Pith. sign in

REVIEW 3 major objections 4 minor 67 references

Control of encounter kinetics by chemically active droplets

T0 review · 3 major / 4 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

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

Pith's one-line read Chemically active droplets can either speed up or slow down molecular encounters, and the fastest encounter rate is reached when a particle's residence time in a droplet matches the Smoluchowski encounter time inside that droplet.

desk verdict A useful mean-field model for encounter kinetics in active emulsions with a qualitatively plausible time-scale-matching optimum, but the reported 'mean encounter time' is actually the slowest relaxation mode, so the quantitative claim needs another pass. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.06153 v1 pith:U4UYUFP2 submitted 2025-05-09 cond-mat.soft physics.bio-ph

Jacques Fries , Roxanne Berthin , Marie Jardat , Pierre Illien , Vincent Dahirel This is my paper · ORCID
classification cond-mat.softphysics.bio-ph
keywords biomolecularcondensatesliquid-liquidphaseseparationencounterkineticschemicallyactivedropletsBrowniandynamicsmean-fieldmodelresidencetimematchingSmoluchowskitheory
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

Condensates formed by liquid-liquid phase separation are often described as nanoreactors that concentrate reactants and speed up reactions, but they can also trap molecules in separate compartments and slow encounters down. This paper argues that in chemically active droplets the outcome is controlled by a time-scale match: the rate of bimolecular encounters is maximized when the residence time of a particle in a droplet equals the Smoluchowski encounter time inside the droplet. The claim is supported by Brownian dynamics simulations of phase-separating particles with stochastic chemical interconversion, together with a five-state mean-field model whose rates are taken from the simulations. If correct, the result turns condensates into tunable regulators: cells could repress or activate specific protein encounters by adjusting the chemical drive that sets residence times.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing object is a five-state mean-field model of a two-particle search in a medium divided into N droplets of volume v and a continuous phase. The five states are: the particles have met; both are in distinct droplets; both are in the same droplet; one is in a droplet and the other in the continuous phase; both are in the continuous phase. Transitions between states are governed by inverse times: Smoluchowski encounter times τS,d = v/(8πD_dσ) inside a droplet and τS,c = (V−Nv)/(8πD_cσ) in the continuous phase, a residence time τres in a droplet, and an entry time τent. Solving the master equations yields the mean first encounter time Te as the longest relaxation time. The simulations supply τres, τent, diffusivities, droplet volumes, and droplet numbers, and the model then predicts Te without fitted parameters, reproducing the simulation data and exposing the optimum at τres ≈ τS,d.

What would settle it

Measure the residence time distribution of client proteins in a condensate system and the first-encounter time between partners while sweeping the chemical drive. If the encounter rate shows no maximum when τres crosses the droplet Smoluchowski time, or if the maximum appears at a very different ratio, the central claim fails. Concretely, a single-particle tracking experiment with a tunable ATP-driven modification should show a non-monotonic mean encounter time versus Δμ.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The paper's central claim is that active chemical reactions do not merely set droplet size and stability; they directly control molecular transport through the droplet interface, and this transport controls reaction kinetics. In active emulsions driven by a chemostat, the residence time τres decreases as the chemical drive Δμ increases, generating particle fluxes at droplet surfaces. The key result is that, for fixed droplet geometry, the mean first encounter time Te is minimized when τres ≈ τS,d = v/(8πD_dσ), the Smoluchowski time for two particles to meet inside a droplet of volume v. When residence is much longer, particles waste time trapped in separate droplets; when much shorter, droplets do not concentrate partners long enough. The authors show that condensates can therefore either accelerate or decelerate encounters relative to a homogeneous reference, and they demonstrate the optimum in Brownian dynamics simulations with client proteins whose drive is varied independently of the scaffold.

Load-bearing premise

The five-state mean-field model treats droplet entry, exit, and encounters as independent exponential waiting times with constant rates, and it ignores correlations between the two searching particles; if real residence times are non-exponential or the two partners' stays are correlated, the predicted optimum at τres ≈ τS,d could shift or disappear.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

  • A condensate can act as either an activator or a repressor of a given bimolecular reaction, depending on the ratio τres/τS,d.
  • Because the chemical drive sets τres, post-translational-type modifications coupled to a free-energy reservoir could tune encounter rates in cells without changing droplet size or number.
  • In multi-droplet systems at equilibrium, the encounter time grows approximately linearly with the number of droplets, so non-specific condensates can act as traps that slow partner search.
  • Even with identical droplet geometry, active systems can have different encounter kinetics, so structure alone does not determine reaction speed in active emulsions.
  • The five-state model generalizes Smoluchowski diffusion-limited kinetics to compartmentalized media and could be used to design condensate-based reactors.

