Antifreeze proteins from polar fish species are potent ice recrystallization inhibitors (IRIs) effectively stopping all ice growth. Additives that have IRI activity have been shown to enhance cellular cryopreservation with potential to improve the distribution of donor cells and tissue. Polyampholytes, polymers with both anionic and cationic side chains, are a rapidly emerging class of polymer cryoprotectants, but their mode of action and the structural features essential for activity are not clear. Here regioregular polyampholytes are synthesized from maleic anhydride copolymers to enable stoichiometric installation of the charged groups, ensuring regioregularity, which is not possible using conventional random copolymerization. A modular synthetic strategy is employed to enable the backbone and side chain hydrophobicity to be varied, with side chain hydrophobicity found to have a profound effect on the IRI activity. The activity of the regioregular polymers was found to be superior to those derived from a standard random copolymerization with statistical incorporation of monomers, demonstrating that sequence composition is crucial to the activity of IRI active polyampholytes.
Antifreeze proteins from polar fish species are potent ice recrystallization inhibitors (IRIs) effectively stopping all ice growth. Additives that have IRI activity have been shown to enhance cellular cryopreservation with potential to improve the distribution of donor cells and tissue. Polyampholytes, polymers with both anionic and cationic side chains, are a rapidly emerging class of polymer cryoprotectants, but their mode of action and the structural features essential for activity are not clear. Here regioregular polyampholytes are synthesized from maleic anhydride copolymers to enable stoichiometric installation of the charged groups, ensuring regioregularity, which is not possible using conventional random copolymerization. A modular synthetic strategy is employed to enable the backbone and side chain hydrophobicity to be varied, with side chain hydrophobicity found to have a profound effect on the IRI activity. The activity of the regioregular polymers was found to be superior to those derived from a standard random copolymerization with statistical incorporation of monomers, demonstrating that sequence composition is crucial to the activity of IRI active polyampholytes.
Antifreeze (glyco)
proteins (AF(G)Ps)
have evolved in polar fish
species to enable them to survive in subzero environments by specifically
interacting with ice crystals.[1] AF(G)Ps
have three main properties of thermal hysteresis (lowering freezing
point, but not melting point), dynamic ice shaping (changing morphology
of ice crystals), and also ice recrystallization inhibition (IRI),
the inhibition of the growth of already formed ice crystals.[1−3] The property of IRI is of particular interest as the growth of ice
crystals has been identified as a crucial mechanism of cell death
during the thawing of cryopreserved cells and tissues.[4] The addition of AF(G)Ps to cryopreservation solutions was
found to give some increase in cell recovery but the effect was limited
by the onset of dynamic ice shaping, which leads to ice crystals piercing
cell membranes.[5] Consequently, there has
been much interest in developing synthetic mimics which have IRI activity
to enable the cryostorage of donor tissues and cells.[6,2,7,8] There
is an urgent need for new storage mechanisms, with a global shortage
of cells such as blood,[9−11] which is exacerbated by cells’ limited shelf
life. Effective cryoprotectants are also important for applications
in frozen food.[12−14] Current cryopreservation strategies often involve
addition of large quantities of DMSO which can have negative (toxic)
effects on both the cells and the recipient.[15,16]The most potent polymer-IRI identified to date is poly(vinyl
alcohol),
which can inhibit all ice growth at sub mg·mL–1 concentrations, although its exact mechanism is unclear,[17,18] unlike AFPs, which engage specifically with ice crystal faces.[19] Many other polyols have been tested and few
have any appreciable activity, suggesting the underlying mechanisms
are complex and not just a property of regularly spaced hydroxyl groups.[20,21] Addition of PVA to nonvitrifying cryopreservative solutions has
been found to enhance the storage of several cell types by reducing
thawing induced damage.[22−24] It should be noted that this
is distinct to PVA’s role in nucleation inhibition.[25,26] The role of architecture on PVA’s activity has been studied
