The exquisite selectivity and unique transport properties of membrane proteins can be harnessed for a variety of engineering and biomedical applications if suitable membranes can be produced. Amphiphilic block copolymers (BCPs), developed as stable lipid analogs, form membranes that functionally incorporate membrane proteins and are ideal for such applications. While high protein density and planar membrane morphology are most desirable, BCP-membrane protein aggregates have so far been limited to low protein densities in either vesicular or bilayer morphologies. Here, we used dialysis to reproducibly form planar and vesicular BCP membranes with a high density of reconstituted aquaporin-0 (AQP0) water channels. We show that AQP0 retains its biological activity when incorporated at high density in BCP membranes, and that the morphology of the BCP-protein aggregates can be controlled by adjusting the amount of incorporated AQP0. We also show that BCPs can be used to form two-dimensional crystals of AQP0.
The exquisite selectivity and unique transport properties of membrane proteins can be harnessed for a variety of engineering and biomedical applications if suitable membranes can be produced. Amphiphilic block copolymers (BCPs), developed as stable lipid analogs, form membranes that functionally incorporate membrane proteins and are ideal for such applications. While high protein density and planar membrane morphology are most desirable, BCP-membrane protein aggregates have so far been limited to low protein densities in either vesicular or bilayer morphologies. Here, we used dialysis to reproducibly form planar and vesicular BCP membranes with a high density of reconstituted aquaporin-0 (AQP0) water channels. We show that AQP0 retains its biological activity when incorporated at high density in BCP membranes, and that the morphology of the BCP-protein aggregates can be controlled by adjusting the amount of incorporated AQP0. We also show that BCPs can be used to form two-dimensional crystals of AQP0.
Membrane proteins mediate specific and
efficient transport of water,
ions and solutes across cell membranes. They also serve the cell as
sensors that detect environmental conditions, ranging from pH to specific
signaling molecules and toxins. Incorporating such membrane proteins
into stable membranes formed by lipid analogs could provide materials
with targeted applications in sensors,[1,2] enzymatic reactions,[3] drug screening,[4] and
even water purification.[5] Block copolymers
(BCPs) form membranes that mimic the architecture of lipid bilayers
and allow incorporation of functional membrane proteins.[6] However, in contrast to lipids, BCPs can be tailored
to have the stability and durability associated with polymeric materials[7] and hence are more suitable for the production
of membrane protein-based devices and other applications. Furthermore,
BCPs can be designed to form membranes with specific physical properties
and unique morphologies simply by the choice of the blocks and their
lengths[8] or their length ratio.[9] Physical properties that can be engineered include
the toughness and permeability of the membrane, as well as its morphology
(e.g., micellar, vesicular, cylindrical or planar). BCP end groups
can also be modified by molecules such as biotin and 4-formylbenzoate
(for recognition and immobilization),[10,11] methacrylate
(for stabilization by cross-linking),[12] fluorescent molecules (for imaging),[10] and even drugs (for drug delivery).[13]Recent efforts to insert membrane proteins into BCP membranes
resulted
in the incorporation of only a small number of proteins into either
vesicles (reviewed in ref (14)) or painted, supported, or suspended bilayers.[15,16] While vesicles are excellent vectors for drug delivery,[17] other applications such as sensors, reactive
surfaces, drug screening, and water purification would benefit greatly
from a planar membrane morphology. Also, film rehydration, a technique
commonly used to make polymer–protein vesicles, appears to
limit the amount of membrane protein that can be incorporated into
BCP vesicles, even if high protein concentrations are used.[5] Painted bilayers are excellent tools for studying
the function, in particular the conductance, of membrane proteins,[18] but the number of membrane proteins that are
incorporated is usually low, and the stability of the membrane can
be limited due to the presence of residual solvent. Supported and
suspended bilayers have also shown low reconstitution of membrane
proteins. Dialysis of mixtures of lipids and membrane proteins dissolved
in nonionic detergents is a method commonly used to reconstitute membrane
proteins into lipid membranes for functional and structural studies.
