globular clusters in extragalactic systems have established themselves as powerful diagnostics of the star formation history , dynamics , and structure of their host galaxies ( see ashman & zepf 1998 for a recent review ) .
most of the observational studies of extragalactic globular cluster systems ( gcss ) have concentrated on the systems of early  type galaxies , where globular clusters are easily identified against the smooth , dust free background .
these studies have uncovered the characteristic properties of such globular cluster systems , as well as notable galaxy - to - galaxy variations in these properties . in comparison ,
information on the globular cluster systems of late - type galaxies is sparse .
the use of globular cluster systems as probes of the formation and evolution of galaxies is severely limited by this scarcity of data for spiral galaxy gcss .
there are two primary problems .
the first is that much of the interpretation of early - type galaxy gcss has used the well - studied globular cluster system of the milky way as a benchmark .
for example , the result that the globular clusters of elliptical galaxies are more metal - rich in the mean than those of spiral galaxies is largely based on the mean metallicity of milky way globulars .
consequently , it is extremely important to establish whether the properties of the milky way globular cluster system are typical of spiral galaxy gcss .
the second issue is that a better understanding of the gcss of late  type galaxies is needed in order to fully utilize gcss as probes of the formation and early evolution of galaxies .
this is self - evident for the case of late  type galaxies , but is also a critical issue for constraining models of the formation and early evolution of elliptical galaxies .
this is particularly important for testing the predictions of the merger model , in which elliptical galaxies are formed in the merger of spiral galaxies . in this picture , the gcss of elliptical galaxies are composite systems .
one population of clusters is associated with the progenitor spirals , while a second population of clusters forms in the merger event .
ashman and zepf ( 1992 ) described several testable predictions arising from this scenario .
however , the limited information on the the gcss of spirals leads to uncertainties in these predictions since it is currently unclear what constitutes a typical spiral galaxy gcss .
one particular problem is that the characteristic specific frequency of globular clusters around spirals is poorly known . the absence of firm constraints on the number of globular clusters contributed by the progenitor spirals to an elliptical galaxy gcs leads to uncertainties in many of the detailed predictions for these systems that follow from the merger model .
one of the key results of the present study is to add to the database of globular cluster specific frequencies for spiral galaxies .    in this paper , we present an imaging study of the globular cluster systems of two edge  on spiral galaxies : ngc 4565 and ngc 5907 .
globular clusters were already statistically detected in ngc 4565 as stellar - like objects above the mean background by van den bergh & harris ( 1982 ) and fleming et al .
the former detected @xmath4 100 clusters to an equivalent limiting magnitude of @xmath5 , and found the clusters to be compatible with a surface density profile of the form @xmath6 , similar to the profile of the milky way system .
the latter study determined the peak of the globular cluster luminosity function to be at v@xmath7 . fleming et al .
( 1995 ) extrapolated the observed number of clusters ( @xmath8 ) to a total number of @xmath9 globular clusters and a specific frequency of @xmath10 under their assumptions for luminosity and distance .
ngc 5907 has been searched for globular clusters by harris , bothun & hesser ( 1988 ) , but no globular cluster could be detected .
the authors speculated that the lack of globular clusters was related to the non  existence of a central bulge .    in section 2 , we present the properties of the galaxies and the observations , and describe the photometry against a highly variable background . in section 3
, the results are analyzed . in section 4
we compare the globular cluster systems to each other and to the milky way .
concluding remarks are made in section 5 .
we obtained wfpc2 observations of the nearby , edge  on spiral galaxies , ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 ( program go 6092 ) .
basic properties of the two galaxies are given in table 1 and a composite of our images is shown in fig .  1 .
ngc  4565 is classified as an sb galaxy ( rc3 , hubble atlas ) with an inclination of @xmath11 ( garca - burillo et al .
1997 ) , and is at a distance of 10 mpc , based on surface brightness fluctuations and planetary nebulae ( jacoby et al .
1996 and references therein ) .
ngc  5907 is classified as an sc galaxy ( rc3 , hubble atlas ) , with an inclination of @xmath12 ( morrison et al .
1994 ) , and is at a distance of 12 mpc , based on the tully  fisher relation ( bottinelli et al .  1988 ,
schniger & sofue 1994 ) .
the two galaxies are very similar to each other in luminosity , but differ considerably in their disk characteristics .
ngc  4565 has a prominent thick disk , accounting for roughly @xmath13 of the total luminosity ( van der kruit & searle 1981 ) .
ngc  5907 has a less prominent bulge and an upper limit to the thick disk luminosity of 0.6% of the thin disk value  a relative contribution of less than @xmath14 of the thick disk of the milky way ( morrison et al .
1994 ) .      for both of our target galaxies , ngc  4565 and ngc  5907
, we obtained two pointings with the wfpc2 on hst .
as shown in fig .  1 , we aligned each pointing so that the major axis was parallel to the edges of two wf chips , the third wf chip and the pc sampling part of the halo .    for every pointing ,
images in the f450w and f814w filters were obtained with total integration times ranging from 600 sec to 780 sec in the f450w filter , and of 480 sec in the f814w filter .
every pointing was split in three exposures shifted by 0.5 .
the basic image reduction was carried out under iraf .
for every pointing , the three calibrated science images provided by the space telescope science institute were shifted by 0.5  ( using the task imshift ) and trimmed in order to be aligned .
they were then combined with the task crrej that rejected the vast majority of cosmic rays.the images were transformed into fits format for the photometry .
the photometry was carried out using the sextractor software ( bertin & arnouts 1996 ) .
the finding parameters were set to 2 connected pixels 2.5@xmath15 above the local background ( computed in a 10 by 10 pixel mesh ) .
the computation of a local background in a relatively fine grid was chosen to allow the finding criteria to be equivalent in the various parts of the image , in particular towards the disks where the background becomes very irregular . typically , down to an equivalent b magnitude of 25.5 ,
0 to 2 objects were detected in both the f450w and f814w image on the pc , 8 to 18 on the wf `` halo '' field , and 130 to 340 on the wf fields including disc and bulge .
the latter included a large number of stellar associations and hii regions .
positions on the sky ( ra and dec ) were computed for all objects using the task metric in the stsdas package .
distance from the center , along the disc , and orthogonal distance from the disc were computed using position angles of @xmath16 for ngc 4565 ( rupen 1991 ) and @xmath17 for ngc 5907
( garca - burillo et al .  1997 ) .
the photometry was carried out with 2 pixel radius apertures in order to avoid being affected by background irregularities .
corrections to get the equivalent magnitude to a 0.5  aperture were determined from isolated bright objects on the images and found to be 0.35 and 0.18 mag for the pc and wf f450w measurements respectively , and 0.55 and 0.21 mag in the f814w filter , with errors of @xmath18% .
additional 0.1 magnitudes were added to obtain the total magnitude of the objects ( derived for the wfpc2 point spread functions , following holtzman et al .
note that at the distance of our galaxies the largest globular clusters will be resolved and these corrections underestimated .
this will hardly affect the colors since the luminosity profiles in f450w and f814w are similar , but could significantly affect the individual magnitudes , as a function of the object size ( cf .
kundu & whitmore 1998 , puzia et al .  1999 ) .
finally , the calibration relation given in holtzman et al .  ( 1995 ) were used to obtain johnson
cousins b and i magnitudes .
extensive artificial star experiments with artificial point sources and artificial globular clusters were carried out .
for the latter wfpc2 point spread functions obtained with tiny tim ( krist & hook 1997 ) and convolved with a modified hubble law of core radius 0.1  and 0.2were used .
the latter correspond to core radii of about 4 to 10 pc at the distance of 10 to 12 mpc , and lie in the upper range of the values measured in the milky way ( only 27% of the milky way cluster have a core radius larger than 4 pc in the compilation of harris 1996 ) .
the resulting fwhm of our artificial objects range from 0.8 to 1.5 pixels and 1.5 to 2.5 pixels for artificial stars and globular clusters respectively , at b@xmath19 .
these allowed us to define robust selection criteria for globular clusters based on the fwhm of the detected objects ( @xmath20 and @xmath21 pixels , as returned by sextractor ) .
these selection criteria were applied down to b@xmath22 ; at fainter magnitudes the signal  to  noise was not sufficient to discriminate with high confidence between point sources and extended objects .
note that down to this magnitude limit our finding algorithm is 100% complete and objects will only be missed if they are physically obscured , e.g.  by dust .
we further introduced a cut in color and magnitude .
for the color cut , we chose b
i @xmath23 , roughly 0.2 magnitudes bluer than the bluest globular clusters in the milky way ( see also fig .  3 ) .
no upper limit was chosen to avoid excluding reddened objects . as a magnitude range , we chose b@xmath24 , corresponding to b@xmath25 and @xmath26 at the respective distances of ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 .
as a reference , the brightest clusters in the milky way and m31 have b@xmath27 ( @xmath28 cen ) and b@xmath29 ( mayall ii ) .
our upper magnitude cut was dictated by the fwhm selection , only reliable down to b@xmath22 which was used as the limiting magnitude .
the peak of the globular cluster luminosity function is expected at b@xmath30 , as derived by della valle et al .
( 1998 ) , using the new hipparcos distance calibration and the list of milky way clusters of harris ( 1996 ) .
this corresponds to b@xmath31 and b@xmath32 at the distance of the two galaxies , so that we pass the peak of the luminosity function in both cases .
the expected number of foreground stars contaminating our images and passing our selection criteria were estimated from galactic models ( ibata , priv .  com . ) and the hubble deep field to be @xmath33 per pointing .
the number of contaminating galaxies was estimated from several fields of the medium deep survey ( griffiths et al .
