4.5 Article

Hydrogelation Through Self-Assembly of Fmoc-Peptide Functionalized Cationic Amphiphiles: Potent Antibacterial Agent

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY B
卷 114, 期 13, 页码 4407-4415

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp909520w

关键词

-

资金

  1. Department of Science and Technology. India [SR/S1/RFPC-04/2006]
  2. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, India

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The present work reports a new class of antibacterial hydrogelators based on anti-inflammatory N-fluorenyl-9-methoxycarbonyl (Fmoc) amino acid/peptides functionalized cationic amphiphiles. These positively charged hydrogelators were rationally designed and developed by the incorporation of a pyridinium moiety at the C-terminal of Fmoc amino acid/peptides, because the pyridinium-based amphiphiles are a known antibacterial agent due to their cell membrane penetration properties. The Fmoc amino acid/peptide-based cationic amphiphiles efficiently gelate (minimum gelation concentration similar to 0.6-2.2%, w/v) water at room temperature. Judicious variation of amino acid and their sequences revealed the architectural dependence of the molecules on their gelation ability. Several microscopic techniques like field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM) were used to obtain the visual insight of the morphology of the gel network. A number of spectroscopic techniques like circular dichroism, FTIR, photoluminescence, and XRD were utilized to know the involvement of several noncovalent interactions and participation of the different segments of the molecules during gelation. Spectroscopic results showed that the pi-pi interaction and intermolecular hydrogen bonding are the major responsible factors for the self-assembled gelation process that are oriented through an antiparallel beta-sheet arrangement of the peptide backbone. These Fmoc-based cationic molecules exhibited efficient antibacterial activity against both Gram-positive and Gram-negative bacteria.

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

4.5
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