Instruction: Write an abstract for the following acadamic paper.

Input:
Paper: we have recorded the flight of a fly during take off and landing using digital high speed photography . it is shown that the dynamics of flexible wings are different for these procedures . during this observation fly flew freely in a big box and it was not tethered .
Abstract: in this fluid dynamics video , we demonstrated take off and landing of a fly . the deformation of wings is in focus in this video .

Paper: progress in single molecule techniques has enabled observations of single steps in many motor proteins , and accurate measurement of the distribution of dwell times , i.e. , the periods of little or no motion between steps . examples are the forward and backward steps of processive molecular motors like kinesin @xcite , myosin v @xcite , cytoplasmic dynein @xcite or rna polymerase @xcite , and stepwise rotations in atp synthase @xcite and the flagellar motor @xcite . observations of steps and dwell time distributions offer a route to gain insight into the microscopic mechanism and detailed motion of such systems , beyond what is available through knowledge of average turnover rates alone . dwell times are examples of first passage times , which have been extensively studied in the theory of random walks @xcite . an important modeling step is therefore to formulate a first passage problem that describes the experimental situation . close examination of step trajectories with high time resolution from several motor proteins @xcite reveals that the steps are very rapid events compared to typical dwell times . in a discrete - state description , it is therefore reasonable to identify a step with a single transition , and the direction of the step with the direction of that transition @xcite . the identification of steps with single transitions follows naturally from the assumption that each state has a well - defined average position , and is a basic assumption in this paper . motor proteins are cyclic enzymes , but contrary to earlier assumptions @xcite , the steps and waiting times obtained in many single - molecule experiments are not well described in terms of the cycle completions in enzyme kinetics . this was recently demonstrated for models where a single cycle accounts for both forward and backward steps @xcite . in this case , the average number of forward and backward steps differ from the average number of completed forward and backward cycles , and the average dwell times between steps differ from the average cycle completion times . the differences can be significant even in conditions where almost no backward steps occur . the basic reason for this difference is that a motor with one or more intermediate states per cycle is in a different state immediately after forward and backward steps . therefore , an experimental trajectory of forward and backward steps does not give explicit information about completed forward and backward cycles . the different states obtained just after forward and backward steps also implies that consecutive step directions are correlated @xcite . this prediction will be confirmed in a later section , where we analyze stepping data from @xcite for a flagellar motor , and find the clear step - step correlations shown in ( b ) . in contrast , consecutive cycle completions are statistically independent @xcite . the observation that steps are correlated has important implications for the interpretation of stepping experiments , and also motivates further theoretical study of stepping statistics that goes beyond the assumption @xcite of independent steps and dwell times . in this paper , we extend the theory of @xcite in two ways . first , we consider the distributions of conditional dwell times instead of mean values . second , we consider a larger class of models , including motor detachments , substeps , and multiple pathways . our main results are a distribution symmetry for conditional dwell times , and a simple relation between the dissipated free energy per cycle , @xmath0 , and certain conditional stepping probabilities . for a large number of models relevant to describe reversible motor proteins , we get    [ mainresult ] @xmath1    here , @xmath2 and @xmath3 are the probability density functions for the conditional dwell times between two consecutive forward and backward steps respectively , @xmath4 are the corresponding integrated probability functions , @xmath5 is the probability that a forward step is followed by another forward step , and @xmath6 that a backward step is followed by another backward step . the different types of dwell times are illustrated in , and simply means that the conditional dwell times @xmath7 and @xmath8 are random variables with equal distributions . however , does not say anything about the distributions of dwell times between steps of different directions , which in general have different distributions .     could be position of a linear motor , net rotation of a rotary motor , or the net number of a substrate or product in an enzymatic reaction , and changes stepwise in steps of size @xmath9 . the staircase line is an idealized running average . ]    equation holds also at finite average velocity . for example , a forward - moving motor will take mostly forward steps , but might eventually produce two consecutive backward steps . the dwell times between such @xmath10 and @xmath11 step pairs have equal distributions , although the probability of observing two consecutive backward steps might be very small for a motor with strong forward bias .    in practice , the need to observe a significant number of @xmath10 and @xmath11 events to test or apply can be an experimental challenge . for example , atp driven motors like kinesin or myosin v typically have @xmath12 _ in vivo _ @xcite . this means that @xmath11 events are very rare ( see ) , unless an external load is applied @xcite .    