1993 ) and our selection criteria turned out to be robust against background galaxy contamination at these bright magnitudes ( b@xmath19 ) estimated to be @xmath34 per pointing .
the final samples include 40 and 25 globular clusters in ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 respectively ( see table 2 and 3 ) . all candidates ( except one in ngc 5907 identified as a star )
were confirmed by a visual inspection .
the distribution of globular clusters , together with all objects detected is shown in fig .  2 .
the colors of the globular cluster candidates in ngc  4565 , as well as visual inspection of the galaxy dust lane , suggests that the majority of the clusters with positive z suffer significant extinction .
the identifiable regions of dust are less extended in ngc  5907 and there is less direct evidence for significant extinction , but we can not rule out reddening of the clusters in this galaxy .
color magnitude diagrams for the detected globular clusters in ngc 4565 and ngc 5907 are shown in fig .  3 , together with one for milky way globular clusters ( uncorrected for reddening ) as comparison .
the mean colors and dispersion for the samples are @xmath35 in ngc 4565 , @xmath36 in ngc 5907 , and @xmath37 in the milky way ( @xmath38 when corrected for reddening , corresponding to a mean metallicity of [ fe / h]@xmath39 dex ) .
this tends to support the evidence that reddening is more of an issue in ngc  4565 than ngc  5907 , at least if the _
intrinsic _ colors ( @xmath4 metallicities ) of the gcss of the three galaxies are similar .
one cautionary note in this regard is that the bluer mean colors of the ngc  5907 clusters is partly driven by some very blue objects amongst the globular cluster candidates .
since these blue objects are not preferentially located near the disk , it is unlikely that they are young compact star clusters , but it is possible that one or two such objects maybe be included in the sample . despite these complications , the small differences ( @xmath40 ) in the mean @xmath41 values probably suggest only moderate differences in the mean metallicities ( @xmath42 dex following the conversion of couture et al .
in order to estimate the total number of globular clusters around ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 , three extrapolations are required .
the first is to account for globular clusters fainter than our magnitude limit .
the second is for globular clusters that are not covered by our imaging field .
the third is for globular clusters lying behind the disk and bulge and being obscured .
we chose to estimate the counts by direct comparison with the milky way and estimate the total number of globular clusters in the two galaxies by comparing our observations with the same spatial region and equivalent magnitude limit in our galaxy .
this approach has the advantage of taking into account all three extrapolations at once without propagating unnecessary errors .
it is motivated by the small number of objects detected and the limited spatial coverage of our observations .
these do not allow us to derive the spatial profile of either globular cluster system , necessary to estimate the spatial extrapolation .
further , we would still need a model to account for the clusters behind the disk .
specifically , we created a mask for each galaxy based on the areal coverage of the two wfpc2 pointings of our observations .
these masks excluded regions between chips and the edges of chips where the images were trimmed .
also excluded were small regions ( @xmath4 150 @xmath43 ) centered on the bulges where our artificial star experiments indicated the data to be incomplete . by imposing the relevant mask onto the milky way clusters and using an absolute magnitude cut appropriate to @xmath44 at the distances of the two galaxies , we determined the number of milky way globular clusters that would have been detected with our observations .
we used positions and magnitudes of milky way globular clusters taken from the mcmaster catalog ( harris 1996 ) to create a 2-dimensional spatial distribution by projecting galactocentric @xmath45 coordinates into the @xmath46 plane .
figures 4 and 5 give a visual representation of the results of this process .    for each galaxy , there are four possible orientations of the mask that preserve the alignment of the pointings along the major axis of the galaxy .
we therefore repeated the above exercise for all four orientations and in each case counted the number of milky way globular clusters that were `` detected '' ( see table 4 ) .
the mean number of clusters from these four possibilities was used to estimate the total number of globular clusters , @xmath47 , in each galaxy , using the expression : @xmath48 where @xmath49 is the total number of globular clusters in the milky way ( @xmath2 , ashman & zepf 1998 ) , @xmath50 is the number of globular clusters observed in our target galaxies ( 40 and 25 for ngc 4565 and ngc 5907 , respectively , corrected to 38 and 23 when accounting for fore-/background contamination ) , and @xmath51 is the mean number of globular clusters from the four mask orientations ( see table 4 ) .
the method relies on several assumptions that we discuss in turn .
the mcmaster catalog lists 141 globular clusters , 134 of which have galactocentric coordinates , and 112 of which have de - redenned absolute b magnitudes ( which served for the magnitude cut ) .
however , the clusters with no reported @xmath52 magnitudes are almost exclusively more than one magnitude fainter than the peak of the luminosity function ( based on their available absolute @xmath53 magnitudes ) and would also be undetected at the distances of our target galaxies .
we assumed the total number of globular clusters in the milky way to be @xmath2 .
the majority of undetected milky way globulars are assumed to be behind the galactic bulge .
the counterparts of such globular clusters in ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 would also be undetected in our observations due to obscuration by disk and bulge .
the scale length and scale heights of the thin disk of all three galaxies is not too different ( e.g.  van der kruit & searle 1981 , morrison et al .
1994 , kent et al .
we therefore assume than the number of obscured objects is the same in all galaxies ( within 20% ) .
thus while our milky way sample is not complete , the missing clusters tend to be ones that we would not detect in ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 anyway .
we assumed that the globular cluster luminosity functions of ngc 4565 and ngc 5907 are similar to the one of the milky way , i.e.  roughly gaussian with a peak at b@xmath54 and a standard deviation of @xmath55 ( see sect .
this assumption of a ` universality ' of the globular cluster luminosity functions is well supported by all recent observations ( e.g.  whitmore 1997 for a recent review ) . for our assumed distances ( see table 1 ) ,
our limiting magnitude of b@xmath22 corresponds to @xmath56 and @xmath57 magnitudes past the peak for ngc 4565 and ngc 5907 respectively .
this corresponds to @xmath58 and @xmath59 past the peak . in other words
, we sampled @xmath60% and @xmath61% of the luminosity functions respectively , and had to implicitly extrapolate over the remaining fraction .
this extrapolating was taken care of by a corresponding cut in the absolute magnitude in the milky way sample .
we stress that down to the magnitude limit , we do not suffer from finding incompleteness due to the software finding algorithm .
another caveat is the implicit assumption that the spatial profile of the milky way globular cluster system is similar to that of the globular cluster systems of ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 . for ngc  4565 , the available photographic data are consistent with this assumption ( see sect .  1 ) . for ngc  5907 , we assume it also to be the case ( but see sect .
if the spatial profile of the globular cluster system of ngc  5907 was markedly shallower than that of the milky way , we would detect a higher fraction of globular clusters in the `` halo '' wf and pc fields than we actually do . on the other hand ,
if the spatial profile was much steeper , it would not greatly affect our estimate of @xmath47 since our areal coverage includes roughly half of all the globular clusters for density profiles comparable to that of the milky way .
errors in the distances to the galaxies lead to uncertainty in both the limiting magnitude and size of the mask used to derive the total number of clusters around each galaxy .
the distance to ngc  4565 is fairly well established , with three independent secondary indicators all agreeing closely with a value of 10  mpc .
the distance to ngc  5907 was derived from the tully  fisher relation and found to be 12 mpc by independent groups . to estimate the effects of distance variations on our derived values
, we carried out the same procedure as above with the galaxies at assumed distances of @xmath62  % their preferred values , affecting both mask size and limiting magnitude .
the results of this exercise are summarized in table 4 .      in summary ,
the above considerations lead us to total numbers of globular clusters for the two galaxies of @xmath63 and @xmath64 , following the equation of sect .  3.1.1 , where @xmath50 was corrected for fore-/background contamination .
the error is the statistical error only : it includes poisson errors in the observed number of globular clusters , poisson errors in the average number of milky way globular clusters in the mask ( derived from the 4 different orientations ) , and errors in the number of contaminating objects . to this error
, potential systematic errors should be added .
first , we estimate up to 20% difference in the number of obscured clusters between the milky way and our target galaxies .
second , we assumed for the milky way a total number of clusters of @xmath2 ; for a different assumption , our counts should be adjusted accordingly .
note that this systematic error does not influence any direct comparison between our two galaxies .
the third systematic error comes from our assumed distances .
for a 20% error in distance , our results would vary by @xmath65 for ngc 4565 and @xmath66 for ngc 5907 , mainly due to the different limiting magnitude .
note that this systematic error significantly affects the total numbers of clusters , but has a much smaller effect on the derived specific frequencies ( see below ) due to the varying total magnitude of the galaxy which compensates somewhat the varying total number of clusters . finally , for ngc 5907 an additional uncertainty is present due to the lack of knowledge on the exact shape of the globular cluster density profile .
thus , formally , the total number of globular clusters are @xmath67 and @xmath68 , where the first error is the statistical one , the second error the systematic one .    for ngc 4565 ,
our result is in good agreement with that of fleming et al .
( 1995 ) , who followed a completely different approach .
this gives us confidence that our approach is also valid for ngc 5907 and the previous non  detection of globular cluster should probably be attributed to the poor observing conditions .
one can also express these numbers in terms of a specific frequency @xmath69 , where @xmath70 is the absolute visual magnitude of the parent galaxy .
using the absolute magnitudes of the two galaxies given in table 1 and the total numbers from the previous section , we obtain @xmath71 and @xmath72 for ngc 4565 and ngc 5907 , respectively .
the errors include the random errors from above , as well as an error of 0.2 magnitudes in the de - reddened apparent magnitudes of the galaxies .
the effect of the systematic errors would be to lower the @xmath73 values by 0.05 , should the total number of globular clusters in the milky way be @xmath74 ; and to vary @xmath73 by less than 0.1 should the distance of the galaxy vary by 20% ( the increase / decrease in total number being partly compensated by an increase / decrease in the total magnitude of the galaxy ) .
the quantity @xmath73 was introduced by harris & van den bergh ( 1981 ) primarily for use in elliptical galaxies where there is little variation in the stellar population from one galaxy to another . zepf & ashman ( 1993 ) attempted to account for stellar mass - to - light ratio variations in a _ statistical _
sense by defining a parameter @xmath75 to be the number of globular clusters per unit ( @xmath76 ) stellar mass of a galaxy .
conversion from galactic luminosity to stellar mass was achieved by assuming a characteristic @xmath77 for each morphological type of galaxy .
this is not an ideal procedure for individual galaxies , but it does tend to minimize differences in @xmath73 generated by stellar population differences . thus the approach allows us to obtain a comparison of the number of globular clusters in our target galaxies with other late  type galaxies studied to date . for the conversion from luminosity to mass , we follow zepf & ashman ( 1993 ) and use @xmath77 values of 5.4 , 6.1 and 5.0 for sa , sab - sb and sbc - sc galaxies , respectively ( cf .  faber & gallagher 1979 ) .
the @xmath75 value for ngc 4565 is @xmath78 if it is assumed to be of type sb and 1.2 if its type is sbc ( errors are of the order 20% , see above ) .
for ngc 5097 ( type sc ) @xmath79 .
we comment on these values below .      a visual comparison of the detected globular clusters in ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 with the masked milky way distributions ( fig
.  4 and 5 ) suggests that the globular cluster system of ngc  5907 may be more flattened than that of the milky way .
it is difficult to derive shape information directly for the globular cluster system of this galaxy from our small sample of 25 objects , as well as the asymmetric geometry of the field of view . a comparison of the @xmath80-distributions of ngc  5907 with that of the masked milky way dataset suggests a difference at a 2-@xmath15 level according to a k - s test ( ngc  4565 and the milky way show no detectable difference ) .
the inner regions of the milky way globular cluster system is itself known to be somewhat flattened , primarily because of the presence of a thick disk population of globular clusters ( e.g.  zinn 1985 ) so our data are consistent with a flattened globular cluster distribution in ngc  5907 , but do not demand it .
the previous non  detection of globular clusters in ngc 5907 ( harris et al .
