Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 68 references

Elucidating chirality transfer in liquid crystals of viruses

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-12 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read This paper claims that chirality transfer in virus liquid crystals splits into two mechanisms—electrostatic surface charge patterns for stiff rods, thermally induced backbone coiling for flexible rods—and supports the split with…

desk verdict Y21M electrostatic model is a real, parameter-free quantitative result; M13 suprahelix branch is a plausible one-parameter fit, so the paper deserves review but with the M13 caveat. read the letter →

arxiv 2411.13445 v1 pith:VYJH5L4A submitted 2024-11-20 cond-mat.soft physics.bio-ph

Eric Grelet , Maxime Tortora This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softphysics.bio-ph
keywords cholestericliquidcrystalschiralitytransferfilamentousbacteriophagesM13virusY21Melectrostaticsurfacechargessuprahelicalbackbonefluctuationspitchmastercurve
verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

Two closely related filamentous viruses, M13 and Y21M, form cholesteric liquid crystals—ordered fluids whose orientation twists in a helix—in opposite directions, and this paper claims to explain that difference quantitatively. For the stiff Y21M strain, the handedness and pitch of the twist (the distance for one full turn) are set by electrostatic interactions between the helical patterns of charge on the virus surface, described by an all-atom model built from the capsid structure. For the flexible M13 strain, those surface details are irrelevant; thermal motion bends the filament into a coherent right-handed superhelix, and the excluded-volume interactions of these coiled shapes set the twist. The authors show that all M13 pitch data collapse onto one master curve when concentration is rescaled, and that a 'suprahelix' with internal pitch fixed at 2.8 times the persistence length (a stiffness length scale) reproduces that curve. If right, this gives a general route from molecular chirality to macroscopic helical order and explains why nearly identical systems can show opposite chiral behavior.

What carries the argument

The argument runs on two machines. The first is an atomistic pair-interaction model for the capsids: starting from the deposited 1IFI and 2C0W capsid structures, every atom pair contributes screened electrostatic, van der Waals, and excluded-volume terms, and the cholesteric pitch and twist elastic constant are obtained by minimizing the second-virial free energy—a low-density expansion in pairwise interactions—of the twisted nematic state. The second is the suprahelix model, in which the thermally fluctuating backbone of a semi-flexible virus is replaced by a hard helix with radius r and internal pitch h; for a given persistence length (stiffness length scale) Lp, the internal pitch is the sole adjustable parameter, and the measured M13 behavior fixes it at h = 2.8 Lp. Both models feed the same free-energy machinery, so the two chirality mechanisms are compared on equal footing. The master-curve collapse is the key output connecting the suprahelix model to experiment.

What would settle it

Directly image the backbone of M13 viruses in cholesteric suspensions (for example by cryo-electron tomography or by tracking fluorescent labels along single filaments) and look for the presumed right-handed superhelix with internal pitch near 2.8 Lp ≈ 8 µm. If the thermally fluctuating backbone is straight, left-handed, or coiled at a clearly different pitch, the master-curve collapse has to be reinterpreted as a fit rather than evidence for the suprahelix mechanism.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that chirality transfer in filamentous-virus cholesterics is not dominated by a single mechanism but by two mechanisms that act at different length scales and can have opposite handedness. For the nearly rigid Y21M strain, a fully atomistic inter-particle potential—screened electrostatics, van der Waals, and steric forces summed over the roughly three million atoms of the capsid—quantitatively reproduces the measured right-handed cholesteric pitch and its dependence on pH and ionic strength, including the unwinding of the cholesteric order as the surface charge is reduced. For the semi-flexible M13 strain, the same electrostatic calculation fails, and the paper attributes the chirality instead to long-wavelength, thermally driven helical deformations of the virus backbone. Representing these fluctuations by a hard 'suprahelix' of radius r and internal pitch h, with h set to 2.8 Lp, collapses the measured inverse pitches of charged M13 and PEGylated M13-PEG at all ionic strengths onto a single master curve as a function of concentration rescaled by the isotropic binodal Ciso. The conclusion is that stiff-rod chirality is set by surface charge geometry, while flexible-rod chirality is set by entropy-driven backbone coiling, and the competition between these routes accounts for the opposite handedness of two otherwise similar viruses.

Load-bearing premise

The M13 result stands or falls on the assumption that thermal wiggling of the flexible virus is equivalent to one right-handed coiled shape whose coil spacing is fixed at 2.8 times the virus's stiffness length—a number chosen to match the measured pitch rather than derived from the physics; if that effective shape or its handedness is wrong, the agreement is a fit rather than a prediction.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • For stiff rod-like biopolymers with known atomistic structure, the cholesteric pitch and its salt/pH response can be predicted from the capsid charge pattern alone, without invoking backbone flexibility.
  • For semi-flexible filaments, the detailed surface charge decoration is irrelevant to chirality: only stiffness, length, and effective diameter matter, so the pitch should follow the same master curve when concentration is rescaled by the isotropic binodal.
  • Because the two mechanisms can contribute with opposite handedness, mutations or conditions that change stiffness, not just surface chemistry, can flip the macroscopic handedness of a cholesteric phase.
  • The pitch of flexible-filament cholesterics should tighten as contour length increases, opposite to the classical prediction for rigid screws, providing an experimental signature in cellulose, amyloid, and DNA-origami systems.
  • Chirality studies on charged biopolymer suspensions should compare data at fixed reduced concentration C/Ciso; otherwise apparent pitch changes with ionic strength may be misread as chiral surface-charge effects rather than generic electrostatic effects on phase stability.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

