4.7 Article

Protein Crystals Nucleated and Grown by Means of Porous Materials Display Improved X-ray Diffraction Quality

期刊

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/ijms231810676

关键词

macromolecular crystallization; protein crystal nucleation; protein crystal growth; nucleation theory; nucleants; porous nucleation-inducing materials; bioglass

资金

  1. COST (European Cooperation in Science and Technology) [CM1402]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Growing protein crystals using porous materials can improve diffraction quality, and crystals continue to grow outside the pores after nucleation inside them.
Well-diffracting protein crystals are indispensable for X-ray diffraction analysis, which is still the most powerful method for structure-function studies of biomolecules. A promising approach to growing such crystals is the use of porous nucleation-inducing materials. However, while protein crystal nucleation in pores has been thoroughly considered, little attention has been paid to the subsequent growth of crystals. Although the nucleation stage is decisive, it is the subsequent growth of crystals outside the pore that determines their diffraction quality. The molecular-scale mechanism of growth of protein crystals in and outside pores is theoretically considered. Due to the low degree of metastability, the crystals that emerge from the pores grow slowly, which is a prerequisite for better diffraction. This expectation has been corroborated by experiments carried out with several types of porous material, such as bioglass (Naomi's Nucleant), buckypaper, porous gold and porous silicon. Protein crystals grown with the aid of bioglass and buckypaper yield significantly better diffraction quality compared with crystals grown conventionally. In all cases, visually superior crystals are usually obtained. Our theoretical conclusion is that heterogeneous nucleation of a crystal outside the pore is an exceptional case. Rather, the protein crystals nucleating inside the pores continue growing outside them.

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