Reading between the lines

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

  • If the residence-time-matching rule is generic, synthetic condensate reactors could be engineered by choosing a chemical drive that sets τres equal to the predicted τS,d for the target pair.
  • A testable extension would be to measure, in a single experimental condensate system, whether varying the chemical drive produces the predicted non-monotonic encounter-time curve with a minimum at τres ≈ τS,d.
  • The same framework could be applied to multi-reactant networks, where selective acceleration or repression of individual pair encounters might shape reaction pathways without changing protein concentrations.
  • Because the mean-field model neglects correlations between the two searching particles, the optimum may be sharper or shifted in crowded condensates where cooperative transport matters.
Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

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 manuscript combines Brownian dynamics (BD) simulations of phase-separating Lennard-Jones particles with a five-state mean-field model (Eqs. 1-5) to study bimolecular encounter kinetics in systems containing one or many droplets. The mean-field model is parameterized with transport coefficients and residence/entry times extracted from the same BD trajectories. For a single equilibrium droplet the model reproduces the BD encounter times and collapses onto Te/T0 = 1.14 D_c v/(D_d V); for multiple droplets it predicts Te/T0 ~ gamma N D_c v/(D_d V). In chemically active emulsions the chemical drive controls the residence time, and the mean-field model predicts that the encounter time is minimized when the residence time matches the intra-droplet Smoluchowski time. Client-protein BD simulations show qualitative agreement with the mean-field model, and the authors conclude that condensates can either accelerate or decelerate molecular encounters relative to a homogeneous system.

Significance. If the time-scale-matching principle survives scrutiny, it would provide a simple design rule for condensate-mediated reaction kinetics and a useful counterpoint to the common 'nanoreactor' picture. The work's strengths are the microscopic stochastic model, the explicit two-species client setup, and the honest bottom-up parameterization: the equilibrium comparison in Fig. 2b is a clean consistency check with no fitted parameters, and the client simulation series (Fig. 4b) is a nontrivial test of the mean-field approach. The significance is currently limited by the fact that the headline optimum is demonstrated only in the mean-field model under a definition of Te that is not the mean first-passage time, and the multi-droplet scaling used for biological estimates has no direct BD validation. These issues are fixable, but they are central to the claims.

major comments (3)
  1. [Appendix 'Mean encounter time between Brownian particles'; Section II, Eqs. (1)-(5)] The encounter time Te is defined as the largest characteristic time, Te = -1/lambda_max, and in BD it is extracted from the long-time exponential decay of the survival probability (SI Fig. S2). This is not the mean first-passage time \bar{T} = \int_0^\infty S(t) dt that the homogeneous reference T0 = V/(8\pi D\sigma) represents. The ratio Te/T0 therefore compares a slow-mode relaxation time with a mean encounter time, and the minimum in Fig. 3g may be dominated by a rare slow mode with small amplitude. The paper should recompute the true mean first-passage time from the five-state model (the weighted sum of the mode times) and from BD (the average first encounter time) and verify that the matching optimum and the reported acceleration/deceleration ratios are preserved.
  2. [Section VI and Fig. 4b] The central claim that matching tau_res to tau_S,d maximizes the encounter rate is supported by mean-field calculations (Fig. 3g) but not directly by Brownian dynamics. In Fig. 4b, the client BD data show a monotonic decrease of Te/T0 with increasing Delta mu', with no clear nonmonotonic optimum, and the agreement with the mean-field model is only qualitative. Please provide a BD scan (for example, using the client drive) that resolves whether the nonmonotonic optimum exists in explicit particle simulations, or alternatively limit the claim to the mean-field model.
  3. [Section III and Fig. 2d] The multi-droplet scaling Te/T0 = gamma N D_c v/(D_d V) is derived only from the mean-field model, with gamma fitted in the range 5-10, and no Brownian dynamics data at N > 1 are presented. This scaling is subsequently used to estimate biological slowdowns (for instance, a 15-fold increase for N = 6 x 10^3). A direct BD test at moderate N would be needed to support the multi-droplet deceleration prediction; otherwise the scaling should be presented explicitly as a mean-field extrapolation.
minor comments (4)
  1. [Fig. 3 caption] The labels for panels (e) and (f) appear swapped: panel (e) plots tau_res and panel (f) plots J_A, while the caption assigns 'Net rate of A escape' to (e) and 'Residence time' to (f).
  2. [Section II] Calling Te the 'mean first encounter time' is misleading because it is the long-time decay time, not the average of the first-encounter distribution; please rename it or justify the definition in terms of the slowest mode.
  3. [Section III and Fig. 4 caption] The text contains 'Oswald ripening' where 'Ostwald ripening' is intended, and the Fig. 4 caption says 'For Delta mu = 18, droplets are unstable' where the context indicates Delta mu' = 18.
  4. [Section II and SI] The model assumes exponential waiting times for droplet entry and exit, but the distributions of residence times and entry times are not reported; showing these distributions (alongside the survival probability in SI Fig. S2) would help justify the Markovian five-state description.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the mean-field model's optimum is a nontrivial model result, and its parameters are measured, not fitted to the encounter-time output.