1988 ) could also point towards a deficiency of objects in the halo , although we can only speculate on this point .
their ground based study was based on object over - densities , and was probably unable to detect clusters close to the disk . with a limiting magnitude similar to ours
, the density of globular clusters in the halo would be only marginally detectable in a statistical comparison with a background field .
the shape of the cluster system in ngc 5907 is of some interest since it has been reported by sackett et al .
( 1994 ) that this galaxy has a highly flattened halo ( @xmath81 ) with a flat density profile falling off roughly as @xmath82 , compared to @xmath83 for the milky way halo and halo clusters .
although ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 have similar total luminosities and hubble types , there are significant differences in the disk and bulge properties of the two galaxies .
if the properties of the disk and bulge of a spiral galaxy influence the formation and evolution of its globular cluster system , we would therefore expect to find differences in the gcss of these two galaxies .    the metal  rich globular cluster population in the milky way shares the kinematics , abundances and spatial distribution of the bulge and thick disk ( e.g.  armandroff 1993 ; burkert & smith 1997 ) . in the absence of a prominent bulge and thick disk ( as in ngc 5907 ) , we could have expected the absence of metal  rich globular clusters and the presence of a halo population only . the globular cluster system of ngc 5907 would have been less flattened than the one of ngc 4565 ( whereas the opposite is observed as discussed above ) , and the total number of clusters normalized to the galaxy mass would be lower by 20% to 30% in ngc 5907 compared to ngc 4565 ( estimated from the fraction of metal  rich to metal
poor clusters in the milky way ) .
the latter could be the case ( see sect .
3.3 ) but for the contradictory reason that ngc 5907 lacks halo clusters and not disk clusters .
given the uncertainties in reddening ( i.e.  metallicity determination from the colors ) , we can not allocate individual clusters in these two galaxies to the disk / bulge or halo .
this awaits spectroscopic measurements of individual clusters .
however , the fact that the globular cluster systems of ngc 4565 and ngc 5907 are still very similar despite difference in the thick disk and bulge characteristics suggests that the processes which form the bulge and thick disk are largely unrelated to the processes which form the total globular cluster systems around late - type galaxies .
as mentioned above , both ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 are similar in many respects to the milky way .
not only are their morphological types similar ( sb and sbc compared to the sbc milky way ) , but also their absolute magnitudes ( @xmath84 and @xmath85 compared to @xmath86 for the milky way , derived from the tully - fisher relation by adopting @xmath87@xmath88 ) and by implication their total stellar masses .
it is therefore notable , although perhaps not surprising , that all three galaxies have very similar _ numbers _ of globular clusters . independently of the total number of milky way clusters , ngc 4565 has about 20% more clusters than the milky way ( but is also slightly more massive ) , while ngc 5907 has the same number of globular clusters as the milky way within the errors .
even large errors in our adopted distance would leave all numbers within 50% of each other . in terms of specific frequency ,
the milky way has @xmath89 for an assumed total magnitude of @xmath90 and @xmath2 globular clusters , identical to the value derived for the two other spirals .
five other spirals of type sb to sc have studied globular cluster systems .
their @xmath73 values are @xmath91 ( m31 , sb ) , @xmath57 ( ngc 253 , sc ) , @xmath92 ( ngc 2683 , sb ) , @xmath93 ( ngc 4216 , sb ) , @xmath94 ( ngc 5170 , sb ) , all taken from the compilation of ashman & zepf ( 1998 ) .
the quoted errors do not take into account the possibility of systematic errors .
the corresponding @xmath75 values ( using the mean @xmath95 values as in sect .
3.2 ) are : @xmath96 , and @xmath97 . a maximum likelihood estimation of the mean and dispersion ( including the milky way @xmath98 , ngc 4565 and ngc 5907 ) returns @xmath99 .
within the large uncertainties , galaxies of type sb to sc seem to produce a similar number of globular clusters per unit mass
.    should ngc 5907 have a lower @xmath73 than assumed ( see sect .
3.3 ) , there would be a hint for sc galaxies to have fewer globular clusters per unit mass .
an increase of the number of globular clusters per unit mass along the hubble sequence of late - type galaxies is strengthened by observations of 4 sa and sab galaxies ( ngc 3031 ( = m81 ) , ngc 4569 , ngc 4594 , and ngc 7814 ) .
the respective @xmath73 values are @xmath100 , @xmath101 , @xmath102 , @xmath103 ( taken from the compilation in ashman & zepf 1998 ) , and the respective @xmath75 values are @xmath104 , @xmath105 , @xmath106 , and @xmath107 .
the mean @xmath75 value for these earlier types is @xmath108 , but note that , except for m81 , these values are poorly defined ( either the number of globular clusters and/or the assumed distance is uncertain ) .
we have studied the globular cluster systems around two edge - on spiral galaxies , ngc  4565 and ngc  5907 . for both these galaxies
we derive a specific frequency of @xmath109 , indistinguishable from the value of the milky way gcs .
the similarity of the specific frequencies is notable since the bulge - to - disk ratio and prominence of the stellar thick disk both differ considerably between the three galaxies .
this result suggests that the properties of the thick disk and bulge of spiral galaxies do not have a significant influence on the building of globular cluster systems around such galaxies .
there is some evidence for flattening of the globular cluster system of ngc  5907 , but we are unable to determine whether this is driven by a flattened halo population of clusters or a thick disk system .
the latter possibility seems somewhat unlikely given the upper limits on any stellar thick disk in this galaxy .
an interesting alternative is that the globular clusters in ngc  5907 are following the profile of a significantly flattened halo .
we are very grateful to our program coordinator , max mutchler , whose work and help greatly assisted this project .
p . gratefully acknowledges support from the alexander von humboldt foundation .
k.m.a . and s.e.z .
acknowledge support for this project from nasa through the stsci grant go-06092.01 - 94a .
ra ( 2000 ) & @xmath110 & @xmath111 & rc3 dec(2000 ) & @xmath112 & @xmath113 & rc3 type & sb & sc & rc3 v@xmath114 & @xmath115 & @xmath116 & rc3 ( value corrected for internal and external reddening)(b  v)@xmath114 & @xmath117 & @xmath118 & rc3 e(b  v ) & 0.015 ( + internal ) & 0.011 ( + internal ) & schlegel et al .
1998 inclination & @xmath11 & @xmath12 & garca - burillo et al .
1997 , morrison et al .  1994 thick disk & 5% of b@xmath119 & @xmath120% of thin disk & van der kruit & searle 1981 , morrison et al .  1994 position angle & @xmath121 & @xmath17 & rupen et al .  1991 , garca - burillo et al .  1997 v@xmath122 & @xmath123@xmath88 & @xmath124@xmath88 & rc3 adopted distance & @xmath125 mpc & @xmath126 mpc & jacoby et al .
1996 , bottinelli et al .
1988 , schniger & sofue 1994 @xmath127 & 30.0 & 30.4 & derived from the above distance @xmath128 & @xmath129 & @xmath85 & derived from the above values      kazf4565 - 1 & 12 36 13.8 & @xmath13026 00 35.3 & -11.6 & -122.4 & @xmath131 & @xmath132kazf4565 - 2 & 12 36 14.0 & @xmath13025 59 58.2 & -35.8 & -94.6 & @xmath133 & @xmath134kazf4565 - 3 & 12 36 15.7 & @xmath13026 00 41.0 & 11.1 & -108.5 & @xmath135 & @xmath136kazf4565 - 4 & 12 36 16.5 & @xmath13025 58 25.0 & -76.8 & -3.7 & @xmath137 & @xmath138kazf4565 - 5 & 12 36 17.4 & @xmath13025 59 16.8 & -31.6 & -32.2 & @xmath139 & @xmath140kazf4565 - 6 & 12 36 17.5 & @xmath13025 59 24.0 & -25.7 & -36.4 & @xmath141 & @xmath142kazf4565 - 7 & 12 36 18.0 & @xmath13025 58 51.2 & -44.7 & -9.0 & @xmath143 & @xmath144kazf4565 - 8 & 12 36 18.0 & @xmath13025 59 26.5 & -20.0 & -34.3 & @xmath145 & @xmath146kazf4565 - 9 & 12 36 18.1 & @xmath13025 59 29.8 & -15.9 & -35.0 & @xmath147 & @xmath148kazf4565 - 10 & 12 36 18.4 & @xmath13025 59 30.5 & -12.7 & -32.8 & @xmath149 & @xmath150kazf4565 - 11 & 12 36 18.5 & @xmath13025 59 26.9 & -14.7 & -29.5 & @xmath151 & @xmath152kazf4565 - 12 & 12 36 18.8 & @xmath13025 59 04.9 & -27.4 & -11.3 & @xmath153 & @xmath154kazf4565 - 13 & 12 36 18.9 & @xmath13025 59 01.7 & -28.1 & -7.7 & @xmath155 & @xmath156kazf4565 - 14 & 12 36 19.2 & @xmath13025 59 25.4 & -9.2 & -22.4 & @xmath157 & @xmath158kazf4565 - 15 & 12 36 19.7 & @xmath13026 00 04.7 & 23.2 & -45.3 & @xmath159 & @xmath160kazf4565 - 16 & 12 36 19.8 & @xmath13025 58 55.9 & -23.4 & 5.1 & @xmath161 & @xmath162kazf4565 - 17 & 12 36 19.9 & @xmath13025 59 20.4 & -5.4 & -11.3 & @xmath163 & @xmath164kazf4565 - 18 & 12 36 20.0 & @xmath13025 59 14.3 & -8.7 & -6.2 & @xmath165 & @xmath166kazf4565 - 19 & 12 36 20.2 & @xmath13025 59 56.0 & 22.0 & -34.8 & @xmath167 & @xmath168kazf4565 - 20 & 12 36 20.3 & @xmath13025 59 06.4 & -11.5 & 2.0 & @xmath169 & @xmath170kazf4565 - 21 & 12 36 20.8 & @xmath13025 58 31.8 & -30.8 & 31.8 & @xmath171 & @xmath172kazf4565 - 22 & 12 36 21.1 & @xmath13025 59 36.6 & 17.8 & -11.3 & @xmath173 & @xmath174kazf4565 - 23 & 12 36 21.2 & @xmath13025 58 34.7 & -25.3 & 33.2 & @xmath175 & @xmath176kazf4565 - 24 & 12 36 21.6 & @xmath13025 59 44.2 & 27.3 & -12.8 & @xmath177 & @xmath178kazf4565 - 25 & 12 36 21.9 & @xmath13025 58 18.1 & -29.6 & 52.2 & @xmath179 & @xmath180kazf4565 - 26 & 12 36 22.3 & @xmath13025 58 30.4 & -17.6 & 46.6 & @xmath181 & @xmath182kazf4565 - 27 & 12 36 22.4 & @xmath13025 58 40.8 & -8.8 & 40.6 & @xmath183 & @xmath184kazf4565 - 28 & 12 36 22.8 & @xmath13025 58 01.6 & -32.9 & 71.8 & @xmath185 & @xmath186kazf4565 - 29 & 12 36 23.4 & @xmath13025 59 10.0 & 20.5 & 28.7 & @xmath187 & @xmath188kazf4565 - 30 & 12 36 23.7 & @xmath13025 59 10.0 & 24.0 & 32.0 & @xmath189 & @xmath190kazf4565 - 31 & 12 36 24.3 & @xmath13025 59 08.2 & 28.1 & 38.6 & @xmath191 & @xmath192kazf4565 - 32 & 12 36 25.4 & @xmath13025 58 21.7 & 6.2 & 82.0 & @xmath193 & @xmath194kazf4565 - 33 & 12 36 25.4 & @xmath13025 58 33.2 & 14.1 & 74.0 & @xmath195 & @xmath196kazf4565 - 34 & 12 36 25.5 & @xmath13025 58 36.1 & 17.3 & 72.9 & @xmath167 & @xmath197kazf4565 - 35 & 12 36 25.9 & @xmath13025 58 47.6 & 28.7 & 68.1 & @xmath198 & @xmath199kazf4565 - 36 & 12 36 26.1 & @xmath13025 57 26.6 & -25.9 & 127.8 & @xmath200 & @xmath201kazf4565 - 37 & 12 36 26.1 & @xmath13025 58 42.2 & 27.3 & 74.1 & @xmath202 & @xmath203kazf4565 - 38 & 12 36 26.6 & @xmath13025 58 08.4 & 8.7 & 103.2 & @xmath175 & @xmath204kazf4565 - 39 & 12 36 26.9 & @xmath13025 58 00.8 & 6.1 & 111.2 & @xmath205 & @xmath206kazf4565 - 40 & 12 36 27.4 & @xmath13025 58 16.0 & 21.5 & 105.5 & @xmath177 & @xmath207      kazf5907 - 1 & 15 15 40.1 & @xmath13056 20 03.8 & -96.7 & -64.6 & @xmath208 & @xmath209kazf5907 - 2 & 15 15 46.7 & @xmath13056 19 50.9 & -51.8 & -29.7 & @xmath210 & @xmath211kazf5907 - 3 & 15 15 46.9 & @xmath13056 21 14.8 & -15.2 & -105.1 & @xmath212 & @xmath213kazf5907 - 4 & 15 15 47.3 & @xmath13056 21 31.3 & -5.6 & -118.8 & @xmath214 & @xmath215kazf5907 - 5 & 15 15 47.7 & @xmath13056 20 52.8 & -18.5 & -82.4 & @xmath216 & @xmath217kazf5907 - 6 & 15 15 49.1 & @xmath13056 20 28.0 & -18.3 & -55.0 & @xmath179 & @xmath218kazf5907 - 7 & 15 15 50.0 & @xmath13056 20 03.1 & -22.3 & -29.4 & @xmath198 & @xmath219kazf5907 - 8 & 15 15 51.5 & @xmath13056 19 28.6 & -25.5 & 7.4 & @xmath220 & @xmath221kazf5907 - 9 & 15 15 51.8 & @xmath13056 19 49.1 & -14.2 & -10.1 & @xmath222 & @xmath223kazf5907 - 10 & 15 15 52.2 & @xmath13056 20 38.8 & 9.8 & -53.6 & @xmath224 & @xmath225kazf5907 - 11 & 15 15 52.5 & @xmath13056 20 11.4 & -0.1 & -28.0 & @xmath183 & @xmath226kazf5907 - 12 & 15 15 53.1 & @xmath13056 19 01.2 & -25.0 & 37.8 & @xmath227 & @xmath228kazf5907 - 13 & 15 15 53.4 & @xmath13056 19 22.1 & -13.7 & 20.0 & @xmath229 & @xmath230kazf5907 - 14 & 15 15 54.2 & @xmath13056 20 00.2 & 8.6 & -11.6 & @xmath220 & @xmath231kazf5907 - 15 & 15 15 54.5 & @xmath13056 20 02.4 & 11.0 & -12.8 & @xmath232 & @xmath233kazf5907 - 16 & 15 15 54.8 & @xmath13056 19 39.4 & 4.0 & 9.1 & @xmath234 & @xmath176kazf5907 - 17 & 15 15 55.4 & @xmath13056 18 45.3 & -14.7 & 60.2 & @xmath235 & @xmath236kazf5907 - 18 & 15 15 55.7 & @xmath13056 19 44.4 & 12.6 & 7.8 & @xmath237 & @xmath238kazf5907 - 19 & 15 15 55.8 & @xmath13056 19 49.4 & 15.7 & 3.5 & @xmath239 & @xmath240kazf5907 - 20 & 15 15 55.9 & @xmath13056 19 28.9 & 8.0 & 22.6 & @xmath241 & @xmath242kazf5907 - 21 & 15 15 56.1 & @xmath13056 19 57.3 & 21.2 & -2.8 & @xmath243 & @xmath244kazf5907 - 22 & 15 15 57.3 & @xmath13056 19 25.3 & 17.2 & 30.9 & @xmath245 & @xmath246kazf5907 - 23 & 15 15 57.4 & @xmath13056 17 47.4 & -24.1 & 119.5 & @xmath247 & @xmath248kazf5907 - 24 & 15 15 57.6 & @xmath13056 19 10.9 & 13.4 & 45.1 & @xmath249 & @xmath236kazf5907 - 25 & 15 15 57.8 & @xmath13056 18 12.6 & -9.8 & 98.6 & @xmath141 & @xmath250      @xmath251 orientation & 29 & 24 + @xmath252 orientation & 34 & 24 + @xmath253 orientation & 36 & 26 + @xmath254 orientation & 35 & 23 + mean , dispersion & @xmath255 & @xmath256 + & & + 20% closer & @xmath257 & @xmath258 + 20% further & @xmath256 & @xmath259 +


since the late twentieth century , research on the mechanical stability of macromolecules turned a prolific field due to the advances in manipulation techniques of individual biomolecules , usually termed single - molecule experiments .
one of the most important techniques is atomic force microscopy ( afm ) , in which a biomolecule is stretched between a rigid platform and the tip of the cantilever @xcite . in these experiments ,
the controlled parameter is either the length of the macromolecule ( length - control protocols ) or the force exerted over it ( force - control protocols ) , and its conjugated magnitude is measured . as a result , a force - extension curve ( fec )
is obtained , which characterizes the elasto - mechanical behaviour of the macromolecule and provides fundamental information about its unfolding pathway @xcite .    in a typical pulling experiment ,
the end - to - end distance of the molecule @xmath5 is increased with a pulling rate @xmath1 , that is , @xmath6 .
remarkably , the fec exhibits a sawtooth pattern @xcite showing how the macromolecule comprises several structural units or blocks , in general each one with different stability properties .
each block unfolds individually causing a drop in the measured force .
the unfolding pathway is , basically , the order and the way in which the structural blocks of the macromolecule unravel .
recent studies show that the pulling velocity plays a relevant role in determining the unfolding pathway @xcite .
different unfolding pathways are observed depending on ( a ) which of the ends ( c - terminus or n - terminus ) the domain is actually pulled from and ( b ) the pulling speed .
it has been claimed that it is the inhomogeneity in the distribution of the force across the protein , for high pulling speeds , that causes the unfolding pathway to change @xcite .
nevertheless , to the best of our knowledge , a theory that explains this crossover is still lacking .
we focus on the unfolding pathway of protein domains composed of several stable structural units @xcite . in this respect , a good candidate is represented by the maltose binding protein ( mbp ) , a stable and well characterized protein comprising two domains .
mbp has been recently employed in studies on mechanical unfolding and translocation @xcite . in particular , bertz and rief
@xcite identified four intermediate states in the fec of mechanical denaturation experiments , each one associated to the unravelling of a specific unit .
the authors termed such units `` unfoldons '' and determined their typical unfolding sequence .
however , simulations @xcite showed that this unfolding scenario holds only for low pulling speed as the pathway depends on the rate at which the molecule is pulled : at very low pulling rates , it is the weakest unfoldon that unfolds first , while at higher rates the first unfoldon to unravel is the pulled one .
the main purpose of this paper is to develop a physical theory that predicts the observed dependence of the unfolding pathway on the pulling velocity .
specifically , we do so in the adiabatic limit , that is , the regime of slow pulling speeds that allow the system to sweep the whole stationary branches of the fec @xcite .
also , we would like to stress that , although our approach is applied to the unfolding of a single protein , it extends to the unfolding of polyproteins comprising several domains ( modular proteins ) , which unfold sequentially @xcite .
the plan of the paper is as follows . in section [ sec : model ]
, we put forward our model to investigate the unfolding pathway of proteins . in general , the free energy characterizing each unit ( unfoldon or module ) of the protein is different , that is , there is a certain degree of asymmetry ( or disorder ) in the free energies .
moreover , we discuss the role of thermal noise and the ( ir)relevance of the details of the device controlling the length of the protein . section [ sec : real_chain ] is devoted to the analysis of the pulling of the model , by means of a perturbative expansion in both the asymmetry of the free energies and the pulling speed . in sections
[ sec : asymmetry ] and [ sec : pulling_speed ] we obtain the corrections introduced by the asymmetry and the finite value of the pulling speed , respectively . in section [ sec : critical_speed ] we show that , in the simplest situation , there naturally appears a critical pulling speed @xmath2 , below ( above ) which it is the weakest ( pulled ) unit that unfolds first . in general , when more than one unit has a different free energy , we show that for low ( high ) enough pulling velocity , it is still the weakest ( pulled ) unit that unfolds first , but other pathways are present for intermediate velocities .
numerical results for some particular situations are shown in section [ sec : numerics ] .
they are compared to the analytical results previously derived , and a quite good agreement is found .
finally , section [ sec : conclusions ] deals with the main conclusions of the paper .
the appendices cover some technical details that we have omitted in the main text .
let us consider a certain protein domain comprising @xmath0 unfoldons ( or a polyprotein composed of @xmath0 , possibly different , modules ) .
from now on , we will refer to these unfoldons or modules as units .
when the molecule is submitted to an external force @xmath7 , the simplest description is to portray it as a one - dimensional chain , where the end - to - end extension of the @xmath8-th unit in the direction of the force is denoted by @xmath9 . in a real afm experiment ,
the molecule is attached as a whole to the afm device and stretched .
following guardiani et al .
