4.8 Article

Nephila clavipes spider dragline silk microstructure studied by scanning transmission X-ray microscopy

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE AMERICAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 129, 期 13, 页码 3897-3905

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ja067471r

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nephila clavipes dragline silk microstructure has been investigated by scanning transmission X-ray microscopy (STXM), a technique that allows quantitative mapping of the level of orientation of the peptide groups at high spatial resolution (< 50 nm). Maps of the orientation parameter < P-2 > have been derived for spider silk for the first time. Dragline silk presents a very fine microstructure in which small, highly oriented domains (average area of 1800 nm(2), thus clearly bigger than individual beta-sheet crystallites) are dispersed in a dominant, moderately oriented matrix with several small unoriented domains. Our results also highlight the orientation of the noncrystalline fraction in silk, which has been underestimated in numerous structural models. No evidence of either a regular lamellar structure or any periodicity along the fiber was observed at this spatial resolution. The surface of fresh spider silk sections consists of a similar to 30-120 nm thick layer of highly oriented protein chains, which was found to vary with the reeling speed, where web building (0.5 cm/s) and lifeline (10 cm/s) spinning speeds were investigated. While the average level of orientation of the protein chains is unaffected by the spinning speed, STXM measurements clearly highlight microstructure differences. The slowpull fiber contains a larger fraction of highly oriented domains, while the protein chains are more homogeneously oriented in the fastpull fiber. In comparison, cocoon silk from the silkworm Bombyx mori presents a narrower orientation distribution. The strength-extensibility combination found in spider dragline silk is associated with its broad orientation distribution of highly interdigitated and unoriented domains.

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

4.8
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