Electrospinning is a high-throughput, low-cost technique for manufacturing long fibers from solution. Conventionally, this technique is used with covalent polymers with large molecular weights. We report here the electrospinning of functional peptide-based supramolecular polymers from water at very low concentrations (<4 wt %). Molecules with low molecular weights (<1 kDa) could be electrospun because they self-assembled into one-dimensional supramolecular polymers upon solvation and the critical parameters of viscosity, solution conductivity, and surface tension were optimized for this technique. The supramolecular structure of the electrospun fibers could ensure that certain residues, like bioepitopes, are displayed on the surface even after processing. This system provides an opportunity to electrospin bioactive supramolecular materials from water for biomedical applications.
Electrospinning is a high-throughput, low-cost technique for manufacturing long fibers from solution. Conventionally, this technique is used with covalent polymers with large molecular weights. We report here the electrospinning of functional peptide-based supramolecular polymers from water at very low concentrations (<4 wt %). Molecules with low molecular weights (<1 kDa) could be electrospun because they self-assembled into one-dimensional supramolecular polymers upon solvation and the critical parameters of viscosity, solution conductivity, and surface tension were optimized for this technique. The supramolecular structure of the electrospun fibers could ensure that certain residues, like bioepitopes, are displayed on the surface even after processing. This system provides an opportunity to electrospin bioactive supramolecular materials from water for biomedical applications.
Electrospinning is an efficient, well-known
process that produces
nanometer-to-micrometer sized fibers with a tunable diameter.[1−5] Nanofiber films produced by this technique provide a promising platform
for biomaterials. This technique employs an electrified needle that
ejects polymeric solutions toward a grounded collector. In the presence
of a large electric field, the solution is drawn into a one-dimensional
structure; moreover, the solvent evaporates as the electrified jet
travels from the end of the needle toward the collector to produce
a solid polymeric fiber. A major advantage of this high-throughput
technique is the versatility: poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG),[6] polycaprolactone (PCL),[7,8] and
collagen[9] have all been electrospun. Additionally,
these materials have been used as scaffolds for cells[7] and surface coatings.[5] Within
certain parameters of viscosity, surface tension, and solution conductivity,
additives like biological epitopes and proteins[10] can be added to the electrospinning solution to produce
bioactive fibers and matrices.Electrospinning has been traditionally
used to form fibers from
high molecular weight polymers, but has recently been extended to
supramolecular assemblies, such as surfactants,[11,12] peptides,[13] host–guest complexes,[14] and cyclodextrin.[15] In these cases, however, electrospinning small molecules requires
high concentrations and organic solvents.[12,15] Organic solvents can be undesirable in biomedical material processing
because residual solvent is deleterious to cells and needs to be removed;[16] additionally, nonaqueous solvents can denature
proteins, reducing their bioactivity. Despite these challenges, supramolecular
polymers provide numerous advantages: small molecules may be easier
to synthesize reproducibly and the self-assembled structures can be
morphologically well-defined. Furthermore, a myriad of structures
can be generated as supramolecular polymers form fibers, tapes, and
spherical micelles.[17] Nonetheless, the
ideal supramolecular system is a molecule that forms viscous solutions
at low concentrations in aqueous media that can be formed into functional
structures with minimal amounts of material. Ordered supramolecular
polymers meet these criteria and can be rationally designed to form
high aspect-ratio nanostructures with defined architecture. This defined
architecture could ensure a strategic geometrical display of residues,
such as bioactive signals on the surfaces of supramolecular polymers.Peptide amphipiles (PAs) are a class of self-assembling biomolecules[18−20] that have been extensively studied for a range of biomedical applications
including spinal cord injury repair,[21] wound
healing,[22] and enamel.[23−29] These are versatile molecules that are processed in water to yield
bioactive nanostructures that can guide cells through regenerative
processes with bioactive cues. Combining the bioactivity of PAs with
the versatility of electrospinning, which can be used to control the
size, layering, and alignment[1,30,31] of fibers, opens up the possibility of using electrospinning to
coat medical devices in a controlled manner to improve their biointegration.