Here, we adapted the dialysis approach to BCPs, which, compared to
lipids, are less soluble in detergents[19,20] and can form
aggregates even in the presence of high detergent concentrations.We selected two BCPs each from the two systems most commonly used
for polymer vesicle formation and membrane protein insertion: polybutadiene-polyethyleneoxide
(PB-PEO)-based diblock copolymers and polymethyloxazoline-polydimethylsiloxane
(PMOXA-PDMS)-based triblock copolymers. The architectures and block
compositions of these polymers are provided in Table 1 and Supporting Information Figure S1. Table 1 also summarizes the molecular weight
(MW) of the chosen BCPs as well as their calculated hydrophilic weight
and volume ratios, the fractions of the polymers that are comprised
of hydrophilic blocks by weight and volume, respectively. While PMOXA-PDMSpolymers have previously been shown to incorporate membrane proteins
(summarized in ref (21)), PB-PEO polymers have not yet been tested for their ability to
incorporate membrane proteins. As test protein for incorporation into
BCP membranes, we selected the lens-specific water channel aquaporin-0
(AQP0), because it forms regular arrays in the native lens membrane[22,23] as well as upon reconstitution with various lipids.[24,25] Lipid membranes with increasing concentrations of reconstituted
AQP0 also show a morphological transition from vesicles to planar
membranes, and finally to 2D crystals, thus providing an excellent
basis for comparison with reconstitution of AQP0 into BCP membranes.
Our studies show that all BCPs tested form vesicular and planar membranes
in the presence of specific amounts of AQP0, and also that the amount
of incorporated AQP0 strongly influences the morphology of the resulting
BCP–AQP0 aggregates. At very high concentrations, AQP0 forms
2D arrays in two of the BCPs, similar to those seen with lipids. Most
of the transitions between different membrane morphologies occur at
similar volume fraction values of incorporated AQP0 (the fractional
volume occupied by AQP0 in the polymer and calculated by considering
the membrane-spanning part of AQP0 as a hydrophobic cylinder). We
also characterized the function of AQP0 in one of the BCPs and show
that its biological function is preserved in BCP membranes even at
high packing densities.
Table 1
Block Copolymers Used in This Study
polymer ID
block composition
type
MW (g/mol)
fhydrophilic (w)/fhydrophilic (vol)a
PB12
PEO10-PB12
Diblock
1089
0.40/0.34
PB22
PEO14-PB22
Diblock
1806
0.34/0.28
ABA42
PMOXA20-PDMS42-PMOXA20
Triblock
6508
0.52/0.51
ABA55
PMOXA12-PDMS55-PMOXA12
Triblock
6110
0.33/0.33
fhydrophilic (w), hydrophilic weight ratio, fhydrophilic (vol), hydrophilic volume ratio; the calculation of these values
is described in Supporting Information.
fhydrophilic (w), hydrophilic weight ratio, fhydrophilic (vol), hydrophilic volume ratio; the calculation of these values
is described in Supporting Information.
Results
Optimization of AQP0 Incorporation into BCP Membranes
Complete initial polymer dissolution in detergent and a slow detergent
removal rate were found to be critical for successful incorporation
of AQP0 into BCP membranes. The polymers were initially dissolved
in various concentrations of octyl-β,d-glucoside (OG)
(2%, 4%, 10% and 40%) and dodecyl-β,d-maltoside (DDM)
(2% and 10%). Examination by transmission electron microscopy (EM)
revealed that all four polymers tested here required an OG concentration
of 10% for complete dissolution. DDM was not used for further experiments
as it has a low critical micellar concentration (cmc) and is thus
not well suited for removal by dialysis. For detergent removal by
dialysis, various parameters were tested, including ionic strength,
pH, and divalent metal ion concentration (MgCl2) of the
dialysis buffer, temperature, and detergent removal rate. Most efficient
and reproducible incorporation of AQP0 into BCP membranes was obtained
by performing the dialysis at 4 °C with dialysis buffer (10 mM
MES, pH 6, 100 mM NaCl, 50 mM MgCl2, 0.01% NaN3) that initially contained 4% OG. In the course of the dialysis,
the detergent concentration was gradually lowered (by doubling the
dialysis buffer volume every 24 h with detergent-free buffer) until
it reached 0.25% on the fourth day. On the fifth day the buffer was
exchanged with detergent-free buffer three times every four hours,
and the dialysis buttons were harvested. A contact angle-based approach[26] was used to follow detergent removal during
dialysis, which established that under the chosen conditions the rate
was 5.1 (mg/mL)/day when the detergent concentration reached the cmc
of OG, and that the residual OG concentration at the end of the dialysis
was ∼0.0001%. Details of the methods used to vary the dialysis
rate, and to determine detergent concentrations and detergent removal
rates are provided in Supporting Information and Figures S2–S4.
Aggregate Morphology at Different Polymer-to-Protein Ratios
In a systematic study of the dependence of aggregate morphology
on the amount of incorporated protein, we reconstituted AQP0 with
the four BCPs using a wide range of polymer-to-protein-ratios (PoPRs).
