Jove
Visualize
Contact Us
JoVE
x logofacebook logolinkedin logoyoutube logo
ABOUT JoVE
OverviewLeadershipBlogJoVE Help Center
AUTHORS
Publishing ProcessEditorial BoardScope & PoliciesPeer ReviewFAQSubmit
LIBRARIANS
TestimonialsSubscriptionsAccessResourcesLibrary Advisory BoardFAQ
RESEARCH
JoVE JournalMethods CollectionsJoVE Encyclopedia of ExperimentsArchive
EDUCATION
JoVE CoreJoVE BusinessJoVE Science EducationJoVE Lab ManualFaculty Resource CenterFaculty Site
Terms & Conditions of Use
Privacy Policy
Policies

Related Concept Videos

Typical Model Studies01:30

Typical Model Studies

620
Fluid mechanics model studies often utilize scaled-down systems to predict fluid behavior in full-scale environments, such as river flows, dam spillways, and structures interacting with open surfaces. Maintaining Froude number similarity in river models is crucial, as it replicates surface flow features like wave patterns and velocities.
620
Molecular Comparison of Gases, Liquids, and Solids02:26

Molecular Comparison of Gases, Liquids, and Solids

53.8K
Particles in a solid are tightly packed together (fixed shape) and often arranged in a regular pattern; in a liquid, they are close together with no regular arrangement (no fixed shape); in a gas, they are far apart with no regular arrangement (no fixed shape). Particles in a solid vibrate about fixed positions (cannot flow) and do not generally move in relation to one another; in a liquid, they move past each other (can flow) but remain in essentially constant contact; in a gas, they move...
53.8K
Molecular Models02:00

Molecular Models

43.5K
Physical models representing molecular architectures of chemical compounds play essential roles in understanding chemistry. The use of molecular models makes it easier to visualize the structures and shapes of atoms and molecules.
43.5K

You might also read

Related Articles

Articles linked to this work by shared authors, journal, and citation graph.

Sort by
Same author

Geometrically Induced Acceleration for Charging Dynamics of Electrical Double-Layers in a Nanopore with Sloped Walls.

The journal of physical chemistry. C, Nanomaterials and interfaces·2026
Same author

Direction of Spontaneous Processes in Non-Equilibrium Systems with Movable/Permeable Internal Walls.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)·2024
Same author

A network model to predict ionic transport in porous materials.

Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America·2024
Same author

Fundamental Relation for the Ideal Gas in the Gravitational Field and Heat Flow.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)·2023
Same author

Parameters of State in the Global Thermodynamics of Binary Ideal Gas Mixtures in a Stationary Heat Flow.

Entropy (Basel, Switzerland)·2023
Same author

Steady-state thermodynamics of a system with heat and mass flow coupling.

The Journal of chemical physics·2023

Related Experiment Video

Updated: Jan 18, 2026

Contrast-Matching Detergent in Small-Angle Neutron Scattering Experiments for Membrane Protein Structural Analysis and Ab Initio Modeling
10:27

Contrast-Matching Detergent in Small-Angle Neutron Scattering Experiments for Membrane Protein Structural Analysis and Ab Initio Modeling

Published on: October 21, 2018

13.0K

Bead model hydrodynamics: an in-depth comparison between GRPY and ZENO.

Emre Brookes1, Pawel J Żuk2, Mattia Rocco3

  • 1Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of Montana, 32 Campus Drive, Missoula, Montana, 59812, USA. emre.brookes@umontana.edu.

European Biophysics Journal : EBJ
|May 29, 2025
PubMed
Summary

Comparing hydrodynamic properties of biomacromolecules using bead modeling aids structure validation. GRPY and ZENO programs show minor differences, with GRPY performing better than ZENO against other methods.

Keywords:
BESTBead modelingHYDROMULTIPOLEProtein modellingUS-SOMO

More Related Videos

Author Spotlight: Advancing Cell Membrane Biophysics - Exploring Interactions and Challenges Through Experimental and Computational Approaches
07:31

Author Spotlight: Advancing Cell Membrane Biophysics - Exploring Interactions and Challenges Through Experimental and Computational Approaches

Published on: September 1, 2023

3.1K
Author Spotlight: Streamlining Visual Dynamics to Simplify Molecular Dynamics Simulations Using Gromacs
05:00

Author Spotlight: Streamlining Visual Dynamics to Simplify Molecular Dynamics Simulations Using Gromacs

Published on: August 9, 2024

1.9K

Related Experiment Videos

Last Updated: Jan 18, 2026

Contrast-Matching Detergent in Small-Angle Neutron Scattering Experiments for Membrane Protein Structural Analysis and Ab Initio Modeling
10:27

Contrast-Matching Detergent in Small-Angle Neutron Scattering Experiments for Membrane Protein Structural Analysis and Ab Initio Modeling

Published on: October 21, 2018

13.0K
Author Spotlight: Advancing Cell Membrane Biophysics - Exploring Interactions and Challenges Through Experimental and Computational Approaches
07:31

Author Spotlight: Advancing Cell Membrane Biophysics - Exploring Interactions and Challenges Through Experimental and Computational Approaches

Published on: September 1, 2023

3.1K
Author Spotlight: Streamlining Visual Dynamics to Simplify Molecular Dynamics Simulations Using Gromacs
05:00

Author Spotlight: Streamlining Visual Dynamics to Simplify Molecular Dynamics Simulations Using Gromacs

Published on: August 9, 2024

1.9K

Area of Science:

  • Biophysics
  • Computational Biology
  • Structural Biology

Background:

  • Hydrodynamic properties like translational diffusion and intrinsic viscosity are crucial for validating macromolecular structures.
  • Bead modeling is an efficient method for simulating biomacromolecules, incorporating hydration effects.
  • GRPY and ZENO are computational tools for hydrodynamic calculations on bead models, each with distinct computational approaches.

Purpose of the Study:

  • To conduct an in-depth comparison of the GRPY and ZENO programs for calculating hydrodynamic properties of biomacromolecules using bead models.
  • To evaluate the performance and consistency of GRPY and ZENO against each other and other established methods like HYDROMULTIPOLE and BEST.
  • To identify discrepancies between GRPY and ZENO and propose potential improvements for ZENO.

Main Methods:

  • Utilized bead modeling to represent biomacromolecules at atomic or residue levels.
  • Performed hydrodynamic calculations using the GRPY (Generalized Rotne-Prager-Yamakawa) and ZENO programs, both integrated within the US-SOMO suite.
  • Compared results with other methods: HYDROMULTIPOLE (accurate, no overlaps) and BEST (boundary elements, extrapolation required).

Main Results:

  • Systematic, albeit small (0.2-2%), differences were observed between GRPY and ZENO results, increasing with model size.
  • GRPY demonstrated better agreement with HYDROMULTIPOLE and BEST compared to ZENO when applied to protein bead models.
  • ZENO's computational efficiency is nearly independent of model size, unlike GRPY's N³ dependency.

Conclusions:

  • GRPY and ZENO exhibit slight but systematic differences in hydrodynamic property calculations for protein bead models.
  • GRPY shows better overall agreement with other advanced computational methods.
  • A heuristic correction for ZENO is proposed to enhance its consistency with GRPY, pending further performance improvements.