Materials and Methods
Materials
Peptide Amphiphiles
All resins and Fmoc-protected amino
acids were purchased from Novabiochem Corporation. Solvents were purchased
from Mallinckrodt (ACS reagent grade) and reagents were purchased
from Aldrich and used as received. Solid-phase peptide synthesis was
performed manually on a 0.5 mM scale using 50 mL peptide synthesis
vessels (Chemglass) and a wrist-action shaker. A Wang resin with the
first amino acid preloaded was used for all molecules. During synthesis,
the Fmoc protecting group was removed by shaking the resin in 30%
piperidine in N,N-dimethylformamide
(DMF) for 10 min, rinsed, and repeated a second time. The resin was
then washed with dichloromethane (DCM) and DMF and allowed to swell
in DCM for 15 min before the coupling reaction. A total of 4 molar
equiv of the Fmoc-protected amino acids were activated using 4 mol
equiv of O-benzotriazole-N,N,N′,N′-tetramethyluronium-hexafluorophosphate
(HBTU) and dissolved in 30 mL of DMF. A total of 6 molar equiv of N,N-diisopropylethylamine (DIEA) were added
to the amino acid solution, which was allowed to sit for 2 min before
being added to the resin. The coupling reaction went for 3 h, at the
end of which, the resin was washed in DCM and DMF, and ninhydrin tests
were done to check for the presence of free amines. After a positive
ninhydrin result, the coupling was repeated. The palmitoyl tail was
added using the ratio of palmitic acid/HBTU/DIEA of 4:4:6. PAs were
cleaved by shaking the resin in a solution of 95% trifluoroacetic
acid (TFA), 2.5% triisopropyl silane (TIS), and 2.5% H2O for 3 h. The solution was drained into a round-bottom flask and
the resin was rinsed several times with DCM to remove all unbound
peptide. The DCM and TFA were removed using rotary evaporation, and
the PA residue was washed with cold diethyl ether and poured into
a fritted filter. After several diethyl ether washes, the flakes were
allowed to dry and then placed in a vacuum desiccator until HPLC purification.After cleavage, ultrapure water was added to make the PA solution
20 mM and ammonia hydroxide was added until the pH was raised to 8.
The solution was passed through a 0.22 μM filter and injected
into a preparative-scale reverse-phase HPLC running a mobile phase
gradient of 98% H2O and 2% acetonitrile (spectroscopic
grade, Mallinckrodt) to 100% acetonitrile. The 0.1% NH4OH was added to all mobile phases to aid PA solubility. The Phenomenex
C18 Gemini NX column had a 5 μm particle size, a
110 Å pore size, and was 150 × 30 mm. HPLC fractions were
checked for the correct compound using electrospray ionization mass
spectroscopy (ESI-MS). Rotary evaporation was used to remove acetonitrile
and solutions were lyophilized (Labconco, FreezeZone6) at a pressure
of 0.015 Torr. To remove any excess salts, PAs were dissolved in water
and dialyzed in 500 molecular weight cutoff dialysis tubing (Spectrum
Laboratories). After dialysis, the PAs were lyophilized.
Solutions
of Peptide Amphiphiles
Solutions of peptide
amphiphiles for characterization and electrospinning were made by
solubilizing the amphiphiles in ultrapure water (Millipore filtered,
resistivity 18.2 MΩ·cm). PAs 1 and 2 were dissolved in ultrapure water, bath sonicated for 25 min, and
allowed to rest at room temperature for 15 min prior to use. PA solutions
with concentrations up to 3 wt % dissolved readily; no heat treatment,
additional surfactants, or salts were used during the course of this
study.