For easier comparison, PoPRs of triblock copolymer/AQP0 mixtures are
reported as twice the value actually used, as a triblock polymer molecule
is equivalent to two lipid or diblock copolymer molecules in a bilayer
configuration. We observed that with increasing protein concentration
the aggregates transitioned from the native structures, which the
polymer forms in the absence of protein (network structures, vesicles
with attached tubes, small vesicles), to vesicles (larger, more monodisperse),
to mixtures of vesicles and planar membranes, and finally to only
planar membranes. With two polymers, PB12 and ABA42, AQP0 organized
into 2D crystals at low PoPR values. Because these transitions occurred
at different PoPRs for the different BCPs, we chose for presentation
in Figure 1 and Supporting
Information Figure S5 PoPRs at which a particular morphology
of the BCP–AQP0 aggregates was dominant. For two polymers,
PB12 and ABA42, the transitions are described in the following paragraphs,
and for the other two polymers, PB22 and ABA55, data are shown and
described in Supporting Information.
Figure 1
The membrane
protein concentration has a large effect on the morphology
of the resulting self-assembled membrane protein–block copolymer
aggregate. The micrographs show PoPRs that are representative of the
range in which a particular aggregate morphology is dominant. (A)
Reconstitution of AQP0 with PB12 at molar PoPRs of (1) ∞ (no
protein), (2) 15.5, (3) 3.9, and (4) 1.3. The increase in incorporated
protein leads to a transition from the network structures formed by
pure polymer as described before (ref (27)), to a mixture of network structures and vesicles
(shown in Supporting Information Figure S5), to vesicles only, membranes, and finally to crystalline membrane
patches. (B) Reconstitution of AQP0 with ABA42 at PoPRs of (1) ∞
(no protein), (2) 43.2, (3) 2.2, and (4) 0.6. The aggregates transition
from vesicles only, to larger vesicles, to membranes only, and finally
to crystalline membrane patches. Schematics below each panel show
the presumed arrangement of polymer bilayers (for PB12) or monolayers
(for ABA42) and the location of AQP0 in the formed membranes. Scale
bars are 100 nm.
The membrane
protein concentration has a large effect on the morphology
of the resulting self-assembled membrane protein–block copolymer
aggregate. The micrographs show PoPRs that are representative of the
range in which a particular aggregate morphology is dominant. (A)
Reconstitution of AQP0 with PB12 at molar PoPRs of (1) ∞ (no
protein), (2) 15.5, (3) 3.9, and (4) 1.3. The increase in incorporated
protein leads to a transition from the network structures formed by
pure polymer as described before (ref (27)), to a mixture of network structures and vesicles
(shown in Supporting Information Figure S5), to vesicles only, membranes, and finally to crystalline membrane
patches. (B) Reconstitution of AQP0 with ABA42 at PoPRs of (1) ∞
(no protein), (2) 43.2, (3) 2.2, and (4) 0.6. The aggregates transition
from vesicles only, to larger vesicles, to membranes only, and finally
to crystalline membrane patches. Schematics below each panel show
the presumed arrangement of polymer bilayers (for PB12) or monolayers
(for ABA42) and the location of AQP0 in the formed membranes. Scale
bars are 100 nm.The PB12–AQP0 system showed the strongest
transitions with
changing PoPRs. In the absence of protein, Jain and Bates reported
that several PB-PEO polymers self-assemble into similar network structures.[27] Although it was hypothesized in the earlier
study that PB-PEO polymers with MWs as low as that of the PB12polymer
studied here do not form such network structures, we found that PB12
also forms network structures, and in a similar weight fraction range
(∼0.4) of the hydrophilic PEO block (Figure 1A, panel 1). The concentration of polymers used in our study
is much lower (0.1% rather than 1%), and our procedure differs from
that used in the Jain and Bates study, in which solid polymers were
mixed in deionized water and equilibrated for several days to weeks.
