Skip to main content
. 2011 Dec 27;6(12):e29225. doi: 10.1371/journal.pone.0029225

Figure 5. Comparison between Dynamic Loop Model and self-avoiding walk.

Figure 5

A. The upper conformation is a Dynamic Loop Model chromatid with Inline graphic, cutoff size Inline graphic and mean loop concentration Inline graphic. For comparison, a conformation without loops with the same chain length Inline graphic is shown below. B. For both, self-avoiding walk and Dynamic Loop Model the coarse-graining method is applied and the directional correlation is calculated. The same degree of coarse-graining is used for both models. The figure shows an exponential decay of the directional correlation function of the Dynamic Loop Model, while the the self-avoiding walk does not show this behaviour. Most importantly, the Dynamic Loop Model chromatid is much stiffer than the self-avoiding walk. This shows that the entropic repulsion of the chromatin loops that are generated by the cross-linking mechanism leads to a considerable stiffening up. Error bars represent the standard error of the sampled conformations.