2013
DOI: 10.1007/s00249-013-0890-4
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Diffusion NMR study of complex formation in membrane-associated peptides

Abstract: Pulsed-field-gradient nuclear magnetic resonance (PFG-NMR) is used to obtain the true hydrodynamic size of complexes of peptides with sodium dodecyl sulfate SDS micelles. The peptide used in this study is a 19-residue antimicrobial peptide, GAD-2. Two smaller dipeptides, alanine-glycine (Ala-Gly) and tyrosine-leucine (Tyr-Leu), are used for comparison. We use PFG-NMR to simultaneously measure diffusion coefficients of both peptide and surfactant. These two inputs, as a function of SDS concentration, are then f… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

1
4
0

Year Published

2014
2014
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
6
1

Relationship

0
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 7 publications
(5 citation statements)
references
References 53 publications
1
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The CMC of free SDS under these conditions was determined as 3.7 ± 0.3 mM by scattering measurements (S1 Fig) and 3.8 mM from DOSY measurements (Fig 5A). The diffusion coefficient of monomeric SDS is (4.6 ± 0.2) × 10 −10 m 2 s −1 , in good consistency with values ranging from 4.7 to 4.9 × 10 −10 m 2 s −1 , as published elsewhere [48]. Above the CMC, monomeric SDS is in rapid exchange with micelles and its diffusion coefficient decreased progressively with an increase in concentration.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…The CMC of free SDS under these conditions was determined as 3.7 ± 0.3 mM by scattering measurements (S1 Fig) and 3.8 mM from DOSY measurements (Fig 5A). The diffusion coefficient of monomeric SDS is (4.6 ± 0.2) × 10 −10 m 2 s −1 , in good consistency with values ranging from 4.7 to 4.9 × 10 −10 m 2 s −1 , as published elsewhere [48]. Above the CMC, monomeric SDS is in rapid exchange with micelles and its diffusion coefficient decreased progressively with an increase in concentration.…”
Section: Resultssupporting
confidence: 89%
“…In this two-site model, the surfactant must either be in the monomeric form free solution or associated within a micelle, so that we can write p f + p m = 1. As the diffusivity of SDS micelles, D m = (6.1 ± 0.9) × 10 –11 m 2 /s, and free monomers, D f = (4.7 ± 0.08) × 10 –10 m 2 /s, have been obtained from the literature, , the fraction of free SDS can be calculated for the concentrations used here with eq and the two-state fraction relationship. The fractions are found to vary depending on the bulk SDS concentration, with p f decreasing from 0.7 to 0.3 at concentrations of 10–20 mM, respectively, well above the SDS cmc.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…For any given total concentration of SDS between CMC 1 and CMC 2 , the number of SDS ions forming micelles is decreased in the SWCNT suspension in comparison to the pure SDS solution because of the presence of nanotubes that shift the equilibrium distribution (see Figure 4a). Since the diffusivity of SDS micelles, D m = (6.1 ± 0.9) × 10 −11 m 2 /s, and free monomers, D f = (4.7 ± 0.08) × 10 −10 m 2 /s, are wellknown, 56 the fraction of free SDS can be calculated at low SDS concentration (10 mM) using eq 2. 36 This fraction was found to be equal to 0.77 and 0.76 ± 0.03 with and without SWCNTs, respectively.…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Error bars for these measurements are about ±0.0001, which are smaller than the data points plotted. (c) Change in the concentration of free monomer and micelles as a function of the total concentration of SDS based on literature data . Note that the fractions of free monomer at 10 and 20 mM SDS are ∼0.7 and ∼0.3, respectively.…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%