4.5 Article

An orthorhombic crystal form of cyclohexaicosaose, CA26•32.59 H2O:: comparison with the triclinic form

Journal

CARBOHYDRATE RESEARCH
Volume 336, Issue 2, Pages 141-153

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0008-6215(01)00249-X

Keywords

cyclohexaicosaose; cycloamylose; V-amylose; hydrophobic channel; disordered water chain

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Cycloamylose containing 26 glucose residues (cyclohexaicosaose, CA26) crystallized from water and 30% (v/v) polyethyleneglycol 400 in the orthorhombic space group P2(1)2(1)2(1) in the highly hydrated form CA26 . 32.59 H(2)O. X-ray analysis of the crystals at 0.85 Angstrom resolution shows that the macrocycle of CA26 is folded into two short left-handed V-amylose helices in antiparallel arrangement and related by a twofold rotational pseudosymmetry as reported recently for the (CA26)(2). 76.75 H(2)O triclinic crystal form [Gessler, K. et al. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA 1999, 96, 4246-4251]. In the orthorhombic crystal form, CA26 molecules are packed in motifs reminiscent of V-amylose in hydrated and anhydrous forms. The intramolecular interface between the V-helices in CA26 is dictated by formation of an extended network of interhelical C-H . . .O hydrogen bonds; a comparable molecular arrangement is also evident for the intermolecular packing, suggesting that it is a characteristic feature of V-amylose interaction. The hydrophobic channels of CA26 are filled with disordered water molecules arranged in chains and held in position by multiple C-H . . .O hydrogen bonds. In the orthorhombic and triclinic crystal forms, the structures of CA26 molecules are equivalent but the positions of the individual water molecules are different, suggesting that the patterns of water chains are perturbed even by small structural changes associated with differences in packing arrangements in the two crystal lattices rather than with differences in the CA26 geometry. (C) 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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