4.4 Article

Instability of C60 fullerene interacting with lipid bilayer

期刊

JOURNAL OF MOLECULAR MODELING
卷 18, 期 2, 页码 549-557

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s00894-011-1086-4

关键词

Fullerenes; Interaction energy; Lennard-Jones potential; Lipid bilayer

资金

  1. Faculty of Science, Mahidol University
  2. Thailand Research Fund [MRG5380266]
  3. Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to the large number of possible applications of nanoparticles in cosmetic and medical products, the possible hazards of nanoparticles in the human body are a major concern. A worst-case scenario is that nanoparticles might cause health issues such as skin damage or even induce cancer. As a first step to study the toxicity of nanoparticles, we investigate the energy behaviour of a C-60 fullerene interacting with a lipid bilayer. Using the 6-12 Lennard-Jones potential function and the continuous approximation, the equilibrium spacing between the two layers of a bilayer is predicted to be 3.36 . On assuming that there is a circular hole in the lipid bilayer, a relation for the molecular interaction energy is determined, involving the circular radius b of the hole and the perpendicular distance Z of the spherical fullerene from the hole. A graph of the minimum energy location Z (min) verses the hole radius b shows that a C-60 fullerene first penetrates through a lipid bilayer when b > 6.81 , and shows a simple circular relation Z(min)(2) + b(2) = 6.81(2) for Z(min) positive and b a parts per thousand currency signaEuro parts per thousand 6.81 . For b > 6.81, the fullerene relocates from the surface of the bilayer to the interior, and as the hole radius increases further it moves to the centre of the bilayer and remains there for increasing hole radii. Accordingly, our modelling indicates that at least for the system with no external forces, the C-60 fullerene will not penetrate through the lipid bilayer but rather remains encased between the two layers at the mid-plane location.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.4
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据