Methods
Viscosity Measurements
Rheological properties of PA 1 and 2 were
studied from 0.2 to 3 wt % (Figure 2). The shear rate-dependent viscosity
data was collected with a Paar Physica Modular Compact Rheometer 300
operating in a parallel-plate configuration with a 25 mm diameter
and 0.5 mm gap distance at 25 °C. The reported shear rate was
the rate experienced by the fluid on the outer edge of the rotating
plate.
Figure 2
Shear rate and concentration dependent viscosity
of (a) PA 1 and (b) PA 2 compared to 2 wt
% aqueous PEG.
(a) Molecular structure of peptide amphiphiles 1 and 2. (b) Cryo-TEM image of PA 1 illustrating twisted
ribbon morphology of nanostructures. (c) Cryo-TEM image of PA 2 illustrating fibrous morphology of nanostructures.Shear rate and concentration dependent viscosity
of (a) PA 1 and (b) PA 2 compared to 2 wt
% aqueous PEG.
Measurements of Solution
Conductivity
The solution
conductivity was measured for PA 1 and 2 using a Malvern Zetasizer Nano (Figure 3b).
We used approximately 300 μL of each solution.
Figure 3
(a) Concentration-dependent
surface tension measurements of PA 1 and 2. (b) Concentration-dependent solution
conductivity measurements of PA 1 and PA 2. Error bars represent standard deviation.
(a) Concentration-dependent
surface tension measurements of PA 1 and 2. (b) Concentration-dependent solution
conductivity measurements of PA 1 and PA 2. Error bars represent standard deviation.
Measurements of Surface Tension
The surface tension
of PA 1 and PA 2 was measured with drop
shape analysis using a KRÜSS DSA 100 instrument (Figure 3a). A droplet was measured from a 5 mL syringe and
quantified within 5 s of forming the droplet.
Electrospinning
Electrospinning was performed using
a horizontal polarized needle and collector. The needle and collector
were spaced 5 cm apart. The voltage applied was 10 kV. The flow rate
for all experiments, unless otherwise noted, were 0.04 mL/h. A syringe
pump was used to eject material from an electrified needle. We used
solutions of PA 1 and 2 with a 3 wt % concentration.
Different substrates (e.g., stents, indium tin oxide, etc.) were taped
with double-sided copper tape to the aluminum foil-based collector
such that the electrospun fibers deposited on top.
Electron
Microscopy
Scanning electron microscopy (SEM)
was performed with a Hitachi S4800–II SEM. Electrospun samples
were coated with 50 nm of osmium from an osmium tetroxide source using
a Filgen Osmium Coater. This coating helped prevent charging of the
sample inside the SEM.
Optical Imaging
Optical imaging
was performed with
a Nikon microscope in transmission mode. We used polarizers to perform
polarized optical microscopy.
Results and Discussion
Characterization
of PA 1 and 2
Studies were performed
with two different PA molecules, C16-E2V3 (PA 1) and C16-V3A3E3 (PA 2) (Figure 1a). The latter
has been shown to form highly viscous gels in solution and can be
processed into aligned, monodomain arrays[32] when drawn through a solution containing divalent cations. The amino
acid valine has a high propensity for β-sheet hydrogen-bonding,[33] which assists in the self-assembly of nanofibers,
while charged glutamic acid residues impart solubility. Such noncovalent
interactions are able to connect these small molecules into electrospun
nanofibers in water.
Figure 1
(a) Molecular structure of peptide amphiphiles 1 and 2. (b) Cryo-TEM image of PA 1 illustrating twisted
ribbon morphology of nanostructures. (c) Cryo-TEM image of PA 2 illustrating fibrous morphology of nanostructures.