@xcite , we model this system with a sequence of nonlinear bonds , as in figure [ fig:1 ] : the endpoints of the @xmath8-th unit are denoted by @xmath10 and @xmath11 , so that its extension @xmath9 is @xmath12 the evolution of the system follows the coupled overdamped langevin equations @xmath13 in which the @xmath14 are the gaussian white noise terms , such that @xmath15 and @xmath16 , with @xmath17 and @xmath18 being the friction coefficient of each unit ( the same for all ) and the temperature of the fluid in which the protein is immersed , respectively ( @xmath19 is the boltzmann constant ) .
the global free energy function of the system is @xmath20 in , @xmath21 is the contribution to the free energy introduced by the force - control or length - control device ( see below ) , while @xmath22 is the single unit contribution to @xmath23 .
the total length of the system is given by @xmath24 in force - control experiments , the applied force @xmath7 is a given function of time , whereas in length - control experiments the device tries to keep the total length @xmath25 equal to the desired value @xmath5 , also a certain function of time .
the corresponding contributions to the free energy are    [ eq:6b ] @xmath26 @xmath27    in which @xmath28 stands for the stiffness of the length - control device
. the length is perfectly controlled in the limit @xmath29 , when @xmath30 for all times .
a sketch of the model is presented in figure [ fig:1 ] .
an apparently similar system , in which each module of the chain follows the langevin equation @xmath31 has been recently analyzed @xcite . in this approach ,
the modules are completely independent in force - controlled experiments because these langevin equations completely neglect the spatial structure of the chain .
while this simplifying assumption poses no problem for the characterization of the force - extension curves in @xcite , it is not suited for the investigation of the unfolding pathway , in which the spatial structure plays an essential role .
the spatial structure of biomolecules can be described in quite a realistic way by using a model proposed by hummer and szabo several years ago to investigate their stretching @xcite , but the simplified picture which follows from figure [ fig:1 ] makes an analytical approach feasible .
now , we turn to look into the unfolding pathway of this system . as
the evolution equations are stochastic , this pathway may vary from one trajectory of the dynamics to another .
nevertheless , in many experiments @xcite it is observed that there is a quite well - defined pathway , which suggests that thermal fluctuations do not play an important role in determining it .
physically , this means that the free energy barrier separating the unfolded and folded conformations at coexistence ( that is , at the critical force , see below ) is expected to be much larger than the typical energy @xmath32 for thermal fluctuations .
therefore , we expect the thermal noise terms in our langevin equations to be negligible and , consequently , they will be dropped in the remainder of the theoretical approach developed in the paper .
of course , if the unfolding barrier for a given biomolecule were only a few @xmath32s , the thermal noise terms in the langevin equations could not be neglected and our theoretical approach would have to be changed .    in order to undertake a theoretical analysis of the stretching dynamics ,
one further simplification of the problem will be introduced .
we consider that the device controlling the length is perfectly stiff , and the total length @xmath33 does not fluctuate for all times .
we expect this assumption to have little impact on the unfolding pathway : otherwise , the latter would be more a property of the length - control device than of the chain .
in fact , we show in section [ sec : numerics ] that the unfolding order is not affected by this simplification . for perfect length - control ,
the mathematical problem is identical to that of the force - control situation , but now the force @xmath7 is an unknown ( lagrange multiplier ) that must be calculated at the end by imposing the constraint @xmath34 .
therefore , the extensions @xmath35 s obey the deterministic equations    [ eq:7 ] @xmath36    we have introduced the pulling speed @xmath37 which is usually time independent .
we assume that @xmath22 allows for bistability in a certain range of the external force @xmath7 , in the sense that @xmath38 @xmath39 is a double - well potential with two minima , see figure [ fig:2 ] .
therefore , in that force range , each unit may be either folded , if @xmath9 is in the well corresponding to the minimum with the smallest extension , or unfolded , when @xmath9 belongs to the well with the largest extension .
if the length is kept constant ( @xmath40 ) , there is an equilibrium solution of , @xmath41 and @xmath42 is calculated with the constraint @xmath43 .
this solution is stable as long as @xmath44 for all @xmath8 .    if all the units are identical , @xmath45 , the metastability regions of each module ( the range of forces for which the equation @xmath46 has several solutions ) coincide .
therefore , we obtain stationary branches corresponding to @xmath47 unfolded units and @xmath48 folded units that have been analyzed in detail in @xcite . if all the modules are not identical , the metastability regions do not perfectly overlap since the units are not equally strong : the weakest one is that for which the equation @xmath46 ceases to have multiple solutions for a smaller force value .
it is important to note that we can change all the forces @xmath49 to @xmath50 and @xmath7 to @xmath51 , we have the same system but with @xmath52 and @xmath53 instead of @xmath54 and @xmath7 , respectively .
then , we may use the free energies for any common value of the force @xmath55 and interpret the lagrange multiplier as the excess force from this value to be applied to the system . a constant force only shifts the equilibrium point of a harmonic oscillator : @xmath56 must be substituted by @xmath57 . ] .
let us consider the pulling of our system .
we write the @xmath8-th - unit free energy as @xmath58 in which @xmath59 is the `` main '' part , common to all the units , and @xmath60 represents the separation from this main contribution . if all the units are perfectly identical , @xmath61 for all @xmath8 or , equivalently , @xmath62 . in principle , in an actual experiment , the splitting of the free energy in can be done if the free energy @xmath63 of each unit is known : we may define the common part as the `` average '' free energy over all the units , @xmath64 , and @xmath65 . from a physical point of view , the dimensionless parameter @xmath66 measures the importance of the heterogeneity in the free energies .
our theory could be applied to a situation in which the free energy deviations @xmath67 were stochastic and followed a certain probability distribution , for instance to represent the slight differences among very similar units , as done in @xcite to analyze the force - extension curves . in particular , the forces @xmath68 in the evolution equations can also be split as @xmath69    as already noted above , we can use the free energies for any common value of the force @xmath55 , and interpret @xmath7 as the extra applied force from this value . in what follows
, we consider @xmath59 with two , equally deep , minima corresponding to the folded ( f ) and unfolded ( u ) configurations .
figure [ fig:2 ] presents a qualitative picture of the free energy and its derivative .
the two minima correspond to lengths @xmath70 and @xmath71 , with @xmath72 .
also the point @xmath73 at which @xmath74 is marked .
it is the condition @xmath75 that essentially determines the stability threshold , as it provides the limit force @xmath76 at which the folded basin ceases to exist for the `` main '' potential . in the deterministic approximation considered here ,
thermal fluctuations are neglected and , for @xmath77 , the folded unit can not jump over the free energy barrier hindering its unfolding : it has to wait until , at @xmath78 , the only possible extension is that of the unfolded basin . of course , neglecting thermal noise restricts in some way the range of applicability of our results , see section  [ sec : critical_speed ] for a more detailed discussion and also the numerical section [ sec : numerics ] .    keeping the above discussion in mind
, now we analyze the limit of stability of the different units .
the asymmetry correction @xmath79 shifts the threshold force for the different units .
the extension @xmath80 at which the @xmath8-th unit loses its stability is obtained by solving the equation @xmath81 , which linearized in both the displacement @xmath82 and @xmath83 reads @xmath84 noting that @xmath75 , we get that @xmath85 see [ apa ] for details .
the corresponding force is @xmath86 in which we have also dropped terms of the order of @xmath87 .
then , units with @xmath88 ( @xmath89 ) are weaker ( stronger ) than average .    when the system is continuously pulled , the total length of the system @xmath5 has been shown to be a good reaction coordinate @xcite .
therefore , on physical grounds it is reasonable to use @xmath5 to measure time and write the evolution equations as    [ eq:11 ] @xmath90 , \\
\fl   \gamma v_{p } \frac{d x_{i}}{dl }   =   -2u'(x_{i})+u'(x_{i+1 } ) + u'(x_{i-1 } )       + \xi[-2{\delta\ !
f}_{i}(x_{i})+{\delta\ ! f}_{i+1}(x_{i+1})+\delta     f_{i-1}(x_{i-1 } ) ] , \nonumber \\
\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad\qquad 1<i < n , \\
\fl   \gamma v_{p } \frac{d x_{n}}{dl }   =   -2u'(x_{n})+u'(x_{n-1})+f + \xi[-2\delta    f_{n}(x_{n } )    + { \delta\ ! f}_{n-1}(x_{n-1 } ) ] , \\
\fl   f = \gamma v_{p}+u'(x_{n})+\xi\,{\delta\ ! f}_{n}(x_{n } ) .    \end{aligned}\ ] ]    moreover , this change of variable makes the pulling speed @xmath1 appear explicitly in the equations , allowing us to consider @xmath1 as a perturbation parameter for slow enough pulling processes .
now , we consider a system in which the asymmetry in the free energies is small and which is slowly pulled .
thus , is solved by means of a perturbative expansion in powers of the pulling velocity @xmath1 and the disorder parameter @xmath83 , that is ,    [ eq:12 ] @xmath91 @xmath92    up to the linear order in both @xmath1 and @xmath83 .
the zero - th ( lowest ) order corresponds to the chain of identical units ( @xmath93 ) with a given constant length @xmath5 ( @xmath40 ) .
namely , @xmath94 and @xmath95 obey the equations    [ eq:13 ] @xmath96    the solution of this system is straightforward , @xmath97 the force is equally distributed among all the units of the chain in equilibrium , as expected .
if we start the pulling process from a configuration in which all the units are folded and the force is outside the metastability region ( the usual situation ) , the units extensions and the applied force are @xmath98 to the lowest order .
to calculate the linear corrections in @xmath83 and @xmath1 , we have to substitute and into , and equate terms proportional to @xmath83 and @xmath1 , respectively .
this is done below in two separate sections : firstly , for the asymmetry contribution @xmath99 and , secondly , for the `` kinetic '' contribution @xmath100 .
all the modules are not characterized by the same free energy , and here we calculate the first order correction introduced thereby . the asymmetry corrections @xmath101 obey the system of equations    [ eq:18 ] @xmath102    which is linear in the @xmath101 s , and thus can be analytically solved .
it is clear that our expansion breaks down when @xmath103 .
this was to be expected , since we know that the stationary branch with all the modules folded is unstable when @xmath104 becomes negative for some unit @xmath8 , and to the lowest order this takes place when @xmath103 .
the solution of the above system of difference equations is obtained by standard methods @xcite , with the result @xmath105 see [ ap1 ] for more details .