  • If the h = 2.8 Lp relation is universal rather than a fit, then the preferred thermal coil wavelength of any semi-flexible filament should be proportional to its persistence length; this could be tested directly by imaging individual M13 filaments under conditions that suppress or enhance thermal fluctuations.
  • A mutant or solvent condition that tunes M13's persistence length across the boundary between the two regimes should show a cholesteric pitch that first diverges and then changes sign—an experimentally accessible crossover the paper does not report.
  • The electrostatic model's success for Y21M implies a testable prediction: mutating specific charged residues on the p8 coat protein should shift the pitch quantitatively in the direction and magnitude the all-atom model computes before the experiment is done.
  • If both mechanisms operate simultaneously in intermediate-stiffness filaments, the observed pitch could be a sensitive probe of their relative sign and magnitude, potentially explaining why some cellulose and amyloid cholesterics show non-monotonic salt behavior.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Referee Report

3 major / 4 minor

Summary. The paper investigates the origin of cholesteric handedness and pitch in liquid crystals of two closely related filamentous bacteriophages, M13 and Y21M, which form cholesteric phases of opposite handedness. The authors combine experiments with two theoretical models: an atomistic electrostatic model that treats the capsid surface charges in detail, and a suprahelix model that represents thermally induced backbone deformations as a weakly curled hard helix. They report quantitative agreement for stiff Y21M using the electrostatic model with no pitch-specific fitting, and for semi-flexible M13 using the suprahelix model with internal pitch set to h = 2.8Lp, which collapses the M13 data onto a master curve. The central claim is that cholesteric self-assembly in these viruses quantitatively results from the interplay of electrostatic surface-charge chirality and fluctuation-induced backbone helicity.

Significance. If the claims hold, this is a substantial step toward a quantitative, bottom-up understanding of chirality transfer in colloidal liquid crystals. The Y21M electrostatic branch is particularly strong: it uses externally determined PDB structures, a standard force field, and standard protonation tools, and it reproduces the sign, magnitude, and pH-dependent unwinding of the pitch without fitted parameters. The master-curve collapse for M13 over multiple ionic strengths is also a valuable empirical result. The main weakness is that the M13 branch depends on a chosen internal pitch h = 2.8Lp and an assumed right-handedness of the backbone deformation, so the quantitative agreement in that branch is partly a fit rather than an independent prediction. Nonetheless, the paper presents a coherent, well-structured framework and will likely stimulate further work on chirality propagation in semiflexible biopolymers.

major comments (3)
  1. [Section II, suprahelix model (Fig. 4b and Fig. 5)] The central quantitative claim for M13 rests on the internal pitch h of the suprahelical conformation being set to h = 2.8Lp, a value chosen to match the measured M13 cholesteric pitch. This is explicitly stated in the text after Fig. 4b: "the internal pitch h of the suprahelical conformation has been set such that h = 2.8Lp." Consequently, the agreement in Fig. 5 is a one-parameter fit for the M13 branch, not an independent prediction. The paper should clearly state which aspects are predictive (for example, the Y21M-PEG diverging pitch, the master-curve collapse, and the predicted scaling with contour length) and which are fitted, and should discuss how h could be determined from first principles or from independent single-filament measurements. Without such clarification, the abstract's claim that the assembly "quantitatively results" from the interplay is overstated.
  2. [Section II, handedness of the suprahelix (paragraph after Fig. 4)] The right-handedness of the backbone deformation is not measured but inferred from the left-handed cholesteric phase and from geometric packing arguments (Extended Data Fig. 3). The paper itself acknowledges that "no primary proof of such helical conformation has been reported yet." Because the sign of the M13 cholesteric pitch is fully determined by this assumed handedness, the M13 branch is not a complete prediction. The authors should make this assumption more prominent and propose a concrete experimental test, such as cryo-electron tomography of individual M13 filaments, that could falsify or confirm the assumed suprahelical chirality.
  3. [Methods, numerical methods (cutoff radius rcut)] The electrostatic model uses a cutoff radius rcut = 3.5 nm for all electrostatic energies, justified by the condition kappa^{-1} << rcut, which holds at IS >= 100 mM. However, the Y21M comparison in Fig. 3 is only shown at IS = 110 mM. The sensitivity of the computed pitch to the choice of rcut is not reported, so the "parameter-free" characterization of the electrostatic model is not fully supported. A short test varying rcut or a statement of the observed insensitivity would strengthen the claim.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Introduction and Methods] There is a typographical error "in vitroin" in the first paragraph of the introduction; it should read "in vitro in."
  2. [Methods, virus strains and capsid symmetries] The text refers to the "IIFI model" in one place; this should be the "1IFI model" as used elsewhere in the paper.
  3. [Fig. 3 and Extended Data Fig. 2] The Y21M electrostatic model is compared with experiment only at IS = 110 mM, while Extended Data Fig. 2 shows Y21M data at several ionic strengths. A sentence explaining why the electrostatic model is not directly compared at the other ionic strengths (for example, due to the rcut limitation) would help the reader assess the scope of the validation.
  4. [Methods, numerical methods] The paper states that error bars for computed pitches come from O(10) independent Monte-Carlo runs, but the error bars are not shown in Fig. 3 or Fig. 5. Adding representative error bars to the theoretical points would make the quantitative agreement more transparent.