full rationale

The paper's central claim is that matching the residence time tau_res to the droplet Smoluchowski time tau_S,d maximizes the encounter rate in active phase-separated systems. This is derived from the five-state master equations (Eqs. 1-5), whose rates are built from measured transport coefficients (Dc, Dd, tau_res, tau_ent) extracted from Brownian dynamics simulations. The comparison of the model's Te with BD Te is a self-consistency check rather than an out-of-sample prediction, since the inputs and the validation data come from the same simulations. However, this is not circular in the relevant sense: no encounter-time observable is used to set the model parameters, and the non-monotonic dependence of Te on tau_res/tau_S,d is an emergent property of the master equation, not an identity or a fitted parameter renamed as a prediction. The scaling coefficients 1.14 and gamma in Figs. 2c-2d are fitted to the model's own output and used for biological extrapolation, but they are not fitted to the encounter data whose behavior is being explained. The self-citations to prior work describe the simulation methodology and the active-emulsion model; they do not carry the load of the time-scale-matching result. The skeptic's point that Te is defined as the largest characteristic time rather than the true mean first-passage time is a legitimate concern about the quantitative interpretation of Te and the comparison with the Smoluchowski mean T0, but it is a correctness or interpretation issue, not a circularity. Overall, the derivation chain is self-contained and the central claim is not forced by construction.

Assumptions & free parameters 2 free parameters · 5 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The model takes as inputs measured quantities from Brownian dynamics (diffusion coefficients, residence times, droplet volumes and numbers) rather than deriving them. Two scaling coefficients are fit to the mean-field model's numerical output. No new physical entities are introduced.

free parameters (2)
  • Multi-droplet scaling factor gamma = 5 to 10
    Fitted to the mean-field model's numerical Te/T0 for N=1 to 10 in Section III; used in the biological estimates.
  • Single-droplet scaling coefficient = 1.14
    Obtained from collapse of mean-field model results in Fig. 2c as Te/T0 = 1.14 D_c v/(D_d V); used to estimate the onset of unfavorable phase separation.
assumptions (5)
  • standard math Smoluchowski formula for encounter time in a finite homogeneous volume: tau_S = V/(8 pi D sigma).
    Used in Section II to define tau_S,d and tau_S,c; assumes uniform concentration and no interactions besides contact.
  • domain assumption The master equations (1)-(5) with constant transition rates are valid, implying exponential residence time distributions.
    The model in Section II treats droplet exit and entry as Poisson processes; this is an approximation for dense interacting systems.
  • domain assumption The interior of a droplet is a well-mixed homogeneous compartment with a single diffusion coefficient D_d, and the Smoluchowski time is v/(8 pi D_d sigma).
    In Section III, D_d is taken from the droplet core; the droplet boundary and density heterogeneity are neglected in the mean-field encounter rate.
  • domain assumption The steady-state geometry is fully characterized by the mean number of droplets N and mean droplet volume v.
    The model takes N and v from Brownian dynamics (Section V) and does not account for size polydispersity or spatial arrangement.
  • ad hoc to paper Active reactions are implemented with rates k^p proportional to (1 - phi_loc/phi_max) and k^a proportional to phi_loc/phi_max, and the chemostat only operates in dense regions.
    Eqs. (10)-(11) in Section IV are chosen to promote B-to-A conversion in droplets; the qualitative results on residence time control may depend on this choice.