These experimental differences may explain why PB12 did form network
structures in our experiments. Upon incorporation of protein, at a
PoPR of first ∼250 and then ∼50, the native network
structures evolved into a mixture of network structures and vesicles
(Supporting Information Figure S5). An
increase in protein concentration to a PoPR of 15.5 resulted in the
formation of exclusively vesicles that were 200–300 nm in diameter
(Figure 1A, panel 2). A further increase in
protein concentration to a PoPR of 3.9 led to the formation of planar
membrane sheets (Figure 1A, panel 3), and at
a PoPR of 1.3 AQP0 began to form crystalline arrays in the PB12 membranes
(Figure 1A, panel 4).Dialysis at higher
detergent removal rates reduced the efficiency
of AQP0 incorporation into PB12 membranes and changed the morphology
of the resulting PB12–AQP0 aggregates (see Supporting Information and Supporting
Information Figure S6 for more information).In the ABA42–AQP0
system, aggregates transitioned with decreasing
PoPRs from vesicles only, to vesicles associated with planar membranes,
to planar membranes, and finally to crystalline patches. Without protein,
ABA42 formed small vesicles (Figure 1B, panel
1). With the incorporation of protein, at a PoPR of 43.2, larger vesicles
formed, and at PoPRs of 8.6 and then 2.2 the native structures evolved
into a mixture of vesicles and membrane patches (Supporting Information Figure S5) and then larger membrane
areas (Figure 1B, panel 3). With a further
increase in the incorporated protein, at a PoPR of 0.6, many membrane
patches showed crystalline AQP0 arrays (Figure 1B, panel 4).Figure 2 shows enlarged
images of the crystalline
AQP0 arrays that formed with PB12 at a PoPR of 1.3 and ABA42 at a
PoPR of 0.6. Fourier transforms of images of such two-dimensional
(2D) arrays provide information about the organization of the proteins
in the array. After computational unbending of the crystal lattice
with the 2dx software,[28] calculated Fourier
transforms of the BCP–AQP0 crystal images revealed clear diffraction
spots (Figure 2, insets) that define a tetragonal
unit cell of a = b = 6.5 nm. This
unit cell is identical to those seen with AQP0 2D crystals produced
with lipids,[24,25] demonstrating that AQP0 tetramers
in BCP membranes are organized in the same way as in lipid bilayers.
Figure 2
2D crystals
of AQP0 formed in BCPs. (A) AQP0 2D crystals in ABA42;
(B) AQP0 2D crystals in PB12. The diffraction spots seen in the Fourier
transforms of these images after unbending (insets) demonstrate the
high degree of protein incorporation. The scale bar in the insets
is (5 nm)−1. The unit cell dimensions of a = b = 6.5 nm are the same as those of
AQP0 2D crystals formed with lipids.
2D crystals
of AQP0 formed in BCPs. (A) AQP0 2D crystals in ABA42;
(B) AQP0 2D crystals in PB12. The diffraction spots seen in the Fourier
transforms of these images after unbending (insets) demonstrate the
high degree of protein incorporation. The scale bar in the insets
is (5 nm)−1. The unit cell dimensions of a = b = 6.5 nm are the same as those of
AQP0 2D crystals formed with lipids.
Functional Characterization of Densely Packed AQP0 in Polymer
Vesicles
We used stopped-flow measurements to assess the
function of densely packed AQP0 in PB12 membranes. In stopped-flow
studies, light scattering or fluorescence quenching is used to monitor
the rapid change in vesicle size when vesicles are subjected to an
osmotic gradient. This approach has been used extensively to determine
the permeability of water channels reconstituted into liposomes.[29−33] A prerequisite for the use of this method is that the protein is
reconstituted into vesicles, and vesicular morphology was therefore
confirmed by EM for all samples used in these studies.With
the dialysis procedure described above, all BCPs tested could be used
to incorporate AQP0 at a high density. To determine whether the incorporated
water channels were functional, we reconstituted AQP0 with PB12 at
a PoPR of 15, which yields large vesicles densely packed with AQP0
(Figure 1A, panel 2). Proteoliposomes are often
used to determine the transmembrane transport characteristics of reconstituted
membrane proteins (reviewed in ref.[34]),
but not in the case of AQP0. Instead, AQP0 function has been characterized
extensively using native vesicles[35] and
expression in Xenopus laevis oocytes.[32,36] Water permeability of AQP0 is low (2.5 × 10–15 cm3/s per molecule; ref (37)) compared to that of classical water channels
such as AQP1 (1.17 × 10–13 cm3/s;
ref (31)) and aquaporin
Z (AqpZ) (∼1 × 10–13 cm3/s;
ref (30)). The low
water permeability necessitated a high density of AQPs in order to
distinguish its permeability over the background permeability of the
BCP membranes.Since dialysis in the absence of AQP0 causes
PB12 to form network
structures (Figure 1A, panel 1), this method
could not be used to obtain pure PB12 vesicles needed as control to
measure the function of AQP0 reconstituted into PB12 vesicles. We
therefore used the sucrose rehydration method[7] to form pure PB12 vesicles, which were confirmed by EM and dynamic
light scattering.At pH 6.5, the water permeability of PB12
vesicles was 189.7 ±
61.3 μm/s (Figure 3), which is high compared
to the measured permeability of other BCP vesicles, 2.5 μm/s
for polyethylethylene-polyethylene oxide (PEE37-PEO40)[7] and 0.7 μm/s for PMOXA15-PDMS110-PMOXA155.[5] The high water permeability of PB12 vesicles, which is
in the range of those seen for lipid vesicles (10–150 μm/s;
ref (34)), is likely
due to its hydrophobic block consisting of only 12 butadiene units,
which is small compared to those of the BCPs analyzed before (30–110
hydrophobic repeat units).