Circularity Check

2 steps flagged · score 6.0 of 10

M13 cholesteric agreement is secured by setting the suprahelix internal pitch h=2.8Lp and by assigning the deformation handedness from the measured phase handedness; the Y21M electrostatic branch is independent, so the circularity is partial.

  1. fitted input called prediction [Section II (Results and Discussion), suprahelix model paragraph preceding Fig. 4b and Fig. 5]
    "Based on the “tube” model of polymer deflection [50], it is shown in Supplementary Section IV that the resulting suprahelical conformation may then be expressed in terms of the internal pitch h as the sole adjustable parameter for a given virion persistence length Lp. ... The results are shown in Figs. 4b–5, where the internal pitch h of the suprahelical conformation has been set such that h = 2.8Lp."

    The text identifies the internal pitch h as the model's sole adjustable parameter and then states that it has been set to h = 2.8Lp before displaying quantitative agreement with the M13 and M13-PEG cholesteric pitches in Figs. 4b and 5. Because h is not independently measured or derived in the article, the magnitude of the M13 branch of the central claim is a one-parameter fit to the target observable rather than a prediction. The concentration dependence and master-curve collapse are still informative, but the claim that the semi-flexible virus pitch is quantitatively explained by the suprahelix model is forced by the chosen input.

  2. fitted input called prediction [Section II (Results and Discussion), handedness assumption of the suprahelix model]
    "Although the link between ground-state and fluctuation-induced chirality is generally non-trivial [30], the left-handed phases displayed by the more flexible M13 phages (Extended Data Fig. 1) would suggest that the corresponding backbone deformations should be predominantly right-handed — in agreement with simple geometric arguments governing the self-assembly of weakly-curled helices (Fig. 1, Extended Data Fig. 3)."

    The handedness of the suprahelical deformation is inferred from the very quantity the model is used to explain: the left-handedness of the M13 cholesteric phase. The model then outputs a left-handed phase because a right-handed deformation was inserted on the basis of that observed output. The sign of the M13 pitch is therefore not an independent prediction; it is an input calibrated to the measured handedness, leaving only the Y21M-PEG null result and the master-curve shape as sign-independent checks.

full rationale

The Y21M electrostatic branch is genuinely independent: it uses atomistic PDB structures (1IFI, 2C0W), a standard force field (GROMOS 53A6), Poisson-Boltzmann/protonation preparation, and contains no parameter tuned to the measured Y21M pitch; it quantitatively accounts for the Y21M cholesteric magnitude, sense, and pH-induced unwinding. The suprahelix branch for M13, however, relies on an adjustable internal pitch h that is set to 2.8Lp and on a deformation handedness inferred from the measured left-handed phase. Those choices make the M13 quantitative agreement a fit for the magnitude and sign of the pitch, so the strongest claim in the abstract is only partially supported by independent prediction. The remaining self-citations (Grelet/Fraden 2003 and Tortora et al. 2020) are not the load-bearing circularity here: the model is openly presented as an ansatz and tested against independent features, and no uniqueness theorem is imported. The paper is not wholly circular because the concentration master curve, the ionic-strength collapse, and the vanishing chirality for stiff Y21M-PEG are nontrivial outputs that do not reduce to the fitted h. Score is set to 6 to reflect that one of the two central quantitative branches reduces, by construction, to fitted inputs.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 7 assumptions · 1 invented entities

The central claim rests on two branches. The Y21M branch uses standard atomistic modeling with no fitted target parameters, but depends on force field accuracy, the PDB structures, and the second-virial approximation. The M13 branch depends on a fitted suprahelix pitch h = 2.8Lp, an assumed right-handed handedness of the deformation, and a postulate that surface charge chirality is negligible for M13. These are counted honestly above.

