4.7 Article

Xanthurenic Acid Is the Main Pigment of Trichonephila clavata Gold Dragline Silk

期刊

BIOMOLECULES
卷 11, 期 4, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/biom11040563

关键词

spider; dragline; xanthurenic acid; UV tolerance; antibacteria

资金

  1. ImPACT Program of the Council for Science, Technology and Innovation (Cabinet Office, Government of Japan)
  2. Yamagata Prefectural Government and Tsuruoka City, Japan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Spider silk, known for its strength, toughness, and elasticity, has attracted attention as a potential biomaterial. Through analysis, it was found that the pigment in the golden dragline silk of golden orb-weaving spiders is xanthurenic acid, which has a slight antibacterial effect. Despite bleaching the golden color of the threads, no significant change in UV tolerance was observed, leading to speculation that the spiders use the pigment for other purposes.
Spider silk is a natural fiber with remarkable strength, toughness, and elasticity that is attracting attention as a biomaterial of the future. Golden orb-weaving spiders (Trichonephila clavata) construct large, strong webs using golden threads. To characterize the pigment of golden T. clavata dragline silk, we used liquid chromatography and mass spectrometric analysis. We found that the major pigment in the golden dragline silk of T. clavata was xanthurenic acid. To investigate the possible function of the pigment, we tested the effect of xanthurenic acid on bacterial growth using gram-negative Escherichia coli and gram-positive Bacillus subtilis. We found that xanthurenic acid had a slight antibacterial effect. Furthermore, to investigate the UV tolerance of the T. clavata threads bleached of their golden color, we conducted tensile deformation tests and scanning electron microscope observations. However, in these experiments, no significant effect was observed. We therefore speculate that golden orb-weaving spiders use the pigment for other purposes, such as to attract their prey in the sunlight.

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

4.7
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