4.7 Article

Spread and adsorbed layers of protein fibrils at water -air interface

期刊

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2022.112942

关键词

8-lactoglobulin; Lysozyme; Fibrils; Spread layers; Adsorption layers; Dilational surface visco-elasticity

资金

  1. Russian Science Foundation [21-13-00039]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The properties of adsorbed layers of protein fibrils and the spread layers on an aqueous subphase differ significantly. The surface elasticity of Lysozyme (LYS) and 8-lactoglobulin (BLG) spread layers on the surface of 0.1 M NaCl solution is more than two times higher than protein solutions with the same NaCl concentration, possibly due to lower surface concentrations of hydrolysed peptides in the latter case. The properties and morphology of the spread and adsorbed layers depend noticeably on the ionic strength of the aqueous bulk phase, especially for LYS layers which are more prone to the formation of macroscopic and mesoscopic surface aggregates compared to BLG layers.
The properties of adsorbed layers of protein fibrils differ significantly from the properties of fibril spread layers on an aqueous subphase. If the dependencies of the dynamic surface elasticity on surface pressure of Lysozyme (LYS) and 8-lactoglobulin (BLG) aqueous dispersions proved to be close to the results for native protein solutions, LYS and BLG spread layers on the surface of 0.1 M NaCl solution exhibited the surface elasticity more than two times higher than the values for protein solutions with the same NaCl concentatration, presumably due to lower surface concentrations of hydrolysed peptides in the latter case. The properties of fibril spread and adsorbed layers and also their morphology, unlike the surface properties of protein solutions, depend noticeably on the ionic strength of the aqueous bulk phase. This dependence is stronger in case of LYS layers, which are also more prone to the formation of macroscopic and mesoscopic surface aggregates as compared with BLG layers.

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