free parameters (2)
  • h (internal pitch of suprahelix) = h = 2.8 Lp
    The suprahelix model expresses the mean helical backbone conformation in terms of a single parameter h; the authors set h = 2.8Lp to reproduce the M13 cholesteric pitch, making the M13 and M13-PEG quantitative agreement a fit rather than a parameter-free prediction.
  • Electrostatic cutoff radius rcut = 3.5 nm
    Chosen for computational tractability in the all-atom electrostatic model; the paper states it is expected to hold only when the Debye length is well below 3.5 nm (IS >= 100 mM), which limits the ionic conditions where the model is applied.
assumptions (7)
  • domain assumption The PDB capsid structures 1IFI (M13) and 2C0W (Y21M) correctly represent the in-solution viral capsid conformations and charge distributions.
    Used to build the all-atom models and PROPKA protonation states in Methods; if these static structures miss relevant solution conformations, the electrostatic predictions for Y21M would be affected.
  • domain assumption GROMOS 53A6 force field with generalized reaction field implicit solvent accurately captures inter-virion electrostatic, steric, and van der Waals interactions.
    Methods; the computed second-virial free energies and cholesteric pitches inherit any force-field inaccuracy.
  • domain assumption The second-virial Onsager free energy expansion and the functional minimization of F0 give accurate cholesteric pitches at the experimental concentrations.
    Methods and Supplementary Section I; the authors note the model underestimates helicity at the highest virus concentrations, indicating the limits of the approximation.
  • ad hoc to paper For M13, the detailed chiral surface charge pattern can be neglected, and charged rods can be remapped to hard rods with an effective diameter deff.
    Explicitly introduced as 'let us postulate' in Section II; the master-curve collapse is presented as the justification.
  • domain assumption PEGylation does not change the persistence length or internal structure of the viruses, so h = 2.8Lp applies to both pristine and PEGylated M13.
    Methods estimates a capsid force around 10 pN, two orders below the elastic modulus, and only about 10% of coat proteins are PEGylated; this supports but does not prove the assumption.
  • ad hoc to paper The thermal backbone deformations of M13 are right-handed, inferred from the left-handed cholesteric phase and geometric packing arguments.
    Section II and Extended Data Fig. 3; no direct single-virus observation is available, and the authors state that no primary proof has been reported.
  • standard math The tube model of polymer deflection (Odijk) describes the suprahelical conformation with only h as a free parameter.
    Supplementary Section IV; this is a published theoretical result applied here.
invented entities (1)
  • Suprahelical backbone conformation of semi-flexible viruses (weakly curled right-handed helix with radius r and internal pitch h)
    purpose: Explains the left-handed cholesteric phase of M13 and M13-PEG via hard-core packing of thermally deformed flexible rods, including the master curve with C/Ciso.
    The individual-virus helical morphology is not directly observed and the paper states 'no primary proof of such helical conformation has been reported yet'; the evidence is indirect (depletion-induced helical assemblies in Extended Data Fig. 5) and a fit to the macroscopic pitch.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Elucidating chirality transfer in liquid crystals of viruses." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/VYJH5L4A

@misc{pith2026241113445,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Elucidating chirality transfer in liquid crystals of viruses},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/VYJH5L4A}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2411.13445}
}
read the original abstract

Chirality is ubiquitous in nature across all length scales, with major implications spanning the fields of biology, chemistry and physics to materials science. How chirality propagates from nanoscale building blocks to meso- and macroscopic helical structures remains an open issue. Here, working with a canonical system of filamentous viruses, we demonstrate that their self-assembly into chiral liquid crystal phases quantitatively results from the interplay between two main mechanisms of chirality transfer: electrostatic interactions from the helical charge patterns on the virus surface, and fluctuation-based helical deformations leading to viral backbone helicity. Our experimental and theoretical approach provides a comprehensive framework for deciphering how chirality is hierarchically and quantitatively propagated across spatial scales. Our work highlights the ways in which supramolecular helicity may arise from subtle chiral contributions of opposite handedness which either act cooperatively or competitively, thus accounting for the multiplicity of chiral behaviors observed for nearly identical molecular systems.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2411.13445 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p004_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. ) and as pH decreases towards the isoelectric point of the virus, pIE (Figs. 2–3). This sensitivity of the cholesteric pitch to modulations of either the range or the intensity of electrostatic interactions shows their major contributions in the cholesteric assembly. Different mechanisms have been suggested to predict the value and sense of the cholesteric pitch from the molecular features of the chiral constituents… view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (3 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p009_4.png]
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: FIG. 4 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p010_4.png]
Figure 5
Figure 5. Figure 5: FIG. 5 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p012_5.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

68 extracted references · 68 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    Supramolecular chirality in self-assembled systems

    Minghua Liu, Li Zhang, and Tianyu Wang. Supramolecular chirality in self-assembled systems. Chemical Reviews, 115(15):7304–7397, Aug 2015

    work page 2015

  2. [2]

    Morrow, Andrew J

    Sarah M. Morrow, Andrew J. Bissette, and Stephen P. Fletcher. Transmission of chirality through space and across length scales. Nature Nanotechnology, 12(5):410–419, May 2017

    work page 2017

  3. [3]

    suprahelical

    long-wavelength chiral deformations stemming from the virus flexibility and leading to a coherent supramolecular helical morphology of the virus backbone (Fig. 1). These sources of chirality transfer are independently probed by tuning the ionic envi- ronment and by the chemical functionalization of two specific virus strains that form chiral nematic phase...

