Back

Bigger Isn't Always Better: Comparing System Size, Hydration, and Software for Lipid Membrane Analysis

Carvalho, F.; Maximiano, P.; Simoes, P.; Hashemi, M.

2026-01-21 biophysics
10.64898/2026.01.20.700632 bioRxiv
Show abstract

The structural and dynamic properties of membranes are known to vary with bilayer size and hydration. While Molecular Dynamic (MD) simulations are a powerful tool for studying cellular membrane systems, the results can be sensitive to the analysis work-flow and software. In this study, all-atom MD simulations (500 ns) were conducted on systems of 256, 512, and 1024 POPC lipids at 40, 80, and 160 waters per lipid. With these simulations, a two-fold study was performed: (1) to assess the convergence of structural and dynamic properties of POPC bilayers as a function of membrane size and hydration level using CPPTRAJ (CPP), including area per lipid (APL), bilayer thickness, order parameter, headgroup orientation, and lateral diffusion, and (2) to compare the analysis output and performance of four software packages: CPP, GROMACS (GRO), MDAnalysis (MDA), and LiPyphilic (LiP). For the first objective, our results show that the average values of the bilayer thickness, order parameter, and headgroup orientation are largely independent of the size and hydration levels studied. In contrast, lateral diffusion coefficient was sensitive to both size and hydration. We found that increasing the system size primarily decreased the statistical variance of the APL and thickness. For the second objective, all four packages produced consistent results for APL and thickness, with the most significant discrepancy being a known artifact from the gmx order tool when applied to unsaturated carbons. Performance bench-marks identified CPP as the fastest serial tool for all properties, whereas parallelization benefited MDA and LiP in some metrics. These findings provide a practical roadmap, demonstrating that moderately sized systems (e.g., 256L), combined with an optimized tool such as CPP, offer an efficient workflow for membrane structural property analysis.

Matching journals

The top 7 journals account for 50% of the predicted probability mass.

1
Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA) - Biomembranes
30 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
17.5%
2
Journal of Chemical Information and Modeling
207 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
10.1%
3
Journal of Chemical Theory and Computation
126 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
8.4%
4
PLOS ONE
4510 papers in training set
Top 28%
6.4%
5
Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences
100 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
4.0%
6
Biophysical Journal
545 papers in training set
Top 2%
3.6%
7
The Journal of Physical Chemistry B
158 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
3.6%
50% of probability mass above
8
PLOS Computational Biology
1633 papers in training set
Top 11%
2.9%
9
The Journal of Chemical Physics
49 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.4%
10
Scientific Reports
3102 papers in training set
Top 51%
2.1%
11
Langmuir
31 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
2.1%
12
Computational and Structural Biotechnology Journal
216 papers in training set
Top 4%
1.8%
13
International Journal of Molecular Sciences
453 papers in training set
Top 8%
1.7%
14
Physical Biology
43 papers in training set
Top 1%
1.7%
15
Biochemistry and Biophysics Reports
28 papers in training set
Top 0.6%
1.7%
16
Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics
34 papers in training set
Top 0.3%
1.5%
17
Biophysical Reports
36 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.5%
18
ACS Omega
90 papers in training set
Top 2%
1.3%
19
European Biophysics Journal
11 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
1.2%
20
SoftwareX
15 papers in training set
Top 0.2%
1.2%
21
Bioinformatics Advances
184 papers in training set
Top 4%
0.9%
22
BMC Bioinformatics
383 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.8%
23
Journal of Molecular Biology
217 papers in training set
Top 3%
0.8%
24
Biophysical Chemistry
14 papers in training set
Top 0.1%
0.8%
25
Briefings in Bioinformatics
326 papers in training set
Top 7%
0.7%
26
F1000Research
79 papers in training set
Top 5%
0.7%
27
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science
12 papers in training set
Top 0.5%
0.6%