Figure 3
Comparison of the water permeability of PB12
and PB12–AQP0
vesicles. (A) Normalized light scattering traces of PB12 vesicles
with (upper curve) and without AQP0 (lower curve) subjected to a 25
mOsm sucrose gradient at pH 6.5. This osmolarity was chosen specifically
for this figure to demonstrate the clear difference in kinetics. For
actual data collection a 50 mOsm sucrose gradient was used for AQP0-BCP
vesicles and a 300 mOsm gradient for pure BCP vesicles as described
in Supporting Information Materials and Methods. At a gradient of 25 mOsm, the kinetics for PB12 vesicles with AQP0
took ∼70 ms to saturate while it took ∼500 ms for pure
PB12 vesicles. (B) The approximately 7-fold higher water permeability
of vesicles containing AQP0 compared to that of pure PB12 vesicles
indicates that the incorporated water channels are functional. The
error bars represent standard deviation of three measurements. (C)
Determination of the activation energy (Ea) yielded 12.8 kcal/mol for pure PB12 vesicles (lower curve) and
5.7 kcal/mol for PB12 vesicle with AQP0 (upper curve). The values
reported in the text are averages of three independent measurements.
Comparison of the water permeability of PB12
and PB12–AQP0
vesicles. (A) Normalized light scattering traces of PB12 vesicles
with (upper curve) and without AQP0 (lower curve) subjected to a 25
mOsm sucrose gradient at pH 6.5. This osmolarity was chosen specifically
for this figure to demonstrate the clear difference in kinetics. For
actual data collection a 50 mOsm sucrose gradient was used for AQP0-BCP
vesicles and a 300 mOsm gradient for pure BCP vesicles as described
in Supporting Information Materials and Methods. At a gradient of 25 mOsm, the kinetics for PB12 vesicles with AQP0
took ∼70 ms to saturate while it took ∼500 ms for pure
PB12 vesicles. (B) The approximately 7-fold higher water permeability
of vesicles containing AQP0 compared to that of pure PB12 vesicles
indicates that the incorporated water channels are functional. The
error bars represent standard deviation of three measurements. (C)
Determination of the activation energy (Ea) yielded 12.8 kcal/mol for pure PB12 vesicles (lower curve) and
5.7 kcal/mol for PB12 vesicle with AQP0 (upper curve). The values
reported in the text are averages of three independent measurements.Reconstitution of AQP0 at a PoPR of 15 increased
the water permeability
of the PB12 vesicles to 1409 ± 409.5 μm/s (Figure 3B). To rule out the possibility that the increase
in water permeability of the AQP0-containing PB12 vesicles is due
to residual detergent, we performed permeability measurements of pure
PB12 vesicles in the presence of different OG concentrations (Supporting Information Figure S7). Since the
measured water permeability did not change up to an OG concentration
of 0.01% and since the residual OG concentration remaining in AQP0–PB12
vesicle samples after dialysis was measured to be only ∼0.0001%
(Supporting Information Figure S3), the
increase in water permeability must be due to the incorporation of
functional AQP0 channels.Measurement of the water permeability
at different temperatures
allowed determination of the activation energy. The activation energy
of water conduction by pure PB12 vesicles, 13.2 ± 0.9 kcal/mol,
is similar to that of vesicles formed by other BCPs and lipids[5,30] and indicative of passive diffusion of water across the PB12 membrane.
Incorporation of AQP0 into the PB12 vesicles lowered the activation
energy to 7.6 ± 1.7 kcal/mol (Figure 3C), comparable to previously determined values for the activation
energy of AQP0-mediated water conduction (5 and 6.9 kcal/mol; refs
(32) and (37)). These results show that
AQP0 function is preserved in BCP membranes, even at the high protein
density of the vesicles used in this study.