to extract qualitative information out of an experimental test of dwell time symmetry , one needs a characterization of the class of models which satisfy . we try to formulate a general characterization of this class . this means that some of the models within this characterization will not be realistic descriptions of biological systems . on the other hand , a large number of candidate models can be excluded if dwell time symmetry is not observed in some system . we find two sufficient assumptions for to hold , which we call _ strong coupling _ and the _ bottleneck property_. within the discrete state modeling framework that we use , these assumptions are easy to formulate , but can also be disposed of @xcite . the bottleneck property is an assumption about the model topology . it means that both forward and backward steps correspond to transitions to or from a single state in the mechanochemical cycle , which we call the bottleneck state . this ensures that the state of the system is uniquely determined after each observed step , independent of previous step directions . the bottle - neck property alone results in a particularly simple form for the step - step correlations , given in , which can be tested experimentally . the assumption of strong coupling , defined mathematically in , is related to microscopic reversibility . physically , it means that there is no futile free energy dissipation in the mechanochemical cycle . in addition to tight coupling in the usual sense @xcite , i.e. , a one - to - one correspondence between fuel consumption and forward steps , it includes the assumption that backward steps is tightly coupled to synthesis of fuel . as a result , motors with strong coupling are effectively one - dimensional systems , in the sense that only one reaction coordinate , e.g. , position , is needed to describe their operation . strong coupling might not necessarily hold for all motors . for example , the forward steps of myosin v are tightly coupled to atp hydrolysis , while backward steps independent of atp binding was recently reported @xcite . another example is kinesin , for which atp binding during steps in both directions has been reported @xcite . on the other hand , strong coupling might be possible in some rotary motors , at least under certain conditions @xcite . several recent works @xcite use hidden markov models to estimate kinetic parameters directly from experimental trajectories , and thus in principle utilize all information in the data and bypass the difficulties associated with step detection . however , this approach does not replace the need for a theoretical understanding of the capabilities and limitations of the underlying stochastic models . our results should provide useful guidance when applying these techniques . equation corresponds to a similar result in cycle kinetics @xcite . using the symbol `` @xmath13 '' to denote cycle time properties , one has @xmath14 where @xmath15 are the probability density functions for waiting times before forward ( @xmath16 ) or backward ( @xmath17 ) cycle completions , @xmath18 are the relative frequencies of completed forward and backward cycles respectively , and @xmath19 are one - way cycle fluxes @xcite . equation is based on similar assumptions as @xcite . however , the waiting times in do not describe the experimental dwell times observed in stepping experiments on motor proteins @xcite . distinguishing between cycle completion times and dwell times results in significant differences when modeling and interpreting stepping data . one example of such a difference is the possibility to calculate @xmath0 from observations of forward and backward steps . in this case , using the cycle completion result in on stepping data can give large systematic errors in the estimated @xmath0 , which can be avoided if is used instead . a related example concerns how to interpret the ratio of observed forward and backward steps , which has been measured for kinesin over a range of forces and atp concentrations @xcite . the force dependence of this ratio can be described as roughly proportional , where @xmath20 nm is the step length , @xmath21 is the applied load , and @xmath22 is a numerical factor significantly smaller than unity . the dissipated free energy per cycle depends on applied load as @xmath23 this means that predicts @xmath24 if steps are assumed to correspond to completed cycles . in contrast , gives no general reason to even expect an exponential behavior of the ratio of forward and backward steps @xcite , and suggests that @xmath25 is a more relevant quantity to study . as mentioned above , kinesin might not satisfy strong coupling , in which case one must look at more complicated models . in any case , making the distinction between steps and completed cycles is clearly important in order to interpret the experiments correctly . the rest of the paper is organized as follows . in the next section , we sketch a derivation of our results for the models studied in refs .  @xcite . we also discuss step - step correlations . after that , we generalize our results to a broader class of models , and discuss detachments and multiple pathways in the mechanochemical cycle . we also generalize to the case of several detectable substeps . to illustrate our results , we then analyze stepping data for the flagellar motor , before the concluding discussion . detailed derivations are given in the appendices . states per cycle , @xmath26_l,[2]_l,\ldots,[n-1]_l$ ] . the model can be viewed as a biased random walk on the periodic lattice of states . numbers in brackets represent different states , and indices different cycles . state @xmath27_l$ ] denotes the same structural state as @xmath28_l\equiv [ k]_{l+1}$ ] , but with position or angular orientation @xmath29 ( for linear and rotary motors respectively ) shifted by the step length @xmath9 . arrows indicate the allowed transitions between neighbor states with transition rates @xmath30 , @xmath31 . fat solid arrows denote the major conformational changes that produce observable steps like those in . the other transitions are indicated by dashed arrows . in a motor protein , these transitions could for example be binding or release of ligands , or small conformational changes that are hidden in the experimental noise . ]    in this section , we derive and some related results in the simplest case , i.e. , a sequential model . consider a model with a single cycle consisting of a sequence of @xmath32 states ( see ) , where we defined @xmath27_l$ ] to denote state @xmath33 in cycle @xmath34 , associated with position @xmath35 . this is a basic model in enzyme kinetics @xcite and has been used to describe motor proteins like kinesin @xcite , @xcite and f@xmath36-atpase @xcite . by construction , it satisfies both strong coupling and the bottleneck property . we denote the forward ( backward ) transition rates from state @xmath37 to adjacent states by @xmath30 ( @xmath31 ) as indicated in . the transition rates are positive and periodic , i.e. , @xmath38 , @xmath39 , and possibly functions of external loads and concentrations of various species in the surrounding solution . for the purpose of this discussion , the rates are assumed to be arbitrary positive constants , some of which can be tuned experimentally . we assume that transitions between different cycles , @xmath40_l\rightleftharpoons[0]_{l+1}$ ] , produces observable forward ( @xmath16 ) or backward ( @xmath17 ) steps . if the model describes an enzyme , the observable step could be the release or uptake of a product or substrate molecule . counting steps is different from counting cycle completions , which can be illustrated with the following thought experiment . consider the sequential model in with @xmath41 states per cycle , and a trajectory where the motor goes through the states @xmath26_0\to[1]_{-1}\to[0]_0\to[1]_0\to[0]_1 $ ] . this completes one forward cycle from @xmath26_0 $ ] to @xmath26_1 $ ] , but produces three steps : one backward ( @xmath26\to[1]_{-1}$ ] ) , followed by two forward ( @xmath26_{-1}\to[0]_0 $ ] , and @xmath42_0\to[0]_1 $ ] ) . due to such events , neither the number of steps nor the dwell times between steps are accurately described in terms of cycle completions . a different treatment is needed . the time evolution of the system is a random walk on the periodic one - dimensional lattice of states , where the average velocity may be nonzero . to simplify the notation , we now use @xmath37 to denote a state in any cycle , with the convention that @xmath37 and @xmath43 are equivalent states in different positions . the probability @xmath44 to be in state @xmath37 at time @xmath45 evolves according to a master equation @xcite , in this case @xmath46 state @xmath37 has free energy @xmath47 , and according to detailed balance , the free energy difference between two adjacent states are related to the transition rates through @xmath48 . from the periodicity of the rates we find @xmath49 the direction of the average drift is positive ( to the right in fig.[seqpath ] ) if the dissipated free energy per cycle , @xmath0 , is negative , and zero if @xmath50 @xcite .    tracking the position produces a series of forward ( @xmath16 ) and backward ( @xmath17 ) steps separated by random dwell times , as sketched in . our aim is to describe the statistics of such a trajectory , i.e. , the fluctuations of the dwell times and the number of forward and backward steps , which can then be compared with experimental data .    following ref . @xcite , we introduce the pairwise splitting probabilities @xmath5 , @xmath51 , @xmath52 , and @xmath6 , where @xmath5 and @xmath51 is the probability that a forward step is followed by a forward step or a backward step , respectively , and similar for @xmath53 . the splitting probabilities satisfy @xmath54 similarly , we introduce random variables @xmath7 , @xmath55 , @xmath56 , and @xmath8 for the conditional dwell times , where @xmath7 is the dwell time between two consecutive forward steps , and so on , as illustrated in . once the proper first passage problem to describe the dwell times has been formulated , explicit expressions for the splitting probabilities and mean conditional dwell times can be computed for arbitrary @xmath32 @xcite , using standard methods @xcite . we now describe the first passage problem for dwell times in sequential models , which we then use to derive . the dwell time symmetry is due to a one - to - one mapping between each @xmath11 event , i.e. , two consecutive backward steps and the dwell time between them , and a corresponding @xmath10 event . this is the key observation for the generalization of to more complex models in later sections . we model the splitting probabilities and probability distribution functions for the dwell times as a first escape problem from the interval of states @xmath57 . one way to approach this problem is the approach with absorbing boundaries @xcite , which means solving a reduced master equation for the states @xmath57 , with absorbing boundaries at both ends @xcite . from the assumption that steps are produced by the transition @xmath40_l\rightleftharpoons[0]_{l+1}$ ] , it follows that immediately after a @xmath16 step , the system is in the state @xmath58 ( @xmath59 ) , and just after a @xmath17 step , it is in the state @xmath60 ( @xmath59 ) . we write the reduced master equation in matrix form , , where the matrix @xmath61 has elements @xmath62 and @xmath63 . the element @xmath64 is the transition rate from state @xmath37 to state @xmath65 . the probability functions are given by the outgoing probability current , @xmath66 where @xmath67 indicates an initial condition @xmath68 , given by the direction the of the previous step ( see ) . normalization of the distributions requires that @xmath69      to derive , we show that the taylor series of @xmath70 and @xmath71 are identical up to a factor @xmath72 , from which follows . the actual calculation is given in appendix a , and we now discuss some of its consequences . first , it is interesting to note that the periodicity of the model is not necessary for the dwell time symmetry , only to get the simple relation between @xmath5 , @xmath6 and @xmath0 in . second , the @xmath73 probability distribution has a simple closed form for ( periodic ) sequential models . as we show in appendix b , @xmath74 where the @xmath75 are the eigenvalues of the matrix @xmath61 this is the distribution of a sum @xmath32 of independent exponential random variables with mean values @xmath76 . explicit expressions for all four conditional dwell time distributions for the case @xmath77 are given in ref . as expected from the calculations in appendix b , there is no simple relation between @xmath78 and @xmath79 . equation is only valid if the eigenvalues @xmath75 are distinct . this is the generic situation , since there are no symmetries or other reasons to expect degeneracies . however , is valid also in the degenerate case . finally , it is worth noting that the sequential models in this section can also be obtained as a discretization of overdamped one - dimensional diffusion @xcite in an arbitrary potential @xmath80 between two points a and b ( see ) . in this case , our results mean that the waiting time between last touch at a and first touch at b , and the reverse waiting time between last touch at b and first touch at a , have equal distributions . this pair of first passage problems was previously studied by @xcite . the fact that the motor is in a different state immediately after steps in different directions means that the step directions might be correlated . in this section , we formulate this observation mathematically , and point out some experimentally relevant consequences . let @xmath81 and @xmath82 be the probabilities that step @xmath33 in a trajectory is a forward or backward step respectively . in the simplest case of no substeps or detachments , the definitions of the pairwise splitting probabilities give @xmath83 equation describes