    work page

  4. [4]

    Chirality amplification by desymmetrization of chiral ligand-capped nanoparticles to nanorods quantified in soft condensed matter

    Ahlam Nemati, Sasan Shadpour, Lara Querciagrossa, Lin Li, Taizo Mori, Min Gao, Clau- dio Zannoni, and Torsten Hegmann. Chirality amplification by desymmetrization of chiral ligand-capped nanoparticles to nanorods quantified in soft condensed matter. Nature Com- munications, 9(1):3908, Sep 2018

    work page 2018

  5. [5]

    Nunes Gon¸ calves, Taizo Mori, Ximin Cui, Ruoqi Ai, Jianfang Wang, Claudio Zannoni, and Torsten Hegmann

    Ahlam Nemati, Lara Querciagrossa, Corinne Callison, Sasan Shadpour, Diana P. Nunes Gon¸ calves, Taizo Mori, Ximin Cui, Ruoqi Ai, Jianfang Wang, Claudio Zannoni, and Torsten Hegmann. Effects of shape and solute-solvent compatibility on the efficacy of chirality transfer: Nanoshapes in nematics. Science Advances, 8(4):eabl4385, 2022. 19

    work page 2022

  6. [6]

    Liquid crystal-templated chiral nanomaterials: from chiral plasmonics to circularly polar- ized luminescence

    Xuan Zhang, Yiyi Xu, Cristian Valenzuela, Xinfang Zhang, Ling Wang, Wei Feng, and Quan Li. Liquid crystal-templated chiral nanomaterials: from chiral plasmonics to circularly polar- ized luminescence. Light: Science & Applications, 11(1):223, Jul 2022

    work page 2022

  7. [7]

    Hierarchical self-assembly into chiral nanostructures

    Yutao Sang and Minghua Liu. Hierarchical self-assembly into chiral nanostructures. Chem. Sci., 13:633–656, 2022

    work page 2022

  8. [8]

    Kotov, Luis M

    Nicholas A. Kotov, Luis M. Liz-Marz´ an, and Qiangbin Wang. Chiral nanomaterials: evolving rapidly from concepts to applications. Mater. Adv., 3:3677–3679, 2022

    work page 2022

Show all 68 references
  1. [9]

    Cholesteric liquid crystals with a broad light reflection band

    Michel Mitov. Cholesteric liquid crystals with a broad light reflection band. Advanced Mate- rials, 24(47):6260–6276, 2012

    2012

  2. [10]

    Yong Geng, Rijeesh Kizhakidathazhath, and Jan P. F. Lagerwall. Robust cholesteric liquid crystal elastomer fibres for mechanochromic textiles. Nature Materials, 21(12):1441–1447, Dec 2022

    2022

  3. [11]

    Liquid crystals: Versatile self-organized smart soft materials

    Hari Krishna Bisoyi and Quan Li. Liquid crystals: Versatile self-organized smart soft materials. Chemical Reviews, 122(5):4887–4926, 2022

    2022

  4. [12]

    Cholesteric liquid crystals in living matter

    Michel Mitov. Cholesteric liquid crystals in living matter. Soft Matter, 13(23):4176–4209, 2017

    2017

  5. [13]

    Beitr¨ age zur kenntniss des cholesterins

    Friedrich Reinitzer. Beitr¨ age zur kenntniss des cholesterins. Monatshefte f¨ ur Chemie, 9:421– 441, 1888

  6. [14]

    Condensed phases of DNA: structures and phase transitions

    Fran¸ coise Livolant and Am´ elie Leforestier. Condensed phases of DNA: structures and phase transitions. Prog. Polym. Sci., 21(6):1115–1164, 1996

    1996

  7. [15]

    Zanchetta, F

    G. Zanchetta, F. Giavazzi, M. Nakata, M. Buscaglia, R. Cerbino, N. A. Clark, and T. Bellini. Right-handed double-helix ultrashort DNA yields chiral nematic phases with both right- and left-handed director twist. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 107:17497–17502, 2010

    2010

  8. [16]

    Siavashpouri, C

    M. Siavashpouri, C. H. Wachauf, M. J. Zakhary, F. Praetorius, H. Dietz, and Z. Dogic. Molecular engineering of chiral colloidal liquid crystals using DNA origami. Nat. Mater., 16:849–856, 2017

    2017

  9. [17]

    Cholesteric phase in virus suspensions

    Zvonimir Dogic and Seth Fraden. Cholesteric phase in virus suspensions. Langmuir, 16(20):7820–7824, 2000

    2000

  10. [18]

    What is the origin of chirality in the cholesteric phase of virus suspensions? Phys

    Eric Grelet and Seth Fraden. What is the origin of chirality in the cholesteric phase of virus suspensions? Phys. Rev. Lett., 90(19):198302, 2003

    2003

  11. [19]

    Chiral nematic phase of suspensions of 20 rodlike viruses: left-handed phase helicity from a right-handed molecular helix