Discussion
The results obtained in this study show
that membrane proteins
can be incorporated into BCP membranes at high density, and that incorporation
of membrane proteins affects the morphology of the resulting BCP–membrane
protein aggregates. Furthermore, in some cases, AQP0 formed 2D crystals
in BCP membranes, which, after further optimization, may allow structure
determination of membrane proteins in BCP membranes and investigation
of BCP–protein interactions analogous to ongoing studies of
lipid–protein interactions.[25] Such
studies will be important for proposed applications of membrane protein-containing
BCP membranes as it will help determine factors that contribute to
compatibility between BCPs and membrane proteins. The present 2D crystals
already indicate that the structure and organization of AQP0 tetramers
in BCP membranes are the same as in lipid-based 2D crystals. The 2D
crystals also show that a high density of membrane proteins can be
incorporated into BCP membranes with planar architecture, ideal for
engineering applications. Finally, functional studies with AQP0 incorporated
into BCP vesicles show that, by using the dialysis approach presented
here, it is possible to reconstitute functional membrane proteins
into BCP vesicles at packing densities not reported before. These
findings and their implications are further discussed in the following
paragraphs.
Dialysis Greatly Increases the Efficiency of Membrane Protein
Incorporation into BCP Membranes
The film rehydration method
relies on separation of a BCP film from a glass surface to form membranes
with simultaneous insertion of membrane proteins.[38] Even though this method has been successful, one study
showed that protein insertion is limited to an equivalent PoPR of
∼100 (ref (5)). In an alternative protein incorporation method, preformed BCP
vesicles are destabilized by addition of detergent to allow insertion
of detergent-solubilized membrane proteins.[39] This procedure may also limit the number of membrane proteins that
can be incorporated, because inserting membrane proteins into preformed
membranes is energetically expensive, especially if the hydrophobic
region of the membrane protein does not match that of the BCP membrane.[19]Dialysis is a method often used in the
reconstitution of membrane proteins into lipid membranes to form either
proteoliposomes for functional studies (reviewed in ref (40)) or 2D crystals for structural
studies (reviewed in refs (41−43)). However,
BCPs are substantially less soluble in detergents than lipids,[19,20] requiring additional considerations. If the ternary BCP/protein/detergent
solution is not well mixed prior to the start of dialysis or if the
rate of detergent removal is too high, the polymer can precipitate
out of solution and self-assemble by itself without significant membrane
protein incorporation. Complete dissolution of the BCP in detergent
before mixing it with the detergent-solubilized membrane protein and
slowing the dialysis rate to allow the ternary BCP/protein/detergent
mixture to slowly transition through the cmc of the detergent is thus
critical for efficient membrane protein insertion. This strategy is
also frequently used for 2D crystallization of membrane proteins in
lipid membranes.[41,44] We thus propose that controlled,
slow detergent removal by dialysis may currently be the most efficient
method for membrane protein incorporation into BCP membranes. The
drawback of this method is the large amount of detergent needed to
dissolve BCPs and to control the dialysis rate, but it may be possible
to further optimize the procedure and to reduce the amount of detergent
needed.
The Amount of Incorporated Membrane Protein Affects the Morphology
of BCP–protein Aggregates
The morphology of self-assembled
aggregates formed by pure BCPs has been correlated with the volume
ratio of their hydrophilic and hydrophobic blocks.[45−47] This dependence
has been attributed to BCP molecules with different hydrophilic volume
ratios having different shapes and symmetries in solution based on
the volumes occupied by each block. For example, wedge-shaped BCPs
with hydrophobic blocks that occupy smaller volumes than their hydrophilic
blocks form aggregates with spherical morphologies in aqueous solutions.
On the other hand, rod-shaped BCPs with hydrophilic and hydrophobic
blocks that occupy similar volumes, reflected in equal volume fractions
for the two blocks, form planar membranes.[48] Inclusion of a molecule that interacts with only the hydrophilic
or the hydrophobic block will change the volume fraction of that block,
thus providing a means to control the morphology of the aggregates
that form.[48] Nanoparticles that interact
with the hydrophilic block have been shown to affect the morphology
of resulting BCP structures by increasing the strength of segregation.[49] Simulations and calculations using self-consistent
field theory suggested that a large number of membrane proteins could
be inserted into BCP membranes, even if the hydrophobic lengths of
the membrane protein and the BCP membrane are mismatched,[50,51] but this prediction had not been experimentally realized.Increasing the amount of membrane protein incorporated into lipid
bilayers can change the morphology of the membranes; for example,
from vesicles to planar membranes and then to 2D crystals.[44] Here, we report similar changes in the morphology
of self-assembled BCP structures with an increase in incorporated
AQP0. However, the PoPRs at which the transitions occur seem to span
a wide range and are very different from those seen when membrane
proteins are reconstituted into lipid membranes. For the case of aquaporins,
lipid membranes transition from densely packed to 2D crystalline at
a molar lipid-to-protein ratio (LPR) in the range of about 8 to 50
(Supporting Information Table S1), while
this transition occurs at a PoPR in the range of about 1.3 and 0.6
for PB12 and ABA42, respectively, the two BCPs that undergo this transition.