the sequence of forward and backward steps as a markov chain @xcite , and the normalization constraints in leave two independent parameters in the @xmath84 transition matrix . the average frequencies @xmath85 of forward and backward steps have been measured for several motor proteins @xcite . in our model , those frequencies are given by the stationary distribution of @xcite , @xmath86 in contrast to the ratio @xmath87 of the number of forward and backward cycles in , the ratio @xmath88 of forward and backward steps is in general not equal to @xmath89 . looking back at , we see no general reason to expect the ratio of forward and backward steps to depend exponentially on the applied load . several experiments have divided the dwell times according to the direction of the following step @xcite . our model gives the forward and backward dwell time probability density functions as @xmath90 since @xmath78 and @xmath79 are in general not related in a simple way , one should not expect equal dwell times before forward and backward steps , in contrast to the case of forward and backward cycle completion times @xcite . equation implies that step directions are correlated , and gives the step - step correlation function @xmath91 where @xmath92 indicates the direction of step @xmath93 , and @xmath94 is an eigenvalue of the transition matrix in @xcite . the other eigenvalue is one . note that @xmath95 since @xmath96 . in addition , it is reasonable to expect @xmath97 , since a forward step following a backward step can be accomplished by a single transition , while the whole cycle must be passed before a forward step is followed by another forward step . inserting @xmath97 in , and using the normalization in , we get @xmath98 apparently , we should expect negatively correlated steps , @xmath99 . uncorrelated steps ( @xmath100 ) occur in systems with @xmath101 , i.e. , simple random walks , as well as some special cases of the extended models in the next section . an upper bound for the number @xmath102 of @xmath11 events is useful to estimate the regime where our results can be applied in practice . a rough estimate is given by @xmath103 hence , the number of steps @xmath104 required to get adequate statistics grows at least exponentially with decreasing @xmath0 . beyond the simplest descriptions in terms of a sequential model for the dominating pathway ( if there is one ) , more complicated situations with multiple pathways are possible @xcite . a general ( coarse - grained ) description of a motor protein would keep track of both the position and the consumption of fuel molecules , which requires the model to include an effective chemical coordinate in addition to the position of the motor @xcite . are the dwell time symmetry properties of sequential models valid for more general cases as well ? as we will see next , the answer is yes for a large class of models , in which the motion is still effectively one - dimensional .    with the extended models , we look for general properties that imply dwell time symmetry , even if not all models with these properties are biologically relevant . we find that the strong coupling and bottleneck assumptions mentioned in the introduction are sufficient . this means that if dwell time symmetry is observed not to hold for a particular system , then one can conclude that the strong coupling or bottleneck properties are absent . to model such a system , one must go beyond the extended models presented below , for example along the lines discussed in refs . the special situation without strong coupling but with the bottleneck property is illustrated below for an example model ( fig . [ n2example2d ] ) . the extension of our results to detachments and observable substeps in later subsections is directly motivated by experimental observations of such events @xcite .      in this section , we describe a large class of extended models which display dwell time symmetry in a little more detail , and indicate how the dwell time symmetry is derived . we use chemical kinetics , but write a master equation with arbitrary transition rates @xmath105 from state @xmath37 to @xmath65 , @xmath106 non - zero `` diagonal '' rates @xmath107 are allowed , for example to describe irreversible detachments of motors from their tracks @xcite , or other events that can be filtered out experimentally . we also need to specify the condition of strong coupling . one way is to demand that the transition rates around any closed loop @xmath108 of transitions satisfy @xmath109 this property is automatically fulfilled for sequential models , and makes it possible to define a free energy @xmath47 for each state @xmath37 , up to an additive constant . from detailed balance , we have @xmath110 for the free energy difference along the transition @xmath111 . hence , says that the sum of free energy differences along any closed loop is zero , which means that free energy dissipation that produces no net motion , e.g. , futile atp hydrolysis , is ruled out . ( note that the mechanochemical cycle , say , from a state @xmath112 to @xmath113 , is not a closed loop in our description . ) we also assume that no transition is irreversible , i.e. , , although the transition rates may be arbitrarily small .    to reflect the cyclic operation of motor proteins , the transition rates are periodic with period @xmath32 , and there is a well defined free energy per period , @xmath114    an important step in the derivation of is to conclude that the state of the motor immediately after a step is independent of earlier steps . in a sequential model , this occurs because there is only one step - producing transition per cycle . this condition can be relaxed somewhat . it is sufficient to assume the bottleneck property mentioned in the introduction , i.e. , that all transitions corresponding to a step are either to or from a single state , the bottleneck state , as illustrated in . as the term indicates , the system must visit the bottleneck state each time it goes through the cycle . whether the bottleneck assumption holds must be determined for each system separately . for example , deviations from the step - step correlations predicted in means that the assumption is not valid . although the models considered in this section are more general than the sequential ones , several properties of the sequential models are retained . these include strong coupling , periodicity , and that steps ( roughly ) correspond to one transition in the enzymatic cycle . they therefore describe an effectively one - dimensional motion , where the motion along the spatial and chemical reaction coordinates @xcite are tightly