4.5 Article

Membrane Bending Moduli of Coexisting Liquid Phases Containing Transmembrane Peptide

Journal

BIOPHYSICAL JOURNAL
Volume 114, Issue 9, Pages 2152-2164

Publisher

CELL PRESS
DOI: 10.1016/j.bpj.2018.03.026

Keywords

-

Categories

Funding

  1. U.S. National Science Foundation [MCB-1410926]
  2. U.S. National Institutes of Health (NIH) [GM105684]
  3. NIH [GM120642, 1-T32-GM08267]
  4. National Science Foundation Graduate Research Fellowship Program [DGE-1144153ESR]
  5. Brazil Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico, CNPq
  6. National Science Foundation [MCB-1327611, MCB-1713242]
  7. NIH/National Institute of General Medical Sciences [P41GM103521]
  8. Div Of Molecular and Cellular Bioscience
  9. Direct For Biological Sciences [1410926, 1327611] Funding Source: National Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A number of highly curved membranes in vivo, such as epithelial cell microvilli, have the relatively high sphingolipid content associated with raft-like composition. Given the much lower bending energy measured for bilayers with nonraft low sphingomyelin and low cholesterol content, observing high curvature for presumably more rigid compositions seems counterintuitive. To understand this behavior, we measured membrane rigidity by fluctuation analysis of giant unilamellar vesicles. We found that including a transmembrane helical GWALP peptide increases the membrane bending modulus of the liquid-disordered (Ld) phase. We observed this increase at both low-cholesterol fraction and higher, more physiological cholesterol fraction. We find that simplified, commonly used Ld and liquid-ordered (Lo) phases are not representative of those that coexist. When Ld and Lo phases coexist, GWALP peptide favors the Ld phase with a partition coefficient of 3-10 depending on mixture composition. In model membranes at high cholesterol fractions, Ld phases with GWALP have greater bending moduli than the Lo phase that would coexist.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available