how reviews work

0 comments
Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of Control of encounter kinetics by chemically active droplets." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/U4UYUFP2

@misc{pith2026250506153,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: Control of encounter kinetics by chemically active droplets},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/U4UYUFP2}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.06153}
}
read the original abstract

Biomolecular condensates play a crucial role in the spatial organization of living matter. These membrane-less organelles, resulting from liquid-liquid phase separation, operate far from thermodynamic equilibrium, with their size and stability influenced by non-equilibrium chemical reactions. While condensates are frequently considered optimized nanoreactors that enhance molecular encounters, their actual impact on reaction kinetics remains unclear due to competing effects such as diffusion hindrance, and random trapping in non-specific condensates. In this study, we develop a microscopic, stochastic model for chemically active droplets, incorporating reaction-driven modulation of protein interactions. Using Brownian dynamics simulations, we investigate how protein interactions and active coupling to a free energy reservoir influence phase separation, molecular transport and reaction kinetics. We demonstrate that the intensity of the chemical drive governs surface dynamics, generating fluxes that modulate bimolecular reaction rates. Comparing active emulsions to homogeneous systems, we reveal that condensates can either accelerate or decelerate molecular encounters. Our findings provide key insights into the role of biomolecular condensates as potential regulators of intracellular reaction kinetics.

Figures

Figures reproduced from arXiv: 2505.06153 by the authors.

Figure 1
Figure 1. FIG. 1 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p002_1.png] view at source ↗
Figure 2
Figure 2. FIG. 2 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p003_2.png] view at source ↗
Figure 3
Figure 3. FIG. 3 [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p006_3.png] view at source ↗
Figures from the paper (1 more)
Figure 4
Figure 4. Figure 4: a show snapshots of simulations where the clients are either trapped in droplets (∆µ ′ = 0), expelled from droplets (∆µ ′ = 24) or in an intermediate situa￾tion [PITH_FULL_IMAGE:figures/full_fig_p007_4.png]

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

67 extracted references · 60 canonical work pages

  1. [1]

    2-d shows the dramatic impact of multi-droplet geometries: with the mean field model, the encounter time Te linearly grows with N

    Fig. 2-d shows the dramatic impact of multi-droplet geometries: with the mean field model, the encounter time Te linearly grows with N . This suggests that, while two particles in the same droplet rapidly meet, these par- ticles may also spend a long time trapped in distinct droplets. The curve collapse for N > 1 is not as good as with single droplet syste...

    work page

  2. [2]

    H.-X. Zhou, G. Rivas, and A. P. Minton, Macromolecu- lar crowding and confinement: Biochemical, biophysical, and potential physiological consequences, Annual Review of Biophysics 37, 375 (2008)

    work page 2008

  3. [3]

    2 Te/ T0 d 10− 3 10− 1 101 τres/τ S, d 0.3 1 3 10 Te/ T0 g FIG. 3. (a) Snapshots from reactive Brownian Dynamics simulations , for ∆ w = − 3. 0, and three values of ∆ µ . A and B particles are both represented as blue spheres. For ∆ µ = 18, droplets are unstable, and the fluid is homogeneous. (b-f ) Properties of droplets computed at stationary state in BD...

    work page

  4. [4]

    B´ enichou, C

    O. B´ enichou, C. Chevalier, J. Klafter, B. Meyer, and R. Voituriez, Geometry-controlled kinetics, Nature Chem 2, 472 (2010)

    work page 2010

  5. [5]

    Narayanan and M

    R. Narayanan and M. A. El-Sayed, Shape-dependent cat- alytic activity of platinum nanoparticles in colloidal so- lution, Nano Letters 4, 1343 (2004)

    work page 2004

  6. [6]