We compared the morphological transitions in BCPs with those of a
model lipid, dioleoyl phosphatidyletahnolamine (DOPE) (Figure 4A). The native structure formed by DOPE in the absence
of protein is a vesicle. With increasing incorporation of AQP0, vesicles
transition into mostly planar membranes at an LPR of ∼13, and
then to crystals at an LPR of ∼12 (Supporting
Information Table S2 and Figure S8), a much tighter transition range than seen for the BCPs tested
in this study.
Figure 4
The morphology of BCP–AQP0 aggregates depends on
the AQP0
volume fraction. The transitions between different morphologies of
BCP–protein aggregates are compared with those of lipid (DOPE)–protein
aggregates for one complete data set (Supporting
Information Table S2). (A) Plot of molar PoPRs against morphology
transitions. N, native structures; V, vesicles; M, planar membranes;
C, 2D crystals. (B) Plot for the same data set of transitions between
aggregate morphologies against the calculated AQP0 volume fraction.
The transition for diblock copolymers, triblock copolymers and the
lipid investigated in this study occur at similar hydrophilic volume
ratios. All studied amphiphiles transitioned to vesicular structures
at an AQP0 volume fraction of 16% or higher (solid gray line) and
to planar membranes at an AQP0 volume fraction of 65% or higher (dashed
line). (C) Plot for the same data set of the transitions between aggregate
morphologies, in which the MW of the “aggregate unit”
is plotted against the calculated AQP0 volume fraction. The values
for the MW of the aggregate unit, the MW of one polymer or lipid molecule
with the associated fraction of the MW of AQP0, were calculated by
adding the MW of a lipid or polymer molecule to the fraction of the
MW of AQP0 associated with the lipid or polymer based on the LPR or
PoPR, respectively. The lines indicate the approximate transition
boundaries.
The morphology of BCP–AQP0 aggregates depends on
the AQP0
volume fraction. The transitions between different morphologies of
BCP–protein aggregates are compared with those of lipid (DOPE)–protein
aggregates for one complete data set (Supporting
Information Table S2). (A) Plot of molar PoPRs against morphology
transitions. N, native structures; V, vesicles; M, planar membranes;
C, 2D crystals. (B) Plot for the same data set of transitions between
aggregate morphologies against the calculated AQP0 volume fraction.
The transition for diblock copolymers, triblock copolymers and the
lipid investigated in this study occur at similar hydrophilic volume
ratios. All studied amphiphiles transitioned to vesicular structures
at an AQP0 volume fraction of 16% or higher (solid gray line) and
to planar membranes at an AQP0 volume fraction of 65% or higher (dashed
line). (C) Plot for the same data set of the transitions between aggregate
morphologies, in which the MW of the “aggregate unit”
is plotted against the calculated AQP0 volume fraction. The values
for the MW of the aggregate unit, the MW of one polymer or lipid molecule
with the associated fraction of the MW of AQP0, were calculated by
adding the MW of a lipid or polymer molecule to the fraction of the
MW of AQP0 associated with the lipid or polymer based on the LPR or
PoPR, respectively. The lines indicate the approximate transition
boundaries.The volume fraction of the incorporated AQP0 in
the BCP–protein
aggregates provides a more consistent basis for understanding morphological
transitions for the various BCPs and lipid than PoPRs/LPR (Figure 4B). Assuming that the hydrophobic part of AQP0 exerts
the predominant effect on the self-assembly of the BCP–protein
aggregates, we considered only the hydrophobic volume of the AQP0
molecule, which we estimated from its atomic structure to be 18.91
nm3 (Supporting Information).