Peptide amphiphiles 1 and 2 were studied by cryogenic transmission electron microscopy
(cryoTEM). Powders of peptide amphiphiles were dissolved in ultrapure
water and bath sonicated per the procedure described in Methods. The preparation of samples for cryoTEM
utilized dilute solutions with concentrations of <0.1% (w/v) in
water. CryoTEM revealed that PA 1 formed a twisted, ribbon-like
nanostructure with a width of 30 nm and a periodicity of 300 nm. The
length of these structures was very long (>10 μm) as the
start
and end of a twisted ribbon could not be traced by the eye. We found
that PA 2 assembled into cylindrical nanofibers. PA 2 formed long nanofibers with lengths exceeding 10 μm
and widths of approximately 7 nm (Figure 1b,c).
It was difficult to obtain cryo-TEM and conventional transmission
electron microscopy images at higher concentrations used for electrospinning
experiments (3 wt %) because the large number of nanofibers in solution
rendered thick films that were no longer electron-transparent. It
is important to note that this class of materials formed supramolecular
polymers in water only; however, the related peptide lipid (PL) systems
are soluble in organic solvents.As shown by Figure 1, peptide amphiphiles
assemble into one-dimensional structures in water. The one-dimensional
supramolecular polymers are long and could become entangled with other
strands thereby producing a more viscous solution. Past studies of
these molecules found that the critical micelle concentration (CMC)
of PAs tends to be very low. Electrospinning uniform fibers required
the careful balance of mechanical properties, minimization of surface
energy, and density of charges. To determine the appropriate concentration
for electrospinning PAs, the viscosity, surface tension, and solution
conductivity were measured.
Rheological Measurements of PA Solutions
Rheological
properties of PA 1 and 2 were studied from
low concentrations (0.2 wt %) up to 3 wt % in Milli-Q water (Figure 2). For comparison, we also measured the shear rate-dependent
viscosity of aqueous solutions of 2 wt % 400 kDa poly(ethylene glycol)
(PEG), a polymer commonly used for electrospinning. This concentration
of PEG has been shown to have low viscosities that are still amenable
for electrospinning; this control experiment allowed us to establish
a threshold for the viscoelastic behavior for electrospinning PAs
and other supramolecular polymers.[3]The mechanical properties of the PA solutions demonstrated a dependence
on concentration: the viscosity increased by more than an order of
magnitude from 0.2 to 3 wt %, as seen in Figure 2. At low shear rates, both PA 1 and PA 2 (3 wt %) had similar viscosities of approximately 2 Pa·s and
began to shear thin at higher shear rates. PA solutions proved to
be more viscous than the PEG-based control at shear rates less than
100 Hz. In contrast, the PEG control had a viscosity that was nearly
constant over the measurement range. High viscosities are required
since high shear rates are applied to the solution at the tip of the
electrospinning Taylor cone. Given this constraint, higher concentrations
of these PAs (3 wt %) should be most suitable but are still 1 order
of magnitude lower than other electrospun small molecules.
Surface
Tension Measurements
In addition to a high
viscosity, a solution with a minimal surface tension is preferred
for electrospinning. A low surface tension implies that the surface
energy of a solution can accommodate a larger surface area (e.g.,
cylindrical morphology) when the solution was ejected; this property
can be manipulated by adding surfactants to the solution. Interestingly,
the amphiphilic nature of the PA behaves like a surfactant and could
help decrease the surface tension of the electrospinning solution.
Therefore, a low surface tension enables long, uniform fibers that
are free of “bead-on-string” morphologies.[30]The surface tension of PA 1 was approximately 44.7 milliNewtons (mN) per meter (m) at 3 wt %.
PA 2 had a higher surface tension of 58 mN/m at 3 wt
%. The surface tension of PA solutions varied with concentration;
however, there was no clear trend between concentration and surface
tension. The surface tension of water measured with the same technique
was 73.8 mN/m at room temperature. The surface tension of PAs was
lower than that of water at all PA concentrations. Furthermore, both
PA-based solutions had surface tensions comparable to or lower than
the PEG solution. We suspect that the PEG-based macromolecules do
not sufficiently adsorb at the liquid–gas interface to lower
the surface tension.