    Fabio Tombolato, Alberta Ferrarini, and Eric Grelet. Chiral nematic phase of suspensions of 20 rodlike viruses: left-handed phase helicity from a right-handed molecular helix. Phys. Rev. Lett., 96(25):258302, 2006

    2006

  12. [20]

    Amyloid fibrils length controls shape and structure of nematic and cholesteric tactoids

    Massimo Bagnani, Gustav Nystr¨ om, Cristiano De Michele, and Raffaele Mezzenga. Amyloid fibrils length controls shape and structure of nematic and cholesteric tactoids. ACS Nano, 13(1):591–600, 01 2019

    2019

  13. [21]

    Belamie, P

    E. Belamie, P. Davidson, and M. M. Giraud-Guille. Structure and chirality of the nematic phase in α-chitin suspensions. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B, 108(39):14991–15000, Sep 2004

    2004

  14. [22]

    Effect of trace electrolyte on liquid crystal type of cellulose microcrystals

    Jun Araki and Shigenori Kuga. Effect of trace electrolyte on liquid crystal type of cellulose microcrystals. Langmuir, 17(15):4493–4496, Jul 2001

    2001

  15. [23]

    Understanding nanocellulose chirality and structure–properties relationship at the single fibril level

    Ivan Usov, Gustav Nystr¨ om, Jozef Adamcik, Stephan Handschin, Christina Sch¨ utz, Andreas Fall, Lennart Bergstr¨ om, and Raffaele Mezzenga. Understanding nanocellulose chirality and structure–properties relationship at the single fibril level. Nature Communications, 6(1):7564...

    2015

  16. [24]

    Camila Honorato-Rios and Jan P. F. Lagerwall. Interrogating helical nanorod self-assembly with fractionated cellulose nanocrystal suspensions. Communications Materials, 1(1):69, Sep 2020

    2020

  17. [25]

    Parton, Richard M

    Thomas G. Parton, Richard M. Parker, Gea T. van de Kerkhof, Aurimas Narkevicius, Jo- hannes S. Haataja, Bruno Frka-Petesic, and Silvia Vignolini. Chiral self-assembly of cellulose nanocrystals is driven by crystallite bundles. Nature Communications, 13(1):2657, May 2022

    2022

  18. [26]

    Joseph P. Straley. Theory of piezoelectricity in nematic liquid crystals, and of the cholesteric ordering. Phys. Rev. A, 14(5):1835, 1976

    1976

  19. [27]

    Molecular chirality and chiral parameters

    A Brooks Harris, Randall D Kamien, and Thomas C Lubensky. Molecular chirality and chiral parameters. Rev. Mod. Phys., 71(5):1745, 1999

    1999

  20. [28]

    M. A. Osipov. Theory for cholesteric ordering in lyotropic liquid crystals. Il Nuovo Cimento D, 10(11):1249–1262, Nov 1988

    1988

  21. [29]

    A. G. Cherstvy. DNA cholesteric phases: The role of DNA molecular chirality and DNA electrostatic interactions. J. Phys. Chem. B, 142:12585–12595, 2008

    2008

  22. [30]

    Entropy-driven formation of chiral nematic phases by computer simulations

    Simone Dussi and Marjolein Dijkstra. Entropy-driven formation of chiral nematic phases by computer simulations. Nature Communications, 7(1):11175, Apr 2016

    2016

  23. [31]

    Maxime M. C. Tortora, Garima Mishra, Domen Preˇ sern, and Jonathan P. K. Doye. Chiral 21 shape fluctuations and the origin of chirality in cholesteric phases of dna origamis. Science Advances, 6(31):eaaw8331, 2020

    2020

  24. [32]

    Soft Matter Vol

    Zvonimir Dogic and Seth Fraden. Soft Matter Vol. 2: Complex Colloidal Suspensions, edited by G. Gompper and M. Schick. Wiley-VCH, Weinheim, 2006

    2006

  25. [33]

    Smith and Valery A

    George P. Smith and Valery A. Petrenko. Phage display. Chemical Reviews, 97(2):391–410, Apr 1997

    1997

  26. [34]

    D. A. Marvin, L. C. Welsh, M. F. Symmons, W. R. P. Scott, and S. K. Straus. Molecular structure of fd (f1, M13) filamentous bacteriophage refined with respect to X-ray fibre diffrac- tion and solid-state NMR data supports specific models of phage assembly at the bacterial memb...