    Q. Zhou, L. Zhang, T. Yang, and H. W. and, Stimuli- responsive polymeric micelles for drug delivery and can- cer therapy, International Journal of Nanomedicine 13, 2921 (2018)

    work page 2018

  7. [7]

    Corma, From microporous to mesoporous molecular sieve materials and their use in catalysis, Chemical Re- views 97, 2373 (1997)

    A. Corma, From microporous to mesoporous molecular sieve materials and their use in catalysis, Chemical Re- views 97, 2373 (1997)

    work page 1997

  8. [8]

    Hinzpeter, U

    F. Hinzpeter, U. Gerland, and F. Tostevin, Optimal compartmentalization strategies for metabolic microcom- partments, Biophysical Journal 112, 767 (2017)

    work page 2017

Show all 67 references
  1. [9]

    F´ erey, Hybrid porous solids: past, present, future, Chemical Society Reviews 37, 191 (2008)

    G. F´ erey, Hybrid porous solids: past, present, future, Chemical Society Reviews 37, 191 (2008)

    2008

  2. [10]

    Solsona, J

    M. Solsona, J. C. Vollenbroek, C. B. M. Tregouet, A.-E. Nieuwelink, W. Olthuis, A. Van Den Berg, B. M. Weck- huysen, and M. Odijk, Microfluidics and catalyst parti- cles, Lab on a Chip 19, 3575 (2019)

    2019

  3. [11]

    Diamanti, D

    E. Diamanti, D. Andr´ es-Sanz, A. H. Orrego, S. Carregal- Romero, and F. L´ opez-Gallego, Surpassing substrate– enzyme competition by compartmentalization, ACS Catal. 13, 11441 (2023)

    2023

  4. [12]

    5 ⟨N ⟩ c 5 10 15 20 25 30 ∆ µ 0 10 20 30JA f ∆ w =0.0 ∆ w =-3.0 ∆ w =-6.0 ∆ w =-9.0 5 10 15 20 25 30 ∆ µ

  5. [13]

    T. Li, Q. Jiang, J. Huang, C. M. Aitchison, F. Huang, M. Yang, G. F. Dykes, H.-L. He, Q. Wang, R. S. Sprick, et al. , Reprogramming bacterial protein organelles as a nanoreactor for hydrogen production, Nat. Comm. 11, 5448 (2020)

    2020

  6. [14]

    Kondrat, U

    S. Kondrat, U. Krauss, and E. von Lieres, Enzyme co- localisation: Mechanisms and benefits, Current research in chemical biology 2, 100031 (2022)

    2022

  7. [15]

    A. A. Hyman, C. A. Weber, and F. J¨ ulicher, Liquid- Liquid Phase Separation in Biology, Annu. Rev. Cell Dev. Biol. 30, 39 (2014)

    2014

  8. [16]

    C. A. Weber, D. Zwicker, F. J¨ ulicher, and C. F. Lee, Physics of active emulsions, Reports on Progress in Physics 82, 064601 (2019)

    2019

  9. [17]

    S. F. Banani, H. O. Lee, A. A. Hyman, and M. K. Rosen, Biomolecular condensates: organizers of cellular 11 biochemistry, Nat. Rev. Mol. Cell. Biol. 18, 285 (2017)

    2017

  10. [18]

    Shin and C

    Y. Shin and C. P. Brangwynne, Liquid phase conden- sation in cell physiology and disease, Science 357, 1253 (2017)

    2017

  11. [19]

    Kojima and S

    T. Kojima and S. Takayama, Membraneless compart- mentalization facilitates enzymatic cascade reactions and reduces substrate inhibition, ACS Appl. Mater. Inter- faces 10, 32782 (2018)

    2018

  12. [20]

    Hinzpeter, F

    F. Hinzpeter, F. Tostevin, and U. Gerland, Regula- tion of reaction fluxes via enzyme sequestration and co- clustering, Journal of The Royal Society Interface 16, 20190444 (2019)

    2019

  13. [21]

    A. M. K¨ uffner, M. Prodan, R. Zuccarini, U. Ca- passo Palmiero, L. Faltova, and P. Arosio, Acceleration of an Enzymatic Reaction in Liquid Phase Separated Com- partments Based on Intrinsically Disordered Protein Do- mains, ChemSystemsChem 2, e2000001 (2020)