by Gibson and co-workers with the IRI activity increasing with chain
length, with a minimum of 10–20 units being essential.[27,28] Voets et al. found that comb-like PVAs had lower activity compared
to linear.[29]There is increasing
evidence that nonhydroxylated polymers (or
small molecules) can also display IRI activity, which may give rise
to new cryoprotectants. Ben et al. have demonstrated that some surfactants
are potent IRIs (but not all) and recently a supramolecular IRI was
reported.[8] A common feature of these is
that hydrophobic domains appear to be crucial to activity, but presented
in a manner which does not lead to aggregation. The antimicrobial
peptide Nisin A shows potent IRI but only at pH where its histidine
residues are protonated, leading to folding into an amphiphilic shape.[30] Matsumura et al. have developed the use of polyampholytes
(polymers with both cationic and anionic side chains) as new cryoprotectants
enabling the DMSO-free storage of stem cells, a key challenge in regenerative
medicine.[31] Gibson et al. studied a range
of polyampholytes and found that they also display significant IRI
activity making them a unique class of polymeric AF(G)P mimics.[32,33] The rationale for polyampholyte IRI activity is currently unclear
as they have no obvious ice binding domains, although they do interact
with cell membranes, which may enhance their cryoprotective effect.[34] Polyampholytes are an appealing class of polymer
to study though, due to their generic nature (e.g any polymer with
mixed charges seems to have some activity) and easier synthesis compared
to PVA.[35]All currently described
polyampholytes, however, are comprised
of either polydisperse polymers (e.g., carboxylated poly(lysine)[31]) or random copolymers with nonstoichiometric
ratios of the anionic and cationic groups.[33,34] We have previously shown that both the molecular weight and the
ratio of the two charged components (must be 1:1) are crucial for
activity of this emerging class of biomaterials.[33] A further issue is that the sequence distribution of these
essential units has not been thoroughly studied (other than both are
required). Recent advances in controlled radical polymerization by
Lutz and others have enabled techniques for control over the site
of installation of specific functionality into synthetic polymers
by kinetic control[36,37] or the synthesis of multiblock
copolymers,[38] with improved control over
sequence; although these methods are still not capable of producing
fully sequence controlled materials as found in Nature. The most well-known
sequence-defined polymers are those based on maleic anhydride copolymers.[39] Due to maleic anhydride’s low propensity
to self-propagate, addition of a second monomer enables the formation
of perfectly alternating polymers, giving regioregularity. Furthermore,
the anhydride ring is an ideal platform for postpolymerization modification[40] to insert adjacent carboxy/amine functionalities
to give ampholytes.[32]Considering
the above, the aim of this work was to undertake the
first systematic investigation into the role of monomer sequence and
location of hydrophobicity on the IRI activity of polyampholytes.
Using RAFT polymerization it was possible to obtain well-defined maleic
anhydride containing precursors with a range of comonomers, and through
ring-opening, varying the side chains, while ensuring a 1:1 balance
of charged units. Quantitative IRI activity reveals that side chain
hydrophobicity is a powerful tool to enhance activity and that the
sequence regulated polymers are more active than random copolymers
derived from acrylates, opening a new avenue to potent IRI active
materials.
Experimental Section
General
Phosphate-buffered
saline (PBS) solutions were
prepared using preformulated tablets (Sigma-Aldrich) in 200 mL of
Milli-Q water (>18.2 Ω mean resistivity) to give [NaCl] =
0.138
M, [KCl] = 0.0027 M, and pH 7.4. Vinyl acetate (>99%), styrene
(>99%),
and isopropenyl acetate (99%) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich and
were filtered through a plug of basic alumina to remove inhibitors
prior to use. 4,4′-Azobis(4-cynaovaleric acid) (>98%) was
recrystallized
from methanol and stored at −18 °C in the dark. Maleic
anhydride (99%), benzyl bromide (98%), 2-cyano-2-propyl benzodithioate
(>97%), N-Boc-ethanolamine (98%), 2-dimethylaminoethanol (99.5%),
2-(diethylamino)ethanol (>99.5%), 2-(diisopropylamino)ethanol (>99%),
and trifluoroacetic acid (99%) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich.