    2006

  27. [35]

    Strano, Gerbrand Ceder, and Angela M

    Yun Jung Lee, Hyunjung Yi, Woo-Jae Kim, Kisuk Kang, Dong Soo Yun, Michael S. Strano, Gerbrand Ceder, and Angela M. Belcher. Fabricating genetically engineered high-power lithium-ion batteries using multiple virus genes. Science, 324(5930):1051–1055, 2009

    2009

  28. [36]

    D. A. Marvin, M. F. Symmons, and S. K. Straus. Structure and assembly of filamentous bacteriophages. Progress in Biophysics and Molecular Biology, 114:80–122, 2014

    2014

  29. [37]

    Gibaud, E

    T. Gibaud, E. Barry, M. Zakhary, M. Henglin, A. Ward, Y. Yang, C. Berciu, R. Oldenbourg, M. Hagan, D. Nicastro, R. Meyer, and Z. Dogic. Self-assembly through chiral control of interfacial tension. Nature, 481:348, 2012

    2012

  30. [38]

    Hard-rod behavior in dense mesophases of semiflexible and rigid charged viruses

    Eric Grelet. Hard-rod behavior in dense mesophases of semiflexible and rigid charged viruses. Phys. Rev. X, 4:021053, 2014

    2014

  31. [39]

    Eubanks, Malcom R

    Bert Willis, Lisa M. Eubanks, Malcom R. Wood, Kim D. Janda, Tobin J. Dickerson, and Richard A. Lerner. Biologically templated organic polymers with nanoscale order. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 105:1416–1419, 2008

    2008

  32. [40]

    Biomimetic self-templating supramolecular struc- tures

    Woo-Jae Chung, Jin-Woo Oh, Kyungwon Kwak, Byung Yang Lee, Joel Meyer, Eddie Wang, Alexander Hexemer, and Seung-Wuk Lee. Biomimetic self-templating supramolecular struc- tures. Nature, 478(7369):364–368, Oct 2011

    2011

  33. [41]

    A model liquid crystalline system based on rodlike viruses with variable chirality and persistence length

    Edward Barry and Zvonimir Dogic. A model liquid crystalline system based on rodlike viruses with variable chirality and persistence length. Soft Matter, 5:2563–2570, 2009

    2009

  34. [42]

    Felberg, David H

    Elizabeth Jurrus, Dave Engel, Keith Star, Kyle Monson, Juan Brandi, Lisa E. Felberg, David H. Brookes, Leighton Wilson, Jiahui Chen, Karina Liles, Minju Chun, Peter Li, David W. Gohara, Todd Dolinsky, Robert Konecny, David R. Koes, Jens Erik Nielsen, Teresa 22 Head-Gordon, Wei...

    2018

  35. [43]

    Left or right cholesterics? a matter of helix handedness and curliness

    Elisa Frezza, Alberta Ferrarini, Hima Bindu Kolli, Achille Giacometti, and Giorgio Cinacchi. Left or right cholesterics? a matter of helix handedness and curliness. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys., 16:16225–16232, 2014

    2014

  36. [44]

    Cholesterics of colloidal helices: Predicting the macroscopic pitch from the particle shape and thermodynamic state

    Simone Dussi, Simone Belli, Ren´ e van Roij, and Marjolein Dijkstra. Cholesterics of colloidal helices: Predicting the macroscopic pitch from the particle shape and thermodynamic state. J. Chem. Phys., 142(7):074905, 2015

    2015

  37. [45]

    A. A. Kornyshev, S. Leikin, and S. V. Malinin. Chiral electrostatic interaction and cholesteric liquid crystals of DNA. Eur. Phys. J. E, 7:83–93, 2002

    2002

  38. [46]

    Wensink and G

    Henricus H. Wensink and G. Jackson. Generalized van der waals theory for the twist elastic modulus and helical pitch of cholesterics. J. Chem. Phys., 130(23):234911, 2009

    2009

  39. [47]

    The effects of shape on the interaction of colloidal particles

    Lars Onsager. The effects of shape on the interaction of colloidal particles. Ann. N.Y. Acad. Sci., 51(4):627–659, 1949

    1949

  40. [48]

    Zhang, N

    C. Zhang, N. Diorio, O. D. Lavrentovich, and A. J´ akli. Helical nanofilaments of bent-core liquid crystals with a second twist. Nature Communications, 5(1):3302, Feb 2014

    2014

  41. [49]

    Mark, and Wilfred F

    Chris Oostenbrink, Alessandra Villa, Alan E. Mark, and Wilfred F. Van Gunsteren. A biomolecular force field based on the free enthalpy of hydration and solvation: The gromos force-field parameter sets 53a5 and 53a6. J. Comput. Chem., 25(13):1656–1676, 2004

    2004

  42. [50]

    From soft to hard rod behavior in liquid crystalline suspensions of sterically stabilized colloidal filamentous particles

    Eric Grelet and Richa Rana. From soft to hard rod behavior in liquid crystalline suspensions of sterically stabilized colloidal filamentous particles. Soft Matter, 12:4621, 2016

    2016

  43. [51]

    Theory of lyotropic polymer liquid crystals

    Theo Odijk. Theory of lyotropic polymer liquid crystals. Macromolecules, 19(9):2313–2329, 1986

    1986

  44. [52]

    Nematic ordering in semiflexible polymer chains

    Zheng Yu Chen. Nematic ordering in semiflexible polymer chains. Macromolecules, 26(13):3419–3423, 1993

    1993

  45. [53]

    Isotropic-cholesteric phase transition in colloidal suspensions of filamentous bacteriophage fd