coupled to each other for motion in both directions . hence , backward and forward motion proceeds in opposite directions along the same reaction paths , just as for the sequential models . states per cycle . all states inside the gray area belong to the same cycle . the bottleneck states are @xmath115 . black arrows denote transitions coupled to a mechanical step of length @xmath9 , and dashed arrows indicate transitions within a cycle , which are undetectable . it is not possible to go from one cycle to the next without either leaving or arriving at a bottleneck state . in general , transitions between any states within a cycle are allowed , and bottleneck states might have a transition to any state in the neighbor cycle . ] dwell time symmetry for the extended models with detachments can be derived using the same methods as for sequential models , and further details on that derivation are given in appendix c. just as in the sequential case , periodicity is only necessary to establish , while the dwell time symmetry , , follows also without assuming periodicity . examples of the non - periodic case are the subcycles in , which shows a model with two observable substeps per cycle . each step in the example satisfies the bottleneck property , but both bottleneck states are in the same subcycle . deriving dwell time symmetry for the different subcycles proceeds as in appendix c , with slightly different initial conditions . as mentioned above , detachments of a motor from its track are observed in several systems @xcite . we model detachments by introducing death rates @xcite as extra terms in the diagonal elements of the master equation and @xmath61 matrix of eqs .   and . the presence of detachments affect the long time behavior of the model @xcite , as well as dwell time distributions and pairwise splitting probabilities . conditional detachment probabilities also have to be added to eqs .   and . however , in the derivations of dwell time symmetry in appendix c , the transition rates always enter as ratios of forward and reverse rates , e.g. , @xmath116 in , so that diagonal elements ( @xmath117 ) always cancel . hence , remains valid even in the presence of detachments .       and subcycle 1 has @xmath119 states , and subcycle 2 has @xmath120 states . both steps have the bottleneck property , although the bottleneck states @xmath58 and @xmath121 are both in subcycle 1 . if strong coupling is satisfied , both subcycles display dwell time symmetry . ]    for some motors , the full forward and backward steps are divided into observable substeps @xcite . in this section , we show how the relation between splitting probabilities in can be generalized , if strong coupling holds and all substeps satisfy the bottleneck property .    to start with , consider the system in , which produces substeps @xmath122 and @xmath123 during each cycle , and assume that each sub - cycle displays dwell time symmetry . from now on , we denote a forward step of length @xmath122 with @xmath124 , and similarly for the other substeps . keeping track of only the @xmath118-steps , we can analyze the system as in previous sections , using four splitting probabilities @xmath125 and dwell times @xmath126 , which satisfy . on the other hand , if we keep track of and discriminate between all substeps , we could instead measure eight splitting probabilities : @xmath127 , @xmath128 , @xmath129 , @xmath130 , and so on . summing over all paths between two consecutive @xmath131-steps , we get @xmath132 and similarly @xmath133 this means that the relation between free energy and splitting probabilities for a system with only one step per cycle generalizes to @xmath134 note that we summed over all paths between two @xmath131 steps without explicit reference to all paths that start with a @xmath131 step and end with something else . this means that is valid also for a system with detachments , or with several parallel pathways .    for systems which go through substeps @xmath122 , @xmath118  @xmath135 in each cycle , we can use the same argument to relate the splitting probabilities of the full analysis ( all substeps included ) to one where the first substep ( @xmath122 ) is ignored : @xmath136 iterating this transformation to ignore substeps @xmath137 as well , we find the following relation for a cycle with @xmath138 visible substeps : @xmath139 in a complicated system with parallel pathways where a cycle can be completed using different sequences of substeps , holds for every such sequence separately . states per cycle , with two parallel pathways that produce a step in the @xmath29 direction . solid arrows are step - producing transitions , while dashed arrows indicate hidden transitions that do not produce an observable step . shaded boxes are bottleneck states . ]    in this section , we consider a small but non - trivial model with 2 states per cycle , to present an explicit example that illustrates the results of the previous sections . the model has two parallel pathways as sketched in , and the steady state velocity and effective dispersion are known exactly @xcite . the bottleneck property is satisfied , and strong coupling is equivalent to @xmath140    computing the dwell time distributions and splitting probabilities ( see appendix d for details ) , we get @xmath141 the eigenvalues @xmath142 are given in appendix d , and @xmath143 . for this model , is obviously equivalent to the dwell time symmetry of . for the other two pairs of steps , we get @xmath144 we see that @xmath78 and @xmath79 differ both from each other and from the @xmath10 and @xmath11 distributions , independent of whether holds or not . the step directions are anti - correlated , since @xmath145     and @xmath93 respectively . shaded boxes are bottleneck states . projecting out the chemical coordinate as explained in the text , this model can be brought to the same form as in . in general , the resulting effective one - dimensional model does not satisfy the strong coupling assumption of . ] the example illustrates the logic of our results . strong coupling and the bottleneck property together are sufficient conditions for the dwell time symmetry . the bottleneck property alone is sufficient for the markov - chain description of step directions in , which remains valid even if is not satisfied .    