Solution Conductivity of PA Solutions
Another parameter
that influences the morphology of electrospun fibers is the charge
density. PA nanofibers inherently exhibit high surface charge density
due to the supramolecular assembly that positions acidic (e.g., glutamic
acid) or basic (e.g., lysine) residues near the surface of the nanostructure.
When solubilized, depending on the pH of the solution and the pKa of the residue, these amino acids become charged.
The charges that form at the surface of the fibers affect the droplet
formation and solution conductivity. In the case of PA 1 and PA 2, both the disassociated proton from the glutamic
acid residues and C-terminal carboxylic acids and the charged supramolecular
structure are mobile and can migrate in the presence of an external
electric field. Both supramolecular polymers had solution conductivities
far exceeding that of the PEG-based control. PA 1 and
PA 2 had solution conductivities of 2.6 and 3.6 mS/cm
at 3 wt %, respectively. Additionally, as the concentration increased
so did the solution conductivity. This trend is expected since more
concentrated solutions had a larger number of charged residues for
a fixed volume; this led to more charged structures and a higher solution
conductivity.
Electrospinning of PA Solutions
Having characterized
these materials, we found that a concentration exceeding 3 wt % to
provide a sufficiently high viscosity, low surface tension, and high
solution conductivity for electrospinning. While spinning, solutions
with lower concentrations had an unstable Taylor cone; this instability
made it difficult to control the uniformity of the fibers. This behavior
was likely caused by the low viscosity and limited entanglement between
the assemblies in solution. The optimal electric field for electrospinning
was found to be 2 kV/cm with a 0.04 mL/h flow rate. This distance
was sufficiently long for water to evaporate from the jet. Electrospun
fibers of PA 1 and PA 2 had similar diameters
of 3.8 ± 0.4 and 3.9 ± 1.3 μm, respectively. The electrospinning
process was very sensitive to voltage: lower voltages did not produce
a reliable Taylor cone and higher voltages resulted in electrospray.Electrospun fibers of PA 1 and 2 showed
axial alignment of supramolecular polymers along the long axis of
the fiber (Figure 4). Scanning electron microscopy
(SEM) revealed that electrospun fibers of PA 1 were composed
of individual nanostructures approximately 20 nm in width: these dimensions
are consistent with dimensions observed in Cryo-TEM (Figure 1). The morphology of individual nanostructures appeared
nonuniform in diameter and may retain the assembled twisted nanoribbon
morphology (Figure 4a). Some thin electrospun
fibers (<200 nm), from 2 wt % solutions, for example, were composed
of textured structures reminiscent of bundles of twisted nanoribbons
(Figure 4b). This ribbon-like structure was
also observed in electrospun systems of poly (ether imide) in hexafluoroisopropanol.[34] PA 2 produced electrospun fibers
composed of bundles of cylindrical PA nanofibers approximately 50
nm wide (Figure 4c). Even though both ribbons
and cylindrical nanofibers would be suitable for biological applications,
the cylindrical morphology is more effective at proper signal presentation.
Figure 4
SEM imaging
of electrospun fibers from 2 wt % solutions of (a,
b) PA 1 and (c) PA 2. Fibers are composed
of highly aligned supramolecular polymers. (b) PA 1 forms
assemblies of twisted nanoribbons that are maintained through the
electrospinning process.
SEM imaging
of electrospun fibers from 2 wt % solutions of (a,
b) PA 1 and (c) PA 2. Fibers are composed
of highly aligned supramolecular polymers. (b) PA 1 forms
assemblies of twisted nanoribbons that are maintained through the
electrospinning process.
Surface Coatings of Electrospun PAs
Like conventional
polymeric materials, electrospun PA fibers can be deposited on a myriad
of surfaces, including medically relevant devices, like stents (Figure 5a), or substrates such as glass (Figure 5b) or silicon (Figure 5c).