interestingly , the force is homogeneous across the chain , since to first order in @xmath83 we have that @xmath106   =   u'(\ell)+\xi   \overline{{\delta\ ! f}}(\ell)=f^{(0)}+\xi \delta f. \label{eq:20}\ ] ] this is nothing but the stationary solution , up to first order in the disorder s , no correction for the lagrange multiplier ( applied force ) would appear to the first order .
this is logical , up to the first order the force expression coincides with the spatial derivative of the average potential , that is , @xmath107 . ] .
moreover , ( [ eq:19 ] ) implies that there are units with @xmath108 and others with @xmath109 , depending on the sign of @xmath110 .
this is a consequence of our perturbation expansion , since @xmath111 for all times , as given by ( [ eq:14 ] ) , and thus @xmath112 .
let us remember that we denote by @xmath73 the value of the extension at which the common main free energy reaches its limit of stability , see figure [ fig:2 ] .
taking into account only the asymmetry correction , it is the weakest unit that unfolds first , since the most negative @xmath113 leads to the largest positive @xmath101 and then it is the one that first verifies the condition @xmath114 ( for a more detailed discussion , see [ apa ] ) . an alternative way of looking at this is to recall that the force corresponding to the limit of stability is smallest for the weakest unit : since the force is homogeneously distributed along the chain , it is the weakest module that first reaches its stability threshold .
now we look into the `` kinetic '' correction due to the finite pulling speed @xmath1 .
the zero - th order solution is given by , so that @xmath115 for all @xmath8 , and we have    [ eq:21 ] @xmath116 , \\
\delta f   =   \gamma + u''(\ell)\delta x_{n}.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    the solution to this system of linear difference equations @xcite is    [ eq:22 ] @xmath117,\\ \label{eq:22b } \delta f=\frac{(n+1)(2n+1)\gamma}{6n}.\end{aligned}\ ] ]    see [ ap1 ] for more details .
again , @xmath118 because the zero - th order solution ( [ eq:14 ] ) gives the total length , @xmath111 for all times .
is reasonable on intuitive grounds : the kinetic correction @xmath100 increases with @xmath8 because the last module is the one that is actually pulled .
therefore , on the basis of only the kinetic correction , it is the last module that would unfold first because @xmath119 is the largest .
thus , the condition @xmath120 is first verified for @xmath121 .
it is interesting to note that the force was equally distributed for the asymmetry correction , as expressed by , but this is no longer true if we incorporate the kinetic correction .
up to the the first order , @xmath122 .
therefore , the force @xmath49 depends on the unit @xmath8 : for all times , it is smaller the further from the pulled unit we are .
again , there is an alternative way of understanding why the last unit would unfold first if we were considering perfectly identical units ( @xmath93 ) : for any time , it would be the last unit that suffered the largest force and thus the first that reached their common limit of stability @xmath123 .
if the last unit is not the weakest , there is a competition between the asymmetry and the kinetic corrections .
for very low pulling speeds , in the sense that @xmath124 , the term proportional to @xmath1 can be neglected and it is the weakest unit ( the one with the largest @xmath101 ) that unfolds first , as discussed in section [ sec : asymmetry ] . on the other hand , for very small disorder , in the sense that @xmath125 , the term proportional to @xmath83 is the one to be neglected and
it is the last unit ( the one with the largest @xmath100 ) that unfolds first , as also discussed in section [ sec : pulling_speed ] .
therefore , different unfolding pathways are expected as the pulling speed changes .    collecting all the contributions to the extensions
, we have that @xmath126 we have rearranged the terms in @xmath9 in such a way that the first two terms on the rhs are independent of the unit @xmath8 , all the dependence of the length of the module on its position across the chain has been included in the last term .
note that we are expanding the solution in powers of @xmath1 around the `` static '' solution , which is obtained by putting @xmath40 in .
thus , the `` static '' solution corresponds to the stationary one the system would reach if we kept the total length constant and equal to its instantaneous value at the considered time .
it is essential to realise that is only valid for very slow pulling , as long as the corrections to the `` static '' solution are small , and this is the reason why the limit of stability is basically unchanged as compared to the static case . in order to be more precise
, we refer to this kind of very slow pulling as _
adiabatic _ pulling .
a main result of our paper is that , even for the case of adiabatic pulling , there appear different unfolding pathways depending on the value of the pulling speed .    in the adiabatic limit we are considering here
, the pulling process has to be slow enough to make the system move very close to the stationary force - length branches , but not so slow that the system has enough time to escape from the folded basin .
as discussed in @xcite , there is an interplay between the pulling velocity and thermal fluctuations .
for very slow pulling velocities , the system has enough time to surpass the energy barrier separating the two minima , which leads to the typical logarithmic dependence of the `` unfolding force '' @xmath127 on the pulling speed , specifically @xmath128 @xcite .
is of the order of unity , its particular value depends on the specific shape of the potential ( linear - cubic , cuspid - like , ... ) considered @xcite . ] on the other hand , as already argued at the beginning of section [ sec : real_chain ] , for _ adiabatic pulling _ , the units unfold not because they are able to surpass the free energy barrier but because the folded state ceases to exist at the force @xmath123 corresponding to the upper limit of the metastability region .
the unit that unfolds first is the one for which @xmath129 for the shortest time . in light of the above ,
it is natural to investigate whether it is possible to determine which module is the first to unfold for a given pulling speed . to put it another way
, we would like to calculate the `` critical '' velocities which separate the velocity intervals in which a specific module unfolds first .
let us assume that , for a given pulling speed @xmath1 , it is the @xmath8-th module that unfolds first .
all the modules @xmath130 to its left , that is , with @xmath131 , will not open first if the pulling velocity is further increased because the difference between the kinetic corrections @xmath132 increases with @xmath1 .
therefore , the first module @xmath130 to unfold when the velocity is sufficiently increased it is always to its right .
the velocity @xmath133 for which each couple of modules @xmath134 , @xmath135 , reach simultaneously the stability threshold is determined by the condition @xmath136 determines both the value of @xmath137 ( or time @xmath138 ) at which the stability threshold is reached and the relationship between @xmath1 and @xmath83 . implies that @xmath139 we already know that the length corresponding to the limit of stability is very close to the threshold length @xmath73 , its distance thereto being of the order of @xmath140 , as shown in [ apa ] .
therefore , to the lowest order , @xmath137 can be approximated by @xmath73 , and we get @xmath141}{j(j-1)-i(i-1 ) } , \quad j > i.\ ] ] clearly , the minimum of these velocities is the one that matters : let us denote by @xmath142 the position of the module for which @xmath133 reaches its minimum value @xmath143 , @xmath144 for @xmath1 just below @xmath143 , it is the @xmath8-th module that unfolds first , but for @xmath1 just above @xmath143 , it is the @xmath130-th module that unfolds first .
let us denote the weakest module by @xmath145 , that is , @xmath146 is smallest for @xmath147 .
if @xmath148 is smaller than @xmath149 , the first unit to reach the stability limit is the weakest one .
then , we rename the latter velocity @xmath150 , that is , @xmath151 because it is the first one of a ( possible ) series of critical velocities separating different unfolding pathways , see below .
let us denote by @xmath152 the module which unfolds first in the `` second '' velocity region , @xmath1 just above @xmath153 , that is , @xmath154 .
this unit ceases to be the first to unfold for the velocity @xmath155 the successive changes on the unfolding pathway take place at the critical velocities @xmath156 in which @xmath157 .
this succession ends when @xmath158 : in that case , for @xmath159 , the first unit to unfold is always the pulled one .
this upper critical velocity @xmath160 can be computed in a more direct way , @xmath161 consistency of the theory requires that @xmath162 ; a short proof is presented in [ apb ] .
we have a trivial case for @xmath163 , when the pulled unit is precisely the weakest and it is always the first to unfold for any pulling speed .
the simplest nontrivial case appears when all the modules has the same free - energy with the exception of the weakest , and @xmath164 , , and reduce to @xmath165}{n(n-1)-\alpha_{1}(\alpha_{1}-1)}.\ ] ] note that the situation is quite simple , since there exist a single critical velocity @xmath166 . for @xmath167 the weakest module
unfolds first whereas for @xmath168 the last one unfolds first . in general , when the units have different free energies the situation may be more complex , as shown in the previous paragraph .
there appear intermediate critical velocities , which define pulling speed windows where neither the weakest unit nor the last one is the first to unfold . in order to obtain these regions
, we need to recursively evaluate .
throughout this numerical section , we check the agreement between our theory and the numerical integration of the evolution equations .
firstly , we discuss the validity of the simplifications introduced in the development of the theory , namely ( i ) negligible thermal noise and ( ii ) perfect length - control .
secondly , we look into the critical pulling speed , showing that there appears such a critical speed in the simulations and comparing this numerical value to the theory developed before .
we consider a system composed of @xmath169 unfoldons , such as the maltose binding protein @xcite , each one characterized by a quartic bistable free energy . in reduced variables ,
the free energies have the form @xmath170 , where @xmath171^{2},\ ] ] with @xmath172 for @xmath173 , @xmath174 , @xmath175 and @xmath176 is different from the one in @xcite ( @xmath177 ) .
its only effect is a shift of the origin of the extensions , our choice implies that a positive ( negative ) sign of the extension corresponds to an unfolded ( folded ) configuration . ] .
the value of the friction coefficient is , also in reduced variables , @xmath178 .
we use these dimensionless reduced variables in order to make it easier to compare our results to those in @xcite .
the function is one of the simplest , but reasonable , choice to describe the free energy of different unfoldons of the same protein domain . using our notation
, we have @xmath179 with @xmath180 . and
give us the limits of stability up to first order in the asymmetry @xmath83 , @xmath181 for this simple example , is exact .
the weakest unit is the first one , because @xmath182 is the minimum value of the force at the limit of stability .
for the values of the parameters we are using , @xmath183 and @xmath184 .
since we are writing the free energies for a common given value of the force , we are assuming that all the units have their two minima equally deep at the same force .
this assumption is made to keep things simple : the main ingredient for having an unfolding pathway that depends on the pulling speed is to have different values of the forces @xmath185 at the stability threshold for the different units .    in the case we are considering
, the weakest unit is the first one , while the others share the same free energy .
this means that we have the simplest scenario for the critical velocity in our theoretical approach : it is always the weakest ( for @xmath3 ) or the last ( for @xmath4 ) unit that opens first , as discussed at the end of the previous section . here ,
( [ eq:26a ] ) for @xmath186 and @xmath169 reduces to @xmath187     evolution of the extensions of the different units in a pulling experiment as a function of the length of the system @xmath25 .
the pulling speed is @xmath188 and the length - control device has a stiffness @xmath189 .
the symbols correspond to a typical realization of the langevin process with @xmath190 , whereas the lines correspond to the deterministic ( zero noise ) approximation .