    2020

  14. [22]

    Peeples and M

    W. Peeples and M. K. Rosen, Mechanistic dissection of increased enzymatic rate in a phase-separated compart- ment, Nature Chemical Biology 17, 693 (2021)

    2021

  15. [23]

    B. G. O’Flynn and T. Mittag, The role of liquid–liquid phase separation in regulating enzyme activity, Current Opinion in Cell Biology 69, 70 (2021)

    2021

  16. [24]

    Ranganathan, J

    S. Ranganathan, J. Liu, and E. Shakhnovich, Enzy- matic metabolons dramatically enhance metabolic fluxes of low-efficiency biochemical reactions, Biophysical Jour- nal 122, 4555 (2023)

    2023

  17. [25]

    I. B. Smokers, B. S. Visser, A. D. Slootbeek, W. T. Huck, and E. Spruijt, How droplets can accelerate re- actions. coacervate protocells as catalytic microcompart- ments, Acc. Chem. Res. 57, 1885 (2024)

    2024

  18. [26]

    Smoluchowski, Drei Vortr¨ age ¨ uber Diffusion, Brown- sche Molekularbewegung und Koagulation von Kol- loidteilchen, Phys

    M. Smoluchowski, Drei Vortr¨ age ¨ uber Diffusion, Brown- sche Molekularbewegung und Koagulation von Kol- loidteilchen, Phys. Z. 17, 557 (1916)

    1916

  19. [27]

    Najafi, S

    J. Najafi, S. Dmitrieff, and N. Minc, Size-and position- dependent cytoplasm viscoelasticity through hydrody- namic interactions with the cell surface, Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 120, e2216839120 (2023)

    2023

  20. [28]

    R. J. Ellis and A. P. Minton, Join the crowd, Nature 425, 27 (2003)

    2003

  21. [29]

    S. B. Zimmerman and A. P. Minton, Macromolecular Crowding: Biochemical, Biophysical, and Physiological Consequences, Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct 22, 27 (1993)

    1993

  22. [30]

    A. P. Minton, How can biochemical reactions within cells differ from those in test tubes ?, J. Cell Sci. 2, 2863 (2015)

    2015

  23. [31]

    Saini and T

    B. Saini and T. K. Mukherjee, Biomolecular condensates regulate enzymatic activity under a crowded milieu: Syn- chronization of liquid-liquid phase separation and enzy- matic transformation, Journal of Physical Chemistry B 127, 180 (2023)

    2023

  24. [32]

    M. A. Steves, C. He, and K. Xu, Single-Molecule Spec- troscopy and Super-Resolution Mapping of Physicochem- ical Parameters in Living Cells, Annual Review of Phys- ical Chemistry 75, 163 (2024)

    2024

  25. [33]

    W. M. ´Smigiel, L. Mantovanelli, D. S. Linnik, M. Punter, J. Silberberg, L. Xiang, K. Xu, and B. Poolman, Pro- tein diffusion in escherichia coli cytoplasm scales with the mass of the complexes and is location dependent, Science Advances 8, eabo5387 (2022)

    2022

  26. [34]

    K. A. Lorenz-Ochoa and C. R. Baiz, Ultrafast spec- troscopy reveals slow water dynamics in biocondensates, Journal of the American Chemical Society 145, 27800 (2023)

    2023

  27. [35]

    A. C. Murthy, G. L. Dignon, Y. Kan, G. H. Zerze, S. H. Parekh, J. Mittal, and N. L. Fawzi, Molecular inter- actions underlying liquid-liquid phase separation of the FUS low-complexity domain, Nature Structural & Molec- ular Biology 26, 637 (2019)

    2019

  28. [36]

    F. C. Keber, T. Nguyen, A. Mariossi, C. P. Brang- wynne, and M. W¨ uhr, Evidence for widespread cytoplas- mic structuring into mesoscale condensates, Nature Cell Biology 26, 346 (2024)

    2024

  29. [37]

    J. T. Wang, J. Smith, B. C. Chen, H. Schmidt, D. Ra- soloson, A. Paix, B. G. Lambrus, D. Calidas, E. Bet- zig, and G. Seydoux, Regulation of rna granule dynamics by phosphorylation of serine-rich, intrinsically disordered proteins in c. elegans, eLife 3, 04591 (2014)