With practical applications in mind, the electrospinning of PAs could
be used to improve cell adhesion to surfaces or elicit a tailored
biological response to medical devices by utilizing PAs with bioactive
epitopes. However, these studies are outside the scope of the work
presented here. Attempts to form free-standing films of electrospun
PAs yielded materials that were not mechanically robust.
Figure 5
Electrospinning
of PA fibers on (a) metallic coronary stent (PA 1), (b)
glass (PA 1), and (c) silicon (PA 2).
Electrospinning
of PA fibers on (a) metallic coronary stent (PA 1), (b)
glass (PA 1), and (c) silicon (PA 2).
Optical Imaging of Electrospun
PAs
The fibers produced
by electrospinning PAs were examined by optical birefringence as well.
PA solutions and aligned monodomains of PA gels[32] show birefringence under crossed polarizers (Figure 6). When two oriented fibers are laid orthogonally
on top of each other, light is fully extinguished: this observation
illustrates the high degree of alignment of nanostructures within
the fiber. The large shear force at the Taylor cone aligns the supramolecular
polymers along the spinning direction, resulting in electrospun fibers
composed of highly aligned, densely packed nanostructures.
Figure 6
Optical imaging
of electrospun PA fibers (a) without polarizers
(PA 1), (b) with cross polarizers (PA 1),
and (c) cross polarizers (PA 2). Birefringence with cross
polarizers indicates that supramolecular polymers are highly aligned
along the fiber.
Optical imaging
of electrospun PA fibers (a) without polarizers
(PA 1), (b) with cross polarizers (PA 1),
and (c) cross polarizers (PA 2). Birefringence with cross
polarizers indicates that supramolecular polymers are highly aligned
along the fiber.Furthermore, electrospun
PA materials are a good candidate for
applications in regenerative medicine. Preliminary studies demonstrated
that cells are able to adhere to nonbiological materials, such as
indium tin oxide, when a coating of electrospun PA 1 is
present. To prove the bioactivity of the fibers, parameters like cell
viability, morphology (a measure of adhesion), and even stem cell
differentiation could be studied. Additionally, PA 2 nucleated
the growth of amorphous calcium phosphate from calcium-enriched media,
which could provide a bioactive surface to promote bone mineralization
(Supporting Information). These results
suggest that the combination of peptide amphiphile self-assembly and
electrospinning could produce new types of functional coatings for
biological applications.
Conclusions
Peptide amphiphiles
that self-assemble into nanofibers are known
to be highly bioactive. In this work we have demonstrated the electrospinning
of these functional supramolecular polymers into micrometer-scale
fibers without any carrier polymer or template. These PAs self-assemble
into functional supramolecular polymers with properties that allow
them to be electrospun. Additionally, the solution-phase assembly
of cylindrical nanofibers or twisted ribbons in water offers a strategy
to create new fibrous biomaterials. These supramolecular polymers
may find new applications to create bioactive surfaces for implantable
devices, sutures, and scaffolds for tissue regeneration.
Authors: Alvaro Mata; Yanbiao Geng; Karl J Henrikson; Conrado Aparicio; Stuart R Stock; Robert L Satcher; Samuel I Stupp Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2010-05-15 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Christopher W Bond; Nicholas Angeloni; Daniel Harrington; Samuel Stupp; Carol A Podlasek Journal: J Sex Med Date: 2012-12-13 Impact factor: 3.802
Authors: Matthew J Webber; Jörn Tongers; Christina J Newcomb; Katja-Theres Marquardt; Johann Bauersachs; Douglas W Losordo; Samuel I Stupp Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2011-08-01 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Kanya Rajangam; Heather A Behanna; Michael J Hui; Xiaoqiang Han; James F Hulvat; Jon W Lomasney; Samuel I Stupp Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2006-09 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: W-J Wan-Ju Li; Richard Tuli; Chukwuka Okafor; Assia Derfoul; K G Keith G Danielson; D J David J Hall; R S Rocky S Tuan Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2005-02 Impact factor: 12.479