This value allowed us to calculate the AQP0 volume fraction in BCP–protein
and lipid–protein aggregates (the hydrophilic and hydrophobic
volume ratios of the lipid were calculated from the structure of hydrated
DOPE molecules;[52−54]Supporting Information). Transitions between different aggregate morphologies seem to occur
for all systems at similar AQP0 volume fractions (Figure 4B). While further studies are required, this result may indicate
that the morphology of BCP–protein and lipid–protein
aggregates is driven by segregation of the two blocks of the amphiphilic
molecules, which is enhanced by the presence of hydrophobic membrane
proteins interacting with the hydrophobic block. Figure 4B shows clear transitions from one to another dominant morphology
in particular AQP0 volume fraction ranges. Figure 4C shows the same data when the AQP0 volume ratio is plotted
against the MW of the aggregate unit (the MW of the polymer or lipid
molecule forming the membrane and the associated fraction of the MW
of AQP0). Again clear transitions are seen between dominant morphologies
in particular AQP0 volume fraction ranges.The change in morphology
of BCP aggregates resulting from different
amounts of incorporated protein has relevance for the design of hybrid
BCP–protein materials. Furthermore, the unit cell constants
of crystalline AQP0 arrays in BCP membranes, which are identical to
those in lipid-based AQP0 2D crystals, indicate that the overall structure
and organization of AQP0 is maintained in these BCP membranes. The
formation of planar BCP membranes rich in structurally and functionally
intact membrane protein, which could then be supported on suitable
substrates, has applications in many areas.BCPs may eventually
be used to grow 2D crystals of membrane proteins
that allow structure determination by electron crystallography.[43] The 2D crystals of AQP0 in both diblock and
triblock copolymer membranes presented here provide only a proof of
concept, but after optimization of polymer chemistry and crystallization
conditions, it may be possible to grow AQP0 2D crystals that are sufficiently
well ordered to reveal the interaction of BCPs with membrane proteins,
as lipid-based AQP0 2D crystals are currently providing insights into
lipid–protein interactions.[24,25] Furthermore,
high-resolution structures of application-relevant membrane proteins
in BCP membranes would help to explain similarities and/or differences
in the activity seen for membrane proteins incorporated into BCP membranes
of different hydrophobic block thicknesses, such as those seen for
NADH-ubiquinone oxidase incorporated into BCP membranes.[39] Eventually, such structural information may
allow it to deduce principles for the design of materials that optimize
membrane protein activity.
Functional Membrane Proteins Can Be Packed into BCP Membranes
at High Densities
In previous studies, full function of aquaporins
in BCP membranes has only been demonstrated at low packing densities.
The highest packing density showing the expected function was demonstrated
for AqpZ reconstituted into a BCP membrane at a molar PoPR (adjusted
for triblock architecture) of 100. We show here that full AQP0 function
still persists at a PoPR of 15. We also show that the reconstitution
method is critical, but polymer block lengths and chemistries may
also be important factors that determine how much protein can be functionally
reconstituted into BCP membranes. The possibility to obtain a high
density of functional membrane proteins in BCP membranes has significant
implications for applications of such systems. Overall, this work
provides a framework for developing highly efficient membrane protein
devices.
Conclusions
The results obtained in this study show
that membrane proteins
can be functionally incorporated into BCP membranes at high density,
and that incorporation of membrane proteins affects the morphology
of the resulting BCP–membrane protein aggregates. The effect
of AQP on the morphology of self-assembled structures for all four
BCPs and one lipid tested followed similar trends depending on the
volume fraction occupied by AQP0. Furthermore, in some cases, AQP0
formed 2D crystals in BCP membranes, representing the limit of membrane
protein packing in bilayer-like membranes. Concentration-dependent
morphology evolution allows for the design of membrane protein devices
and membranes of defined form factor, and the high densities shown
possible to be achieved provides for orders of magnitude improvement
in sensitivity or transport rates of such devices, allowing for miniaturization
or other unique designs.
Authors: Yue-Xiao Shen; Wen Si; Mustafa Erbakan; Karl Decker; Rita De Zorzi; Patrick O Saboe; You Jung Kang; Sheereen Majd; Peter J Butler; Thomas Walz; Aleksei Aksimentiev; Jun-li Hou; Manish Kumar Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2015-07-27 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Yue-Xiao Shen; Woochul Song; D Ryan Barden; Tingwei Ren; Chao Lang; Hasin Feroz; Codey B Henderson; Patrick O Saboe; Daniel Tsai; Hengjing Yan; Peter J Butler; Guillermo C Bazan; William A Phillip; Robert J Hickey; Paul S Cremer; Harish Vashisth; Manish Kumar Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2018-06-12 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Mustafa Erbakan; Yue-xiao Shen; Mariusz Grzelakowski; Peter J Butler; Manish Kumar; Wayne R Curtis Journal: PLoS One Date: 2014-01-31 Impact factor: 3.240
Authors: Ziyi Yu; Yu Zheng; Richard M Parker; Yang Lan; Yuchao Wu; Roger J Coulston; Jing Zhang; Oren A Scherman; Chris Abell Journal: ACS Appl Mater Interfaces Date: 2016-03-25 Impact factor: 9.229