a possible reason for why the model in might not satisfy is illustrated in this is again an @xmath41 state model , but with an independent `` chemical '' reaction coordinate ( the superscript @xmath93 on the states ) , e.g , the number of hydrolyzed atp molecules @xcite . for example , the path @xmath26_l^m\leftrightharpoons [ 1]_l^m\leftrightharpoons [ 0]_{l+1}^{m+1}$ ] could be a step driven atp hydrolysis , while the reaction @xmath26_l^m\leftrightharpoons [ 0]_{l+1}^m$ ] could describe an atp independent step . this model can be transformed to the 1d model in through the projection @xmath146_l=\sum_m [ j]_l^m$ ] , which leaves the rates unaffected . however , the open - ended reaction path @xmath26_l^m\leftrightharpoons [ 1]_l^m\leftrightharpoons [ 0]_{l+1}^{m+1}\leftrightharpoons [ 0]_l^{m+1}$ ] is transformed into the closed loop @xmath26_l\leftrightharpoons[1]_l\leftrightharpoons [ 0]_{l+1}\leftrightharpoons [ 0]_l$ ] . since strong coupling places no constraints on the rates in the original model in , there is no reason to assume that holds for the projected model . in the effective 1d description , this loop then becomes a slip loop , which dissipates free energy without producing net motion . hence , the simple step - step correlations of is retained , but not the dwell time symmetry .    in systems where it is not possible to measure the `` chemical position '' with single molecule precision , the resulting violation of dwell time symmetry is a useful test for such projected slip loops , if the bottle - neck property is satisfied . this property can in turn be ruled out , for example if the step - step correlations are more complicated than predicted in . the most interesting candidates for such tests seem to be the rotary motors driven by ion fluxes , e.g. , the f@xmath147 part of atp synthase , or the bacterial flagellar motor , since it is difficult to measure the ion flow with single molecule precision . we are not aware of any experiments on atp synthase under conditions that produces both forward and backward steps . data from a flagellar motor will be analyzed in the next section . @xmath148    in this section , we apply our theoretical results to analyze stepping data from a recent experiment with a chimaeric flagellar motor @xcite . as we will see , the data is consistent with the predicted dwell time symmetry and step - step correlations within the experimental uncertainty . we also estimate the free energy per cycle , and show that the estimate based on cycle completions can have a significant systematic error , compared to . the flagellar motor propels many swimming bacteria , by driving the rotation of flagellar filaments . each filament is driven at its base by a transmembrane rotary motor , powered by ion flux ( na@xmath149 in this case @xcite ) down an electrochemical gradient across the cell membrane . the motor is about 45 nm in diameter , and is believed to contain 13 torque - generating units @xcite . in this experiment , only one unit was active , and the flagellum is expected to switch between 26 distinct orientations per turn , corresponding to a step length of @xmath150 @xcite . we analyzed one trajectory with close to zero net velocity , and one with finite velocity . aided by chung - kennedy filtering @xcite to enhance the steps , and the step - finding algorithm described in ref . @xcite , the raw data was converted to stair - case stepping data , as shown in ( a ) . upon close inspection , the trajectory seems to be divided into intervals where the step lengths are consistent with each other , but out of phase with steps outside . this apparent drift might be due to dynamical exchange of the stator units @xcite that anchor the motor to the cell . we identified intervals of consistent stepping by inspection ( see ( a ) ) , and excluded the drift from our analysis by treating inconsistent steps as detachments , i.e. , each interval of consistent stepping was treated as an independent run . the result is summarized in tab . [ stepdir ] , and we now proceed to compare step - step correlations and dwell time distributions from trajectory a with the theoretical predictions . trajectory b contained too few steps to make such comparisons meaningful .    . stepping is consistent with the theoretical step length in intervals interrupted by drift events ( arrows ) , and adjacent intervals are out of phase with each other . ( b ) step - step autocorrelation function as defined in . the measured correlation function ( squares ) is consistent with the theoretical prediction ( circles ) using conditional splitting probabilities from tab . [ stepdir ] . symbols are the same size as the estimated standard deviations . ( c ) distribution functions @xmath151 for the four different dwell times . ] the step - step autocorrelation function for trajectory a is shown in ( b ) . the prediction @xmath152 of is valid for trajectories without detachments . in order to compare theory and experiments , the splitting probabilities in tab . [ stepdir ] must therefore be renormalized by a factor @xmath153 to account for the fact that intervals of consistent stepping ( by definition ) contain no drift events . this gives the theoretical prediction @xmath154 a least squares fit to the experimental correlations gives @xmath155 , in agreement with , but inconsistent with uncorrelated step directions . having confirmed that the step - step correlations are consistent with , we go on to test the dwell time symmetry . the empirical distribution functions @xmath151 are plotted in ( c ) for trajectory a. error bars are standard deviations from bootstrap estimates @xcite . using the kolmogorov - smirnov test @xcite , we conclude , with 95% confidence , that @xmath56 have different distribution than @xmath7 and @xmath8 , and that @xmath55 have different distribution than @xmath8 . however , the test could not detect significant differences between the other three pairs ( @xmath73 , @xmath156 , and @xmath157 ) . this is again consistent with the theoretical predictions , and also shows that the statistics is good enough to detect differences between distributions that are not equal . it is also interesting to note from ( c ) that @xmath7 and @xmath8 are longer than @xmath55 and @xmath56 on average . this is reasonable , since @xmath157 events in principle only requires a single transition , while the system must go through a complete cycle to complete a @xmath10 or @xmath11 event . the ionic motive force was not measured independently @xcite , so it is not possible to compare the free - energy estimate of with an experimental value . however , we can compare our result with that based on , which was used in ref . the results are summarized in tab.