    2014

  30. [38]

    W. P. Lipi´ nski, B. S. Visser, I. Robu, M. A. Fakhree, S. Lindhoud, M. M. Claessens, and E. Spruijt, Biomolec- ular condensates can both accelerate and suppress ag- gregation of α -synuclein, Science advances 8, eabq6495 (2022)

    2022

  31. [39]

    Zwicker, R

    D. Zwicker, R. Seyboldt, C. A. Weber, A. A. Hyman, and F. Julicher, Growth and division of active droplets provide a model for protocells, Nature Physics 13, 408 (2017)

    2017

  32. [40]

    Guilhas, J

    B. Guilhas, J. C. Walter, J. Rech, G. David, N. O. Wal- liser, J. Palmeri, C. Mathieu-Demaziere, A. Parmeggiani, J. Y. Bouet, A. L. Gall, and M. Nollmann, Atp-driven separation of liquid phase condensates in bacteria, Molec- ular Cell 79, 293 (2020)

    2020

  33. [41]

    Zwicker, The intertwined physics of active chemical reactions and phase separation, Current Opinion in Col- loid & Interface Science 61, 101606 (2022)

    D. Zwicker, The intertwined physics of active chemical reactions and phase separation, Current Opinion in Col- loid & Interface Science 61, 101606 (2022)

    2022

  34. [42]

    Tjhung, C

    E. Tjhung, C. Nardini, and M. E. Cates, Cluster Phases and Bubbly Phase Separation in Active Fluids: Reversal of the Ostwald Process, Phys. Rev. X 8, 31080 (2018)

    2018

  35. [43]

    Hondele, R

    M. Hondele, R. Sachdev, S. Heinrich, J. Wang, P. Vallot- ton, B. M. A. Fontoura, and K. Weis, Dead-box atpases are global regulators of phase-separated organelles, Na- ture 573, 144 (2019)

    2019

  36. [44]

    T. H. Kim, B. Tsang, R. M. Vernon, N. Sonenberg, L. E. Kay, and J. D. Forman-Kay, Phospho-dependent phase separation of fmrp and caprin1 recapitulates regulation of translation and deadenylation, Science 365, 825 (2019)

    2019

  37. [45]

    Linsenmeier, M

    M. Linsenmeier, M. Hondele, F. Grigolato, E. Sec- chi, K. Weis, and P. Arosio, Dynamic arrest and ag- ing of biomolecular condensates are modulated by low- complexity domains, rna and biochemical activity, Nat. Commun. 13, 3030 (2022)

    2022

  38. [46]

    Ziethen, J

    N. Ziethen, J. Kirschbaum, and D. Zwicker, Nucleation of Chemically Active Droplets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 130, 248201 (2023)

    2023

  39. [47]

    H. Wu, X. Chen, Z. Shen, H. Li, S. Liang, Y. Lu, and M. Zhang, Phosphorylation-dependent membraneless or- ganelle fusion and fission illustrated by postsynaptic den- sity assemblies, Molecular Cell 84, 309 (2024)

    2024

  40. [48]

    S¨ oding, D

    J. S¨ oding, D. Zwicker, S. Sohrabi-Jahromi, M. Boehning, and J. Kirschbaum, Mechanisms for active regulation of biomolecular condensates, Trends in Cell Biology 30, 4 (2020)

    2020

  41. [49]

    Gouveia, Y

    B. Gouveia, Y. Kim, J. W. Shaevitz, S. Petry, H. A. Stone, and C. P. Brangwynne, Capillary forces generated by biomolecular condensates, Nature 609, 255 (2022) . 12

    2022

  42. [50]

    Berthin, J

    R. Berthin, J. D. Fries, M. Jardat, V. Dahirel, and P. Il- lien, Microscopic and stochastic simulations of chemically active droplets, Phys. Rev. E 111, L023403 (2025)

    2025

  43. [51]

    Fries, J

    J. Fries, J. Diaz, M. Jardat, I. Pagonabarraga, P. Il- lien, and V. Dahirel, Active droplets controlled by enzy- matic reactions, Journal of The Royal Society Interface 22, 20240803 (2025)

    2025

  44. [52]

