| Literature DB >> 26438975 |
R Madurga1,2, T A Blackledge3, B Perea1,2, G R Plaza1,2, C Riekel4, M Burghammer4, M Elices1,2, G Guinea1,2, J Pérez-Rigueiro1,2.
Abstract
The extraordinary mechanical performance of spider dragline silk is explained by its highly ordered microstructure and results from the sequences of its constituent proteins. This optimized microstructural organization simultaneously achieves high tensile strength and strain at breaking by taking advantage of weak molecular interactions. However, elucidating how the original design evolved over the 400 million year history of spider silk, and identifying the basic relationships between microstructural details and performance have proven difficult tasks. Here we show that the analysis of maximum supercontracted single spider silk fibers using X ray diffraction shows a complex picture of silk evolution where some key microstructural features are conserved phylogenetically while others show substantial variation even among closely related species. This new understanding helps elucidate which microstructural features need to be copied in order to produce the next generation of biomimetic silk fibers.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26438975 PMCID: PMC4594040 DOI: 10.1038/srep14820
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Representative XRD spectra of maximum supercontracted MAS fibers of the analysed species represented in a phylogenetic tree19.
The most significant Bragg’s peaks are shown in each XRD pattern.
Figure 2(A) Schematic representation of a β-sheet nanocrystal showing the directions of the unit cell and the labelling used to describe the unit cell and nanocrystal dimensions. (B) Representation of the unit cell dimensions for the different spider species. Circles are for a-dimension (interchain direction), squares correspond to b-dimension (intersheet direction) and diamonds are for c-dimension (protein backbone direction). Error bars represent standard error. (C) Particle size of the nanocrystallites in the [100] (crossed circles, dimension w), [010] (squares, dimension t) and [001] (diamonds, dimension l) directions. Error bars represent standard error.
Spacings of main Bragg reflections.
| Species | Distances (Å) | Proposed group | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| (100) | (020) | (210) | (002) | ||
| — | 8.7 ± 0.2 | 4.51 ± 0.06 | 3.48 ± 0.04 | ~β(5) | |
| 9.5 ± 0.7 | 4.6 ± 0.1 | 4.4 ± 0.1 | 3.58 ± 0.03 | β(1) | |
| 9.5 ± 0.7 | 5.5 ± 0.1 | 4.43 ± 0.03 | 3.47 ± 0.01 | β(3) | |
| 9.1 ± 0.7 | 5.3 ± 0.5 | 4.4 ± 0.1 | 3.53 | β(3) | |
| 10 ± 1 | 5.6 ± 0.3 | 4.5 ± 0.1 | 3.47 ± 0.05 | β(3) | |
| 9.0 ± 0.4 | 5.3 ± 0.2 | 4.4 ± 0.1 | 3.525 ± 0.009 | β(3) | |
| 9.3 ± 0.1 | 5.4 ± 0.2 | 4.4 ± 0.1 | 3.44 ± 0.05 | β(3) | |
1Groups are labelled following Warwicker’s classification. The pattern of A. seemani was assigned to β(5) group despite the value of the b-dimension is actually larger than that originally proposed by Warwicker.
2Due the noisy images of this sample the (002) reflection has been analyzed only in one pattern.
Sequence motifs present in the analyzed species and percentage of small aminoacids.
| Motif | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| An | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ |
| (GS)n | ✓ | ||||
| (GA)n | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ||
| (GGX)n | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | ✓ | |
| GPG(X)n | ✓ | ✓ | |||
| (G+A+S)% | 34 | 78 | 72 | 69 | 70 |
Analyses were performed from sequences available at the National Center for Biotechnology Information (http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/protein; Release May 1st 2014). No sequence for the fibroins of P. mirabilis or C. darwini were available at the time of writing this work.
Figure 3(A) Mean orientation of the β-sheet nanocrystals with respect to fiber axis, quantified from the FWHM of the Gaussian functions obtained from the fitting of azimuthal intensity at (210) reflections. Higher values of FWHM mean less orientation of the nanocrystals with respect to the fiber axis. (B) Crystallinity of the fibers calculated as χ. (C) Volume of the nanocrystals for the different species obtained from the apparent particle size (see Fig. 3) assuming ellipsoid geometry. The number in each bar indicates the mean value of the parameter and error bars represent standard error. All data, except for C. darwini, where n = 1, are the result of averaging the corresponding parameter from at least two different fibers of the same species.
Figure 4(A,B) Orientation, measured as azimuthal FWHM of the (210) reflection, versus supercontraction and strain at breakage, respectively. Supercontraction (C) and elastic modulus (D) as a function of crystallinity. Supercontraction (E) and toughness (F) as a function of the volume of the individual nanocrystal. Error bars represent the standard error as calculated from the mechanical data found in19. Error bars along the X axes are not shown to improve the clarity of the plots but can be readily inferred from Fig. 3.