4.8 Article

A study of the correlation between organic matrices and nanocomposite materials in oyster shell formation

期刊

BIOMATERIALS
卷 21, 期 3, 页码 213-222

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/S0142-9612(99)00120-9

关键词

calcium carbonate; shell formation; organic matrix; biocomposite material; Fourier self-deconvolution

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Calcium carbonate minerals are an integral part of many organisms. These biogenic minerals are all of original size, shape and high strength, and they are quite different from those found in their abiotic precipitates. It has been accepted that the formation, morphological development and crystallography of the biocomposites are controlled by the intrinsic molecular recognition of macromolecules. In this study, with the analyses of X-ray diffraction and scanning electron microscopy of the texture of biogenic minerals in oyster shells, we noted that the intracrystalline proteins deliberately reduce the coherence lengths of biogenic crystals compared to synthetic ones, leading to more isotropy. In order to understand the exact nature of the controlled nucleation and growth, we investigated the changes in protein conformation in vivo from the mineral-specific layers using Fourier self-deconvolution and Gaussian curve-fitting techniques. And via in vitro assays, we studied the relation of such changes to biomineral phase and morphology. We showed that the shell proteins in vivo are in the higher structural ordered state, and beta-antiparallel structure was predominant in each shell layer. Also, as the shell undergoes a change of calcium carbonate polymorphs from aragonite to calcite, significant alterations of the protein conformation with the denaturing of alpha-helix and beta-structure in the aragonitic layer is induced. These results provide a relationship between the effects of conformational changes on the nanostructure of biocomposites and the necessity of new synthetic strategies. (C) 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

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