[dgestimates ] . as expected , the free energy per cycle is close to zero in trajectory a , which has almost no net velocity , while trajectory b clearly has a finite free energy per cycle to drive the rotation . also note the differences in the estimates based on and , which show that the cycle - completion estimate can give rise to significant systematic errors in estimated free energies if applied to stepping data . the statistical properties of steps in reversible molecular motors are not the same as that of cycle completions in enzyme kinetics . to interpret stepping trajectories correctly , this difference must be taken into account .    in this paper , we have extended the theory for dwell times in sequential models @xcite , and derived a symmetry relation for the conditional dwell time distributions for a large class of experimentally relevant models , including parallel pathways , visible substeps , and detachments . in contrast to the statistics of cycle completions @xcite , the dwell time distributions and splitting probabilities of steps depend on the step directions of both steps before and after the dwell period .    the dwell time symmetry is a consequence of strong coupling , i.e. , tight coupling for both forward and backward steps , and a bottleneck property of the underlying kinetic scheme . this means that the motion of the system is essentially a one - dimensional random walk in the ( two - dimensional ) space of spatial and chemical reaction coordinates . this makes it possible to use our results to infer information about the coupling and efficiency of a system from kinetic data , without detailed assumptions about the underlying kinetic scheme . in this respect , it is similar to the relation @xmath159 between the randomness parameter @xmath160 and the number of steps @xmath32 in the mechanochemical cycle of molecular motors @xcite . an alternative to the discrete formalism used here , is to include continuous spatial degrees of freedom , as is common for example when modeling ratchet - type motor mechanisms @xcite . since such models can be discretized @xcite , it is in principle possible to inquire about strong coupling and the bottleneck property in continuous models as well . an example of this is diffusion in one dimension ( see fig .  [ contlim ] ) , which strictly satisfies strong coupling and the bottleneck property . an interesting problem for further research is to quantify how well the dwell time symmetry is preserved in system with small deviations from these assumptions . we analyzed stepping data from single motor subunits in a flagellar motor @xcite . the data seems to be consistent with the predicted dwell time symmetry and step - step correlations , although only one trajectory with almost zero velocity had enough steps to make such a comparison meaningful . the form of the step - step correlations is consistent with an underlying kinetic scheme that satisfies the bottleneck property . so , does the dwell time symmetry in fig . [ flagellapc ] indicate that the flagellar motor subunits are strongly coupled to the driving ion flow ? another possibility is that the steps are equilibrium fluctuations , as indicated by the low @xmath0 estimated from the stepping probabilities . in equilibrium , there is no free energy change associated with ion transport , which means that dwell time symmetry could be obtained also for a system with loose coupling . to say anything about the coupling in the flagellar motor , the dwell time symmetry must be tested in a regime with finite ( and constant ) velocity and ionic driving force . this is in principle a question of observing more steps in such conditions , but a systematic way to identify and separate steps from drift events would also be useful . the step - step correlations predicted in might be present also in systems that violates the dwell time symmetry . deviations from this form would say something about the topology of the kinetic pathways in such systems , and it would probably be useful to apply our analysis also to kinesin and myosin v.    an accurate theoretical model is often crucial in order to correctly interpret experiments on such complex systems as motor proteins . many previous theoretical works on steps and dwell times in molecular motors @xcite derive or assume descriptions where consecutive steps or cycles are statistically independent of each other . as we have demonstrated , this does not apply to the flagellar motor of ref . we have also presented a large class of simple models where easily accessible quantities like the dwell times and step directions are correlated . we expect our results to be of practical use in both data analysis and design of experiments . in particular , further experimental efforts are motivated in order to detect correlations and collect significant statistics for both forward and backward steps . we now give a detailed derivation of for a sequential model . the initial condition is the state immediately after a step , and can be written @xmath161 to derive , we compute @xmath162 and @xmath163 using and the initial conditions in . this gives @xmath164 where the summation over @xmath165 goes from @xmath58 to @xmath60 . the same calculation for @xmath166 yields @xmath167 the products of matrix elements in eqs.([seqffdiff]-[seqbbdiff ] ) correspond to @xmath168-step paths between states @xmath58 and @xmath60 , plus the extra escape step . for sequential models , the shortest such path is @xmath32 steps , so the first @xmath60 derivatives are zero . for @xmath169 , we note that there is a one - to - one correspondence between the nonzero terms in and . for each term including a path from @xmath58 to @xmath60 in , there is a corresponding term for the reverse path from @xmath60 to @xmath58 in . the ratio of two corresponding non - zero terms is @xmath170 going back to for the elements of @xmath61 , and using @xmath171 by periodicity , we see that @xmath172 for all pairs of corresponding terms . moreover , @xmath173 , as there is no transition which produces two steps at once . therefore , @xmath174 for all @xmath175 . the underlying reason is that the sum of free energy changes is the same along all possible paths going forward one cycle from @xmath58 .    