, scaledwidth=70.0% ]    to start with , we consider the relevance of the noise terms in . in figure
[ fig:3 ] , we plot the integration of the langevin equations together with the deterministic approximation @xcite for a concrete case : the free energy of the first unit corresponds to @xmath191 ( @xmath192 ) , the stiffness of the device controlling the length is @xmath189 , the temperature is @xmath190 and the pulling speed is @xmath188 . for these values of the parameters , taken from @xcite ,
the critical velocity in is @xmath193 , so we are considering a subcritical velocity , @xmath3 .
thermal fluctuations are small , and thus the same unfolding pathway is observed in the deterministic and the majority of the stochastic trajectories .
trajectories , for a subcritical pulling speed @xmath194 .
( right ) the same as in the left panel , but for a supercritical pulling speed @xmath195 . as the temperature decreases , the frequency of the deterministic unfolding pathway approaches unity in both cases.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]   trajectories , for a subcritical pulling speed @xmath194 .
( right ) the same as in the left panel , but for a supercritical pulling speed @xmath195 .
as the temperature decreases , the frequency of the deterministic unfolding pathway approaches unity in both cases.,title="fig:",scaledwidth=49.0% ]    let us consider in more detail the relevance of thermal noise : from a physical point of view , it may be inferred by looking at the height of the free energy barrier at the critical force in terms of the thermal energy @xmath32 . for the values of the parameters we are using , this barrier is around @xmath196 in reduced units .
this explains why thermal noise is basically negligible in figure [ fig:3 ] , in which @xmath190 .
if the temperature is decreased to @xmath197 , the barrier is so high , around @xmath198 times the thermal energy , that essentially all the stochastic trajectories coincide with the deterministic one . on the other hand , if the temperature is increased to @xmath199 , the barrier in only a few , around @xmath200 , times the thermal energy , and we expect that the deterministic approximation ceases to be valid . in order to further clarify this point , we present figure  [ fig : new ] .
both panels display bar graphs with the frequencies with which each unit unfolds first in the stochastic trajectories obtained over @xmath201 trajectories of the langevin equations with perfect length control and different values of the temperature . in the left panel ,
a subcritical velocity @xmath194 is considered , so that the weakest ( first ) unit is expected to unfold first . in the right panel ,
the numerical data for a supercritical velocity @xmath195 are shown , for which the pulled ( fourth ) unit would unfold first .
the effect of thermal noise is quite similar in both cases . for the low temperature @xmath197 ,
the frequency of the deterministic pathway is close to unity and , for the temperature in figure  [ fig:3 ] , @xmath190 , its frequency is still very large , clearly larger than any of the others . on the other hand , for the higher value of the temperature , @xmath199 , thermal noise can no longer be neglected .    in the following ,
we restrict the analysis to the physically relevant case in which the deterministic approximation gives a good description of the first unfolding event . in figure [ fig:4 ] (
left panel ) , we look into the same pulling experiment as before , but now we compare the deterministic evolution of the extensions for two finite values of the stiffness to the @xmath29 limit . consistently with our expectations , the unfolding pathway is not affected by this simplification .
nevertheless , the control of the length of course improves as @xmath28 increases ( see right panel ) .
although for the smaller values of @xmath28 the length is not perfectly controlled , the curves in the left panel , which correspond to different values of @xmath28 , are almost perfectly superimposed when plotted as a function of the real length of the system @xmath25 ( but not of the desired length @xmath5 ) .
this means that the real length @xmath25 is a good reaction coordinate , as already said in section [ sec : real_chain ] .
we have integrated the deterministic approximation ( zero noise ) of the langevin equations for different values of the pulling speed , and extracted from them the numerical value of the critical velocity as a function of the asymmetry @xmath202 . in order to obtain this numerical prediction
, we initially set @xmath1 equal to the theoretical critical velocity given by .
then , we recursively shift it by a small amount @xmath203 , such that @xmath204 , until the pathway changes .
we compare the values so obtained to the theoretical expression , in figure [ fig:5 ] .
we find an excellent agreement for @xmath205 , for @xmath206 there appears some quantitative discrepancies .
these discrepancies stem from two points : ( i ) the perturbative expansion used for obtaining from and ( ii ) the intrinsically approximate character of , since @xmath73 gives rigorously the limit of stability only for the static case @xmath40 .
therefore , we have looked for the solution of in the numerical integration of the deterministic equations .
this is the dashed line in figure [ fig:5 ] , which substantially improves the agreement between theory and numerics because we have eliminated the deviations arising from point ( i ) above .
in fact , for the case we have studied in the previous figures , which corresponds to a not so small asymmetry @xmath192 , the improved theory gives an almost perfect prediction for the critical velocity .
now we consider a more realistic potential for the units , which has been introduced by berkovich et al .  for modelling the unfolding of single - unit i27 and ubiquitin proteins in afm experiments @xcite
moreover , it has also been used to investigate the stepwise unfolding of polyproteins in force - clamp conditions @xcite and their force - extension curves in @xcite . at zero force
, it reads @xmath207 + \frac{k_btl_c}{4p}\left(\frac{1}{1-\frac{x}{l_c}}-1-\frac{x}{l_c } + \frac{2x^2}{l_c^2}\right ) ,   \label{eq : berkovich}\ ] ] that is , it is the sum of a morse and a worm - like - chain potentials , representing the enthalpic and the entropic contributions to the free energy , respectively @xcite .
we take the values of the parameters from @xcite , @xmath208 nm ( persistence length ) , @xmath209 nm ( contour length ) , @xmath210k , @xmath211pn nm(@xmath212 ) , @xmath213 nm , @xmath214 .
we measure force and extensions in the units @xmath215=100 $ ] pn , @xmath209 nm , respectively .
accordingly , dimensionless variables are introduced with the definitions @xmath216)$ ] , @xmath217 , @xmath218 , @xmath219 .
thus , a dimensionless potential is obtained , which reads @xmath220 ^ 2 - 1   + a\!\left(\frac{1}{1-x}-1-x+2x^2\right ) \right\ } ,     \label{eq : berk - dimless}\ ] ] note that , in order not to clutter our formulae , we have not introduced a different notation for the dimensionless potential .
the values of the parameters therein are @xmath221 , @xmath222 , @xmath223 and @xmath224 . in dimensionless variables , @xmath225 ( @xmath226pn ) and @xmath227 ( @xmath228 nm ) .
the relevant time scale is set by the friction coefficient @xmath17 ,
@xmath229= \gamma l_c/[f]$ ] . in turn
, @xmath17 is given by the einstein relation @xmath230 , where @xmath231 is the diffusion coefficient for tethered proteins in solution .
we consider a typical value of @xmath231 , also taken from @xcite , @xmath232 nm@xmath233/s , so that @xmath234pn nm@xmath235 s.    we consider a system of @xmath236 units , again with all the units but the first being identical
. then , @xmath61 , @xmath173 , and the first unit is the weakest because @xmath237 .
the situation is then similar to the one we have already analyzed with the quartic potential , but there is a difference that should be noted : here , @xmath59 is the free energy at zero force , whereas for the quartic potential @xmath59 was the free energy at a force @xmath55 for which the folded and unfolded minima were equally deep .
then , the force here must not be interpreted as the extra force from @xmath55 , but as the whole force that is applied to the polyprotein . on the basis of our theory
, we expect the simplest situation with only one critical velocity @xmath2 , below ( above ) which the weakest unit ( the pulled unit ) unfolds first .
this is also indeed the case in the numerical simulations , and we compare the theoretical and numerical critical velocities in figure [ fig:6 ] .
a very good agreement is found again , up to values of the asymmetry @xmath83 of the order @xmath238 .
the above discussion shows that the validity of the theory presented here is not restricted to simple potentials like the quartic one ; on the contrary , it can be confidently applied to experiments in which the units are described by realistic potentials .
moreover , for the typical parameters we are using , the theoretical critical velocity @xmath2 for the berkovich potential equals @xmath239nm / s for an asymmetry @xmath240 , which can be regarded as quite a conservative estimate of the largest asymmetries for which our theory gives an almost perfect description of the unfolding pathway .
interestingly , this pulling speed corresponds to the upper range of velocities usually employed in afm experiments , for instance see table i of @xcite . therefore ,
testing our theory in real afm experiments with modular proteins should be achievable .
finally , we consider a more complex situation , in which more than one unit is different from the rest and there may exist more than one critical velocity . to be concrete ,
we have considered a system with @xmath236 units in which @xmath241 , @xmath237 as before but @xmath242 , with @xmath59 being the quartic potential in . in this situation , we have two different critical velocities : for very low pulling speeds , the weakest unit is the first to unfold , but there appears a velocity window inside which neither the weakest nor the pulled unit is the first to unfold .
this stems from the fact that the first and the third unit reach simultaneously the limit of stability for a velocity @xmath243 that is smaller than the velocity @xmath244 for which the first and the last would do so .
the physical reason behind this is the threshold force of the pulled unit being larger enough than that of the third one .
we recall that @xmath133 is the velocity for which the @xmath8-th and the @xmath130-th unit reach simultaneously their limits of stability .
afterwards , the third unit and the fourth attain the limit of stability in unison for a velocity @xmath245 , and the following picture emerges from our theory . using the notation introduced in section [ sec : critical_speed ] , we define two critical velocities , @xmath246 such that for @xmath247 , it is the weakest unit that unfolds first , for @xmath248 , it is the third unit that unfolds first , and , finally , for @xmath249 , the first unit to unfold is the pulled one .
we check the more complex scenario described in the previous paragraph in figure [ fig:7 ] .
therein , we observe that ( i ) our theory correctly predicts the existence of the three pulling regimes described above but ( ii ) even for very small asymmetries , there appear some noticeable discrepancy between theory and simulation . since the validity of the perturbative expansion for obtaining the critical velocities from the condition ( [ eq : stab ] )
is strongly supported by the accurateness of the theoretical prediction for the simplest case , see figures [ fig:5 ] and [ fig:6 ] , this discrepancy should stem from the intrinsically approximate character of the condition @xmath250 for determining the stability threshold when @xmath251 .
therefore , an improvement of the present theory should involve the derivation of a more accurate condition for obtaining the stability threshold in the case of finite pulling velocity .
this point , which probably makes a multiple scale analysis necessary for lengths close to the condition @xmath252 , certainly deserves further investigation .     and @xmath253 as a function of the asymmetry @xmath83 . in this case , our theoretical approach is able to reproduce the existence of the three different pulling regimes , but the discrepancies between the theoretical and the numerical values for the critical velocities are larger than in the simpler cases considered in the previous figures.,scaledwidth=70.0% ]
we have investigated the general properties of the unfolding pathway in pulled proteins by means of a simple model portraying the chain as a sequence of nonlinear modules .