    Jianxin Tang and Seth Fraden. Isotropic-cholesteric phase transition in colloidal suspensions of filamentous bacteriophage fd. Liquid Crystals, 19(4):459–467, 1995

    1995

  46. [54]

    Steiner, Richard M

    Aurimas Narkevicius, Lisa M. Steiner, Richard M. Parker, Yu Ogawa, Bruno Frka-Petesic, and Silvia Vignolini. Controlling the self-assembly behavior of aqueous chitin nanocrystal suspensions. Biomacromolecules, 20(7):2830–2838, 07 2019. 23

    2019

  47. [55]

    Solid self-assembled films of cellulose with chiral nematic order and optically variable properties

    J-F Revol, Louis Godbout, and Derek G Gray. Solid self-assembled films of cellulose with chiral nematic order and optically variable properties. J. Pulp Paper Sci., 24(5):146–149, 1998

    1998

  48. [56]

    Pitch of a polymer cholesteric

    Theo Odijk. Pitch of a polymer cholesteric. J. Phys. Chem., 91(23):6060–6062, 1987

    1987

  49. [57]

    D. A. Marvin, R. D. Hale, C. Nave, and M. Helmer Citterich. Molecular models and structural comparisons of native and mutant class I filamentous bacteriophages. Journal of molecular biology, 235:260–286, 02 1994

    1994

  50. [58]

    Sgourakis, David Baker, and Amir Goldbourt

    Omry Morag, Nikolaos G. Sgourakis, David Baker, and Amir Goldbourt. The NMR-Rosetta capsid model of M13 bacteriophage reveals a quadrupled hydrophobic packing epitope. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA, 112(4):971–976, 2015

    2015

  51. [59]

    Structure of a foreign peptide displayed on the surface of bacteriophage M13

    Gregory Kishchenko, Hoshang Batliwala, and Lee Makowski. Structure of a foreign peptide displayed on the surface of bacteriophage M13. J. Mol. Biol., 241:208–213, 1994

    1994

  52. [60]

    Pouget, E

    E. Pouget, E. Grelet, and M. P. Lettinga. Dynamics in the smectic phase of stiff viral rods. Phys Rev E Stat Nonlin Soft Matter Phys, 84:041704, 2011

    2011

  53. [61]

    Zimmermann, H

    K. Zimmermann, H. Hagedorn, C. Chr. Heucks, M. Hinrichsen, and H. Ludwig. The ionic properties of the filamentous bacteriophages pfl and fd. J. Biol. Chem., 261:1653–1655, 1986

    1986

  54. [62]

    grafting-to

    Tingting Zan, Fengchi Wu, Xiaodong Pei, Shaoyi Jia, Ran Zhang, Songhai Wu, Zhongwei Niu, and Zhenkun Zhang. Into the polymer brush regime through the “grafting-to” method: densely polymer-grafted rodlike viruses with an unusual nematic liquid crystal behavior. Soft Matter, 12:...

    2016

  55. [63]

    Elastic constants of polymer-grafted lipid membranes

    Derek Marsh. Elastic constants of polymer-grafted lipid membranes. Biophysical Journal, 81(4):2154–2162, 2001

    2001

  56. [64]

    Khalil, Jorge M

    Ahmad S. Khalil, Jorge M. Ferrer, Ricardo R. Brau, Stephen T. Kottmann, Christopher J. Noren, Matthew J. Lang, and Angela M. Belcher. Single M13 bacteriophage tethering and stretching. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences, 104(12):4892–4897, 2007

    2007

  57. [65]

    Tironi, Ren´ e Sperb, Paul E

    Ilario G. Tironi, Ren´ e Sperb, Paul E. Smith, and Wilfred F. van Gunsteren. A generalized reaction field method for molecular dynamics simulations. J. Chem. Phys., 102(13):5451–5459, 1995

    1995

  58. [66]

    Mats H. M. Olsson, Chresten R. Søndergaard, Michal Rostkowski, and Jan H. Jensen. PROPKA3: Consistent treatment of internal and surface residues in empirical pKa predic- tions. J. Chem. Theory Comput., 7(2):525–537, 02 2011. 24

    2011

  59. [67]

    Dolinsky, Paul Czodrowski, Hui Li, Jens E

    Todd J. Dolinsky, Paul Czodrowski, Hui Li, Jens E. Nielsen, Jan H. Jensen, Gerhard Klebe, and Nathan A. Baker. Pdb2pqr: expanding and upgrading automated preparation of biomolec- ular structures for molecular simulations. Nucleic Acids Res., 35( suppl2):W522–W525, 07 2007

    2007

  60. [68]

    Maxime M. C. Tortora and Jonathan P. K. Doye. Hierarchical bounding structures for efficient virial computations: Towards a realistic molecular description of cholesterics. J. Chem. Phys., 147(22):224504, 2017. 25 Z=0 µm Z=10 µm Z=20 µm Z=30 µm Z=40 µm Z (a) M13 P/2 Z=0 µm Z=1...

    2017

Pith tools

Reviewed August 12, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.