4.7 Article

Self-Assembly of Electrostatic Cocrystals from Supercharged Fusion Peptides and Protein Cages

期刊

ACS MACRO LETTERS
卷 7, 期 3, 页码 318-323

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsmacrolett.8b00023

关键词

-

资金

  1. Academy of Finland
  2. Centre of Excellence in Molecular Engineering of Biosynthetic Hybrid Materials (HYBER)
  3. Aalto University School of Chemical Engineering

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Self-assembly is a convenient process to arrange complex biomolecules into large hierarchically ordered structures. Electrostatic attraction between the building blocks is a particularly interesting driving force for the assembly process, as it is easily tunable and reversible. Large biomolecules with high surface charge density, such as proteins and protein cages, are very promising building blocks due to their uniform size and shape. Assemblies of functional molecules with well-defined nanostructures have wide-ranging applications but are difficult to produce precisely by synthetic methods. Furthermore, obtaining highly ordered structures is an important prerequisite for X-ray structure analysis. Here we show how negatively charged ferritin and viral protein cages can adopt specific cocrystal structures with supercharged cationic polypeptides (SUPs, K72) and their recombinant fusions with green fluorescent protein (GFP-K72). The cage structures and recombinant proteins self-assemble in aqueous solution to large ordered structures, where the structure morphology and size are controlled by the ratio of oppositely charged building blocks and the electrolyte concentration. Both ferritin and viral cages form cocrystals with face centered cubic structure and lattice constants of 14.0 and 28.5 nm, respectively. The crystals are porous and the cationic recombinant proteins occupy the voids between the cages. Such systems resemble naturally occurring occlusion bodies and may serve as protecting agents as well as aid the structure determination of biomolecules by X-ray scattering.

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