the deterministic approximation of the langevin equations controlling the time evolution of the units extensions is used therein .
this is a sensible approach in our model system : note that the free energies characterising the different units are considered to be very similar , and therefore their kramers rates for thermal activated unfolding would also be very close .
then , were thermal effects important , our unfolding trajectories would be essentially stochastic and we would not observe a specific unfolding pathway .    nevertheless , in some recent optical tweezers experiments in which thermal fluctuations are relevant , definite pathways have also been observed .
although trajectories are indeed stochastic , the pathway is well - characterised @xcite .
therefore , the analysis of these experiments needs a more sophisticated theory , which takes into account thermal noise effects .
moreover , it seems that there are other elements that should be incorporated , such as ( i ) the possible coupling between the different units and ( ii ) their dissimilar free energies .
for example , the former may explain the existence of _ dead ends _ observed in  @xcite , that is , intermediate states that do not allow the system to completely relax , whereas the latter may lead to kramers rates leading to the separation of the timescales for the different unfolding events .
the equilibrium extensions of the units are governed by different free energies , which we have called asymmetry or disorder in the free energies .
our theory , based on stability considerations , is able to explain the experimental observations : ( i ) for low pulling speeds , it is the weakest unit that unfolds first , ( ii ) for large enough pulling speed , it is the pulled unit that opens first .
this has been done by introducing a perturbative expansion both in the asymmetry of the free energies and in the pulling speed . moreover , our approach makes it possible to identify a critical rate that separates two well - defined regimes . to the lowest order ,
this critical velocity has a linear dependence on the asymmetry of the potential . in spite of the crude approximations ,
our theory compares quite well with the numerical data even beyond the applicability regime .
moreover , our results provide a guide to interpret some inversions observed in the sequence of unfolding of the stable regions of the maltose - binding protein during its mechanical denaturation @xcite .
it must be stressed that to the lowest order in our theory , the system is sweeping the stationary branches of the force - extension curve . in this sense , the pulling process is very slow or _
adiabatic_. despite this adiabatic nature of the pulling process , it is not always the weakest unit to unfold first . as long as the pulling speed @xmath251 ,
the closer to the pulled terminal one unit is , the larger the force acting on it .
this gradient in the distribution of the force across the protein , which increases with the pulling speed , makes it possible that the last unit reaches first its limit of stability .
we have limited ourselves to the investigation of the first unfolding event . however , our argument can be easily generalized to the next unfolding event : the difference is that the zero - th order approximation is no longer given by all the units sweeping the all - units - folded branch but by the sweeping of the branch with one module unfolded and the remainder folded .
then , a similar perturbative expansion around this zero - th order solution in powers of the asymmetry and the pulling speed would give the next unit that opens .
if the biomolecule comprises several perfectly identical units , the asymmetry correction vanishes , because @xmath254 ( and thus @xmath255 ) for all the units . in that case
, our theory predicts that it is always the pulled unit that unfolds first .
however , even in engineered modular proteins , slight differences from module to module may be present .
in fact , this has lead to the analysis of the impact of quenched disorder in the force - extension curves of biomolecules @xcite . in the present context
, we may also introduce stochastic free energy deviations , following a certain probability distribution .
next , our theoretical approach can be applied to this system with quenched disorder in the free energies .
interestingly , evidence of dynamical disorder , that is , a fluctuating environment , has been recently brought to bear in stretching experiments @xcite .
the analysis of this situation needs a more complex theory , in which the free energy landscape fluctuates in time , and is outside of the scope of the present paper .
there are methods that extract the free energy landscape from experimental data of pulling experiments , even when there are intermediates @xcite .
the resulting free energy is usually calculated as a function of the end - to - end distance of the molecule . nevertheless , in order to apply our theory , we do not need this global energy landscape as a function of the end - to - distance of the molecule but each unit s contribution thereto as a function of its own extension . in this regard , it is relevant to note that a similar velocity dependent unfolding pathway should also be found in modular proteins , although it has not been experimentally investigated to the best of our knowledge .
in fact , we have analyzed a simple polyprotein model with a realistic potential , and observed a completely analogous behaviour .
when all the modules are not identical , the weakest one will always open first for small enough pulling velocities . on the other hand , if the pulled unit is not the weakest , this will no longer be the case as the pulling speed is increased .
since the free energy of each module is experimentally accessible and the critical velocity lies on the experimental range , a reliable test of our theory could be done in modular proteins .
another possibility that deserves attention is to test our theory in ankyrin repeat proteins . in @xcite ,
the unfolding of a consensus ankyrin repeat protein , ni6c , has been investigated .
this protein is composed of eight repeats : the two capping repeats are different from the six identical central ones , that at the c - terminus ( n - terminus ) is weaker ( stronger ) than the rest . pulling from the c - terminus ( weakest unit ) ,
lee et al .
observe that the unfolding always starts from this end .
this is what is expected from our theory , since when the pulled and the weakest units coincide , there is no competition between the asymmetry and kinetic terms .
therefore , it seems relevant to carry out the same experiment but pulling from the n - terminus ( strongest unit ) , in which a much richer phenomenology is to be expected .
very recently , sequential unfolding has been reported in a simple model @xcite , which makes it possible to understand the stepwise unfolding observed in force - clamp experiments with modular proteins @xcite .
this sequential unfolding appeared as a consequence of a depinning transition near the stability threshold introduced by the coupling between nearest neighbour units .
interestingly , the unfolding of the ankyrin repeat protein in @xcite does not only start from a well - defined end but it is also sequential , which may hint at the significance of this kind of short - ranged couplings in the experiment .
then , it seems also relevant to analyze whether a similar sequential unfolding is present in the model developed here , when a similar short ranged interaction between neighbouring units is considered .
this work has been supported by the spanish ministerio de economa y competitividad grant fis2011 - 24460 ( ap ) .
cap acknowledges support by a phd fellowship from fundacin cmara ( universidad de sevilla ) .
to first order in @xmath83 , the extension @xmath80 such that @xmath256 verifies @xmath257 that is , @xmath258 the corresponding force at the stability threshold is obtained from . to the lowest order in the deviations , @xmath259 because the next term , @xmath260 , is of the order of @xmath87 .
therefore , the @xmath8-th module reaches its limit of stability at the time for which @xmath261 , that is , when the length per unit @xmath262 has the value @xmath263 verifying @xmath264 or , equivalently , @xmath265 we know that @xmath266 when @xmath267 . but @xmath74 and thus we can not substitute @xmath73 on the rhs of . on the other hand , this means that the dominant balance for @xmath267 involves the lhs and the first term on the rhs of . therefore , making use of @xmath268 , we get @xmath269 since @xmath270 ( see figure [ fig:2 ] ) , this means that only the units with @xmath146 smaller than the average ( that is , weaker than average ) reach the limit of stability in the limit as @xmath271 .
in fact , it is the weakest unit , that is , the unit with smallest @xmath146 , that unfolds first .
it is interesting to note that , in order to obtain , we have completely neglected the last term on the rhs of . since , in turn , this term stems from the last term on the rhs of , to the lowest order we are solving the equation @xmath129 .
in other words , to the lowest order the stability threshold can be considered to be given by the non - disordered , zero - asymmetry case , free energy @xmath59 . for the sake of concreteness and simplicity , we have stuck to the asymmetry contribution @xmath101 in this appendix , but the same condition @xmath129 would still be valid , had we taken into account the kinetic contribution @xmath100 derived in section [ sec : pulling_speed ] .
the reason is that there is also a factor @xmath272 in the denominator of @xmath100 , see , and thus both the terms coming from @xmath101 and @xmath100 are dominant against the last term on the rhs of .
in this appendix , we briefly discuss a general procedure which is useful to solve linear difference equations similar to those in and .
the methods for solving difference equations often resemble those used for solving analogous differential equations ; the latter may be thought of as the continuous limit of the former . both and belong to the following general class of second - order linear difference equations for @xmath273 ,    [ eq : b1 ] @xmath274    in which @xmath275 , @xmath276 are arbitrary functions and @xmath277 is a given constant .
( [ eq : b1b ] ) is a second - order linear difference equation , and ( [ eq : b1a ] ) and ( [ eq : b1c ] ) are its boundary conditions .
it may be thought of as a discrete inhomogeneous diffusion equation : @xmath278 is the first discrete derivative , so that @xmath279 is the second discrete derivative @xcite . in complete analogy with the corresponding differential equation @xmath280 ,
the general solution of ( [ eq : b1b ] ) is @xmath281 in which @xmath282 and @xmath283 are two arbitrary constants .
the solution of ( [ eq : b1 ] ) is , as usual , univocally determined by the boundary conditions , from which specific values for @xmath282 and @xmath283 are obtained .
let us show that both and can be cast in the above form .
firstly , in , it is easily seen that if we define @xmath284 , ( [ eq : b1b ] ) is obtained with @xmath285 .
secondly , in , it is straightforward to identify @xmath286 and @xmath287^{-1}$ ] .
a simple calculation gives the constants @xmath282 and @xmath283 in for each case , and thus the expressions for @xmath99 and @xmath100 in the main text .
here , we prove that @xmath162 .
it is easy to show that this inequality follows if we have that @xmath288 in which @xmath289 . due to , @xmath290 minimize @xmath291 .
therefore , in particular , @xmath292 , which is readily shown to be equivalent to .
hoffmann t and dougan l , 2012 chem .
soc . rev . *
41 * , 4781 smith s b , cui y and bustamante c , 1996 science * 271 * , 795 lu h and schulten k , 1999 proteins struct . funct .
genet . * 35 * , 453 manosas m and ritort f , 2005 biophys . j. * 88 * , 3224 - 3242    cao y , kuske r and li h , 2008 biophys .
j. * 95 * , 782 carrion - vazquez m , oberhauser a f , fowler s b , marszalek p e , broedel s e , clarke j and fernandez j m , 1999 proc .
usa * 96 * , 3694 fisher t e , marszalek p e and fernandez j m , 2000 nat .
* 7 * , 719    liphardt j , onoa b , smith s b , tinoco i and bustamante c , 2001 science * 292 * , 733 bustamante c , bryant z and smith s b , 2003 nature * 421 * , 423 klimov d k and thirumalai d , 2000 proc .
usa * 97 * , 7254 hyeon c , dima r i , and thirumalai d , 2006 structure * 14 * , 1633 liphardt j , dumont s , smith s b , tinoco i and bustamante c , 2002 science * 296 * , 1832 li m s and kouza s , 2009 j.  chem .
phys .  * 130 * , 145102