| Literature DB >> 27626071 |
Huixi Violet Zhang1, Frank Polzer2, Michael J Haider2, Yu Tian2, Jose A Villegas1, Kristi L Kiick2, Darrin J Pochan2, Jeffery G Saven1.
Abstract
Folded peptides present complex exterior surfaces specified by their amino acid sequences, and the control of these surfaces offers high-precision routes to self-assembling materials. The complexity of peptide structure and the subtlety of noncovalent interactions make the design of predetermined nanostructures difficult. Computational methods can facilitate this design and are used here to determine 29-residue peptides that form tetrahelical bundles that, in turn, serve as building blocks for lattice-forming materials. Four distinct assemblies were engineered. Peptide bundle exterior amino acids were designed in the context of three different interbundle lattices in addition to one design to produce bundles isolated in solution. Solution assembly produced three different types of lattice-forming materials that exhibited varying degrees of agreement with the chosen lattices used in the design of each sequence. Transmission electron microscopy revealed the nanostructure of the sheetlike nanomaterials. In contrast, the peptide sequence designed to form isolated, soluble, tetrameric bundles remained dispersed and did not form any higher-order assembled nanostructure. Small-angle neutron scattering confirmed the formation of soluble bundles with the designed size. In the lattice-forming nanostructures, the solution assembly process is robust with respect to variation of solution conditions (pH and temperature) and covalent modification of the computationally designed peptides. Solution conditions can be used to control micrometer-scale morphology of the assemblies. The findings illustrate that, with careful control of molecular structure and solution conditions, a single peptide motif can be versatile enough to yield a wide range of self-assembled lattice morphologies across many length scales (1 to 1000 nm).Entities:
Keywords: Peptide; computational design; de novo design; nanomaterials; self-assembly; soft matter
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 27626071 PMCID: PMC5017825 DOI: 10.1126/sciadv.1600307
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Adv ISSN: 2375-2548 Impact factor: 14.136
Fig. 1Computationally designed, helical, homotetramer assemblies.
(A to D) Models of peptides forming distinct nanostructures using a de novo designed helical homotetramer motif, which comprises both the backbone coordinates of the D2 symmetric tetramer and interior hydrophobic residues. On the left of each panel, designed exterior residues are colored according to chemical properties: positively charged KHR (blue), negatively charged DE (red), polar NQSTY (green), hydrophobic FILMVW (yellow), and small AG (cyan). Interior hydrophobic residues common to all the sequences are gray. On the right of each panel, the targeted assemblies are rendered along with symmetry axes (C2, oval; C3, triangle; C4, square; C6, hexagon) and the unique dimensions of the unit cell, a and b. (A) D2 symmetric tetramer designed in isolation and targeted to remain not assembled in solution. The exterior residues of the remaining proteins were designed in the context of a single layer from the corresponding space groups (B) P622, (C) P422, and (D) P222.
Table of computationally determined peptides for solution assembly.
Colored rectangles contain eight candidate sequences that were experimentally characterized. Sequences were theoretically designed to produce tetrahelical bundles. BNDL_1 was designed in the absence of any lattice assembly and is expected to remain soluble (brown). The P222 (orange), P422 (green), and P622 (blue) sequences were designed in the presence of lattices of corresponding symmetry. The remaining P222_9 and P422_1 sequences contain covalently modified termini. P222_4 is the only sequence candidate that did not behave as predicted and could not be assembled into a nanostructure in the solution conditions used for the other peptides. The heptad repeat positions (abcdefg) of all peptides are shown in the table heading. The designed, hydrophobic interior residues of the motif shown are highlighted in gray. MW, molecular weight.
Fig. 2Structural characterization of assemblies comprising designed peptides.
(A) Small-angle neutron scattering data and nanocylinder fit (black curve) of BNDL_1 assembled from 5 mM peptide solution in borate buffer (pH 10). Fit provides a cylinder length of ~3.5 nm and a radius of ~1 nm, consistent with tetrameric coiled coil soluble bundle design. (B to D) Peptide solutions were heated to 80°C to obviate intermolecular or intramolecular structures and then allowed to cool to room temperature for intermolecular assembly. (B) Left: Low-magnification cast-film transmission electron microscopy (TEM) image of P622_6 assembled from 1 mM peptide solution in phosphate buffer (pH 7). (B) Right: High-magnification image of negatively stained lattice consistent with P622 symmetry. Upper inset is the fast Fourier transform (FFT) calculated from the high-magnification TEM data, whereas the lower inset is the inverse FFT (IFFT) calculated using the FFT maxima. (C) Left: Low-magnification cast-film TEM image of P422_1 assembled from 1 mM peptide solution in borate buffer (pH 10). (C) Right: High-magnification image of negatively stained lattice. Upper and lower insets are the FFT and IFFT, respectively. (D) Left: Low-magnification cast-film image of P222_1 assembled from 1 mM peptide solution in phosphate buffer (pH 7). (D) Right: High-magnification image of positively stained lattice. Upper and lower insets are the FFT and IFFT, respectively.
Lattice parameters of the self-assembling peptides from the design in comparison with those determined from analysis of Fourier transforms of the TEM images in Fig. 2.
a and b denote the dimensions of the two-dimensional unit cell, and γ denotes the interior angle defined by sides a and b.
| 4.57 | 4.57 | 120 | 4.5 ± 0.3 | 4.5 ± 0.3 | 112.7 ± 0.4 | |
| 3.12 | 3.12 | 90 | 4.2 ± 0.2 | 3.9 ± 0.2 | 88.9 ± 0.9 | |
| 2.09 | 2.00 | 90 | 3.3 ± 0.3 | 3.2 ± 0.3 | 100.4 ± 0.9 | |
Fig. 3Cast-film TEM examples of morphology control with manipulation of solution assembly conditions and peptide primary structure.
All sample solutions heated to above 80°C for 1 hour to obviate any assembled or secondary structure before respective cooling treatment. (A and B) P622_2 peptide (0.5 mM) at pH 7 (phosphate buffer) quenched to (A) 50°C versus (B) 25°C and imaged after 1 day. (C and D) P222_9 (1.0 mM) ambiently cooled to room temperature at (C) pH 7 (phosphate buffer) versus (D) pH 10 (borate buffer) showing a clear difference in superstructure growth. (E and F) Plates grown from 0.1 mM peptide solutions with peptide primary structure altered through acetylation of the N terminus. Ambient cooling to room temperature allowing assembly of (E) P222_9_Ac at a low pH of 4.5 in sodium acetate buffer and of (F) P422_1_Ac quenched to 50°C at pH 8 in phosphate buffer. (G and H) Plates grown from 1.0 mM peptide solutions at pH 7 (phosphate buffer) after ambient cooling to room temperature, with P222_9 peptide primary structure altered through addition of (G) four glycines versus (H) six glycines to the N terminus of the P222_9 peptide molecule.