    Smit and D

    B. Smit and D. Frenkel, Vapor–liquid equilibria of the two-dimensional lennard-jones fluid(s), J. Chem. Phys. 94, 5663 (1991)

    1991

  45. [53]

    J. D. Weeks, D. Chandler, and H. C. Andersen, Role of repulsive forces in determining the equilibrium structure of simple liquids, J. Chem. Phys. 54, 5237 (1971)

    1971

  46. [54]

    Mazzocca, A

    M. Mazzocca, A. Loffreda, E. Colombo, T. Fillot, D. Gnani, P. Falletta, E. Monteleone, S. Capozi, E. Bertrand, G. Legube, Z. Lavagnino, C. Tacchetti, and D. Mazza, Chromatin organization drives the search mechanism of nuclear factors, Nature Communications 14, 6433 (2023)

    2023

  47. [55]

    Min´ e-Hattab, M

    J. Min´ e-Hattab, M. Heltberg, M. Villemeur, C. Guedj, T. Mora, A. M. Walczak, M. Dahan, and A. Taddei, Sin- gle molecule microscopy reveals key physical features of repair foci in living cells., eLife 10, e60577 (2021)

    2021

  48. [56]

    W. T. Snead and A. S. Gladfelter, The control centers of biomolecular phase separation: How membrane sur- faces, ptms, and active processes regulate condensation, Molecular Cell 76, 295 (2019)

    2019

  49. [57]

    C. W. Gardiner, Handbook of Stochastic Methods (Springer, 1985)

    1985

  50. [58]

    Decayeux, V

    J. Decayeux, V. Dahirel, M. Jardat, and P. Illien, Spon- taneous propulsion of an isotropic colloid in a phase- separating environment, Physical Review E 104, 034602 (2021)

    2021

  51. [59]

    I. S. Burgos, J. R. Espinosa, A. Garaizar, R. Collepardo- Guevara, and J. A. Joseph, Study on stability, compo- sition, and protein arrangement within biocondensates formed via liquid-liquid phase separation, Biophysical Journal 121, 357a (2022)

    2022

  52. [60]

    Alon, An introduction to systems biology: design prin- ciples of biological circuits (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2019)

    U. Alon, An introduction to systems biology: design prin- ciples of biological circuits (Chapman and Hall/CRC, 2019)

    2019

  53. [61]

    A. P. Thompson, H. M. Aktulga, R. Berger, D. S. Bolin- tineanu, W. M. Brown, P. S. Crozier, P. J. in ’t Veld, A. Kohlmeyer, S. G. Moore, T. D. Nguyen, R. Shan, M. J. Stevens, J. Tranchida, C. Trott, and S. J. Plimpton, LAMMPS - a flexible simulation tool for particle-based mate...

    2022

  54. [62]

    M. P. Allen and D. J. Tildesley, Computer Simulation of Liquids (Oxford University Press, 1987). 1 Control of encounter kinetics by chemically active droplets Supplementary Information Jacques Fries, Roxanne Berthin, Marie Jardat, Pierre Illien, Vinc ent Dahirel Sorbonne Unive...

    1987

  55. [63]

    50 ˙v B. FIG. S1. A. Probability distribution of droplet volume v at stationar y state for various values of the chemical drive ∆ µ . B. Phase portrait of the volume of droplets (derivative of the volume with respect to time as a function of th e volume) for different values of...

  56. [64]

    0 7. 5 10. 0 12. 5 15. 0 17. 5 20. 0 22. 5 25. 0 ∆ µ 0 10 20 30JA a. ∆ w =0.0 ∆ w =-3.0 ∆ w =-6.0 ∆ w =-9.0

  57. [65]

    0 1. 5 2. 0 2. 5 3. 0 3. 5 4. 0 4. 5 5. 0 ∆ µ

  58. [66]

    0 1000 50 100y c

    15 Max(µ A, in kBT − µ A, out kBT ) b. 0 1000 50 100y c. 0 100 0 100 x 0 100

  59. [67]

    75 FIG. S4. (a) Net rate of A escape from droplets JA = (− dNA/dt )diff , computed from BD simulations. (b) Maximal difference of steady state chemical potential of A species inside and outside droplets in continuous systems. T he partial differential equations are solved using t...

    2025

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.