since @xmath176 and @xmath166 are integrals of the solutions of the reduced master equation , which is a finite system of ordinary differential equations with constant coefficients , they are smooth functions which have taylor series . hence , together with the normalization in implies . a similar correspondence between paths was used in ref . @xcite to derive . the periodicity is necessary to get the simple relationship between @xmath5 , @xmath6 and @xmath0 in , but not to establish the dwell time symmetry in . without the periodicity , is replaced by @xmath177 to derive explicit expressions for @xmath178 and @xmath179 for sequential models , we first note that the occupation probabilities @xmath44 in are the solution of a system of linear ordinary differential equations with constant coefficients , namely the elements of @xmath61 in . if the eigenvalues @xmath180 of @xmath61 are non - degenerate , the solutions have the form @xmath181 . note that the eigenvalues have negative real parts , to guarantee that the system eventually leaves the interval . we make the ansatz @xmath182 where the term 1 ensures proper normalization . we need @xmath32 equations to determine the coefficients @xmath183 . these are @xmath184 for @xmath185 . the case @xmath186 was argued just before , and @xmath187 follows from the argument between eqs .   and . the resulting system of equations for @xmath183 is of the vandermonde type , @xmath188 solving with cramer s rule and setting @xmath189 we arrive at . the distributions of @xmath55 and @xmath55 can be computed with the same ansatz , but the derivatives @xmath190 and @xmath190 are non - zero for @xmath191 , so the results are more complicated and there is in general no simple relation between @xmath78 and @xmath79 . in this appendix , we derive for a periodic extended model like the one in , generalizing the first passage problem as we go along . the derivation proceeds much as for the sequential model , by solving a reduced master equation for the states @xmath57 , @xmath192 with absorbing boundaries at @xmath193 and @xmath32 , and allowing @xmath194 to model detachments . note that the sum in have at most @xmath195 terms , due to the bottleneck property . after a forward step , the system is in state @xmath58 , while it could in principle be anywhere in the cycle after a backward step . the initial conditions , describing the distribution of states just after a @xmath67 step , are therefore @xmath196 since there are several escape transitions for each step , for the dwell time probability functions is generalized to @xmath197 we now proceed to compute derivatives of @xmath198 and @xmath199 , and note that by eqs . ( [ micrev]-[gendg ] ) , the free energy difference @xmath200 is independent of path : @xmath201 @xmath202 from the periodicity of @xmath105 expressed in , we get @xmath203 , which proves and thereby . the derivation for the case when backward steps ( instead of forward steps ) end in the bottleneck state is analogous . note that our definition of the bottleneck property means that there are no transitions that produce two steps at the same time . this rules out discontinuities at @xmath204 in the distribution functions @xmath151 , and justifies our use of taylor expansions . in this appendix , we solve the example model in fig . [ n2example1d ] in some detail . in addition to deriving eqs . ( [ ffbbexample]-[n2xgamma ] ) , this also illustrates a method that can easily be generalized to larger systems and implemented on computer algebra systems . for @xmath205 states per cycle , the eigenvalues @xmath75 must be calculated numerically . with this exception , the method gives explicit expressions for the dwell time distributions in the real time domain , that can be directly compared to experimental dwell time histograms . the first escape problem for the model in is governed by a reduced master equation as described in , with the matrix @xmath206 the eigenvalues of @xmath61 are @xmath207 and satisfy the relations @xmath208    the initial conditions after forward and backward steps are given by , and the conditional dwell time distributions are given by : @xmath209 using the ansatz in together with eqs.([aic]-[apdfdef ] ) to compute @xmath210 and @xmath211 , we get the following systems of linear equations : @xmath212 solving this and using @xmath213 , we eventually arrive at the probability density functions given in eqs.([ffbbexample]-[fbbfexample ] ) .    finally , we need expressions for the splitting probabilities , which we derive using the adjoint equations @xcite . let @xmath214 , with @xmath215 , be the probability that a system starting in state @xmath37 will next produce a @xmath67 step . starting with @xmath216 , we note that from state @xmath58 , a backward step can be accomplished either by the next transition being a backward step , which has probability @xmath217 , or by jumping to state @xmath218 and from there eventually get a backward step . the last possibility has total probability @xmath219 , so that @xmath220 next , we multiply with @xmath221 and rearrange the terms . applying the same procedure for the other @xmath214 , we finally get @xmath222 to get the pairwise splitting probabilities in eqs.([ffbbexample]-[n2xgamma ] ) , we first solve for the @xmath214 , and then weight them according to the initial conditions of : @xmath223    we are grateful to richard berry and yoshiyuki sowa for helpful comments about the stepping data and flagellar motors in general , to michael e. fisher , denis tsygankov and r. dean astumian for stimulating discussions , and to hong qian for sharing ref.@xcite with us prior to publication . financial support from the royal institute of technology , the wallenberg foundation ( m.l . ) and the swedish research council , grant 2003 - 5001 , ( m.w . ) is gratefully acknowledged .
Abstract:

Answer: the statistics of steps and dwell times in reversible molecular motors differ from those of cycle completion in enzyme kinetics . the reason is that a step is only one of several transitions in the mechanochemical cycle . as a result , theoretical results for cycle completion in enzyme kinetics do not apply to stepping data . to allow correct parameter estimation , and to guide data analysis and experiment design , a theoretical treatment is needed that takes this observation into account . in this paper , we model the distribution of dwell times and number of forward and backward steps using first passage processes , based on the assumption that forward and backward steps correspond to different directions of the same transition . we extend recent results for systems with a single cycle and consider the full dwell time distributions as well as models with multiple pathways , detectable substeps , and detachments . our main results are a symmetry relation for the dwell time distributions in reversible motors , and a relation between certain relative step frequencies and the free energy per cycle . we demonstrate our results by analyzing recent stepping data for a bacterial flagellar motor , and discuss the implications for the efficiency and reversibility of the force - generating subunits . + _ key words : _ motor proteins ; single molecule kinetics ; enzyme kinetics ; flagellar motor ; markov process ; non - equilibrium fluctuations .