particles allowing a nonzero cavity potential must show mobility in an external electric field even if the net charge of the particle is zero. The theory predicts that a positive cavity potential and a positive surface charge translate to an effectively negative solute charge reported by mobility measurements. Passing of the cavity potential through a minimum found in simulations might be the origin of the maximum of mobility vs the ionic size observed experimentally. Finally, mobility of proteins in the field gradient (dielectrophoresis) is many orders of magnitude greater than predicted by the traditionally used Clausius-Mossotti equation. Two reasons contribute to this disagreement: (i) a failure of Maxwell's electrostatics to describe the cavity-field susceptibility and (ii) the neglect of the protein permanent dipole by the Clausius-Mossotti equation. An analytical relation between the dielectrophoretic susceptibility and dielectric spectroscopy of solutions provides direct access to this parameter, confirming the failure of the Clausius-Mossotti equation in application to protein dielectrophresis.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Article number064106
JournalBiomicrofluidics
Volume13
Issue number6
DOIs
StatePublished - Nov 1 2019
Externally publishedYes

Fingerprint

Solvation
solvation
Electrostatics
Electric fields
Ions
Surface charge
electrostatics
proteins
Proteins
solutes
cavities
Anions
electric fields
Cations
Water
Permittivity
Negative ions
Positive ions
Dielectric spectroscopy
ions

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Biomedical Engineering
  • Materials Science(all)
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Fluid Flow and Transfer Processes
  • Colloid and Surface Chemistry

Cite this

@article{f025a6e32fd648d484fe66e9cacaa238,
title = "Electrostatic solvation and mobility in uniform and non-uniform electric fields: From simple ions to proteins",
abstract = "A number of observations related to interfacial electrostatics of polar liquids question the traditional assumption of dielectric theories that bulk dielectric properties can be continuously extended to the dividing surface separating the solute from the solvent. The deficiency of this approximation can be remedied by introducing local interface susceptibilities and the interface dielectric constant. Asymmetries of ionic hydration thermodynamics and of the mobility between cations and anions can be related to different propensities of the water molecules to orient their dipole toward and outward from solutes of opposite charges. This electrostatic asymmetry is reflected in different interface dielectric constants for cations and anions. The interface of water with neutral solutes is spontaneously polarized due to preferential water orientations in the interface. This phenomenon is responsible for a nonzero cavity potential directly related to a nonzero surface charge. This connection predicts that particles allowing a nonzero cavity potential must show mobility in an external electric field even if the net charge of the particle is zero. The theory predicts that a positive cavity potential and a positive surface charge translate to an effectively negative solute charge reported by mobility measurements. Passing of the cavity potential through a minimum found in simulations might be the origin of the maximum of mobility vs the ionic size observed experimentally. Finally, mobility of proteins in the field gradient (dielectrophoresis) is many orders of magnitude greater than predicted by the traditionally used Clausius-Mossotti equation. Two reasons contribute to this disagreement: (i) a failure of Maxwell's electrostatics to describe the cavity-field susceptibility and (ii) the neglect of the protein permanent dipole by the Clausius-Mossotti equation. An analytical relation between the dielectrophoretic susceptibility and dielectric spectroscopy of solutions provides direct access to this parameter, confirming the failure of the Clausius-Mossotti equation in application to protein dielectrophresis.",
author = "Matyushov, {Dmitry V.}",
year = "2019",
month = "11",
day = "1",
doi = "10.1063/1.5124390",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "13",
journal = "Biomicrofluidics",
issn = "1932-1058",
publisher = "American Institute of Physics Publising LLC",
number = "6",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Electrostatic solvation and mobility in uniform and non-uniform electric fields

T2 - From simple ions to proteins

AU - Matyushov, Dmitry V.

PY - 2019/11/1

Y1 - 2019/11/1

N2 - A number of observations related to interfacial electrostatics of polar liquids question the traditional assumption of dielectric theories that bulk dielectric properties can be continuously extended to the dividing surface separating the solute from the solvent. The deficiency of this approximation can be remedied by introducing local interface susceptibilities and the interface dielectric constant. Asymmetries of ionic hydration thermodynamics and of the mobility between cations and anions can be related to different propensities of the water molecules to orient their dipole toward and outward from solutes of opposite charges. This electrostatic asymmetry is reflected in different interface dielectric constants for cations and anions. The interface of water with neutral solutes is spontaneously polarized due to preferential water orientations in the interface. This phenomenon is responsible for a nonzero cavity potential directly related to a nonzero surface charge. This connection predicts that particles allowing a nonzero cavity potential must show mobility in an external electric field even if the net charge of the particle is zero. The theory predicts that a positive cavity potential and a positive surface charge translate to an effectively negative solute charge reported by mobility measurements. Passing of the cavity potential through a minimum found in simulations might be the origin of the maximum of mobility vs the ionic size observed experimentally. Finally, mobility of proteins in the field gradient (dielectrophoresis) is many orders of magnitude greater than predicted by the traditionally used Clausius-Mossotti equation. Two reasons contribute to this disagreement: (i) a failure of Maxwell's electrostatics to describe the cavity-field susceptibility and (ii) the neglect of the protein permanent dipole by the Clausius-Mossotti equation. An analytical relation between the dielectrophoretic susceptibility and dielectric spectroscopy of solutions provides direct access to this parameter, confirming the failure of the Clausius-Mossotti equation in application to protein dielectrophresis.

AB - A number of observations related to interfacial electrostatics of polar liquids question the traditional assumption of dielectric theories that bulk dielectric properties can be continuously extended to the dividing surface separating the solute from the solvent. The deficiency of this approximation can be remedied by introducing local interface susceptibilities and the interface dielectric constant. Asymmetries of ionic hydration thermodynamics and of the mobility between cations and anions can be related to different propensities of the water molecules to orient their dipole toward and outward from solutes of opposite charges. This electrostatic asymmetry is reflected in different interface dielectric constants for cations and anions. The interface of water with neutral solutes is spontaneously polarized due to preferential water orientations in the interface. This phenomenon is responsible for a nonzero cavity potential directly related to a nonzero surface charge. This connection predicts that particles allowing a nonzero cavity potential must show mobility in an external electric field even if the net charge of the particle is zero. The theory predicts that a positive cavity potential and a positive surface charge translate to an effectively negative solute charge reported by mobility measurements. Passing of the cavity potential through a minimum found in simulations might be the origin of the maximum of mobility vs the ionic size observed experimentally. Finally, mobility of proteins in the field gradient (dielectrophoresis) is many orders of magnitude greater than predicted by the traditionally used Clausius-Mossotti equation. Two reasons contribute to this disagreement: (i) a failure of Maxwell's electrostatics to describe the cavity-field susceptibility and (ii) the neglect of the protein permanent dipole by the Clausius-Mossotti equation. An analytical relation between the dielectrophoretic susceptibility and dielectric spectroscopy of solutions provides direct access to this parameter, confirming the failure of the Clausius-Mossotti equation in application to protein dielectrophresis.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=85074842884&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=85074842884&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1063/1.5124390

DO - 10.1063/1.5124390

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:85074842884

VL - 13

JO - Biomicrofluidics

JF - Biomicrofluidics

SN - 1932-1058

IS - 6

M1 - 064106

ER -