4.5 Article

Theoretical Study of Binding and Permeation of Ether-Based Polymers through Interfaces

期刊

JOURNAL OF PHYSICAL CHEMISTRY B
卷 117, 期 47, 页码 14723-14731

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/jp4028832

关键词

-

资金

  1. Deutsche Forschungsgemeinschaft (DFG) [RO 3571/3-1]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We present a molecular dynamics simulation study on the interactions of poly(ethylene oxide) (PEO), poly(propylene oxide) (PPO), and their ABA-type block copolymer, poloxamers, at water/n-heptane and 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phospatidycholine (DMPC) lipid bilayer/water interfaces. The partition coefficients in water/l-octanol of the linear polyethers up to three monomers were calculated. The partition coefficients evidenced a higher hydrophobicity of the PPO in comparison to PEO. At the water/n-heptane interface, the polymers tend to adopt elongated conformations in agreement with similar experimental ellipsometry studies of different poloxamers. In the case of the poloxamers at the n-heptane/water interface, the stronger preference of the PPO block for the hydrophobic phase resulted in bottle-brush-type polymer conformations. At lipid bilayer/water interface, the PEO polymers, as expected from their hydrophilic nature, are wealdy adsorbed on the surface of the lipid bilayer and locate in the water phase close to the headgroups. The free energy barriers of permeation calculated for short polymer chains suggest a thermodynamics propensity for the water phase that increase with the chain length. The lower affinity of PEO for the hydrophobic interior of the lipid bilayer resulted in the spontaneous expulsion within the simulation time. On the contrary, PPO chains and poloxamers have a longer residence time inside the bilayer, and they tend to concentrate in the tail region of the bilayer near the polar headgroups. In addition, polymers with PPO unit length comparable to the thickness of the hydrophobic region of the bilayer tend to span across the bilayer.

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