Potassium ethyl xanthate (98%) was purchased from Alfa Aesar. All
solvents were purchased from VWR or Sigma-Aldrich and used without
further purification. S-benzyl O-ethyl carbondithioate was synthesized by Thomas Congdon.[41]
Physical and Analytical Methods
1H and 13C NMR spectra were recorded on Bruker
Avance III HD 300 MHz,
HD 400 MHz, or HD 500 MHz spectrometers using deuterated solvents
obtained from Sigma-Aldrich. Chemical shifts are reported relative
to residual nondeuterated solvent. All size exclusion chromatography
(SEC) data were recorded in DMF or THF on Agilent 390-LC MDS instruments
equipped with differential refractive index (DRI) detectors. Both
systems were equipped with 2xPLgel Mixed D columns (300 × 7.5
mm) and a PLgel 5 μm guard column. The eluents are DMF with
5 mmol NH4BF4 additive or THF with 2% TEA (triethylamine)
and 0.01% BHT (butylated hydroxytoluene) additives (depending on the
system used). All samples were run at 1 mL.min–1 at 50 °C. Poly(methyl methacrylate) standards (Agilent EasyVials)
were used for calibration. Analyte samples were filtered through a
nylon membrane with 0.22 μm pore size before injection.Respectively, experimental molar mass (Mn,SEC) and dispersity (Đ) values of synthesized
polymers were determined by conventional calibration using Agilent
GPC/SEC software. Ice wafers were annealed on a Linkam Biological
Cryostage BCS196 with T95-Linkpad system controller equipped with
a LNP95-Liquid nitrogen cooling pump, using liquid nitrogen as the
coolant (Linkam Scientific Instruments UK, Surrey, U.K.). An Olympus
CX41 microscope equipped with a UIS-2 20x/0.45/∞/0–2/FN22
lens (Olympus Ltd., Southend on sea, U.K.) and a Canon EOS 500D SLR
digital camera was used to obtain all images. Image processing was
conducted using ImageJ, which is freely available from http://imagej.nih.gov/ij/.
Ice Recrystallization Inhibition Assay
A 10 μL
droplet of polymer in PBS solution is dropped from 1.4 m onto a glass
microscope coverslip, which is on top of an aluminum plate cooled
to −78 °C using dry ice. The droplet freezes instantly
upon impact with the plate, spreading out and forming a thin wafer
of ice. This wafer is then placed on a liquid nitrogen cooled cryostage
held at −8 °C. The wafer is then left to anneal for 30
min at −8 °C. Three photographs are then taken of the
wafer in different locations at 20× zoom under cross polarizers.
The number of crystals in the image is counted, again using ImageJ,
and the area of the field of view divided by this number of crystals
to give the average crystal size per wafer, and reported as a % of
area compared to PBS control.
Synthetic Section
Synthesis
of Poly(maleic anhydride-alt-styrene)
As
a representative example, 2-cyano-2-propyl benzodithioate (0.092
g, 416 μmol), maleic anhydride (1.01 g, 10.3 mmol), styrene
(0.280 g, 2.69 mmol), ACVA (4,4′-azobis(4-cyanovaleric acid);
0.020 g, 72.3 μmol), and 1,4-dioxane (3 mL) were added to a
sealed vial. The solution was degassed by bubbling N2 through
the solution for 30 min, and the reaction was then allowed to polymerize
at 80 °C for 5 h. The polymerization reaction was stopped by
plunging the resulting solution into liquid nitrogen. Poly(maleic
anhydride-alt-styrene) was recovered as a pink solid
after precipitation into diethyl ether. The diethyl ether was decanted
and the solid dried under vacuum overnight forming a pale pink solid.1H NMR (DMSO): δ 1.75 (C2, br, 2H), 2.01 (C, br, 1H), 3.43 (CC(O)OC(O)C, br, 2H), 7.25 (aromatic C-H, br, 5H). 13C NMR (DMSO): δ 31 (H2), 51 (HC(O)OC(O)H), 127 (aromatic C–H), 138 (H–C6H6), 171
(CHC(O)O(O)CH). IR
anhydride C=O 1775, 1850 cm–1. MnSEC(DMF) = 9200 Da. Mw/Mn = 1.08
Synthesis
of Poly(maleic anhydride-alt-vinyl
acetate)
As a representative example, S-benzyl O-ethyl carbonodithioate (0.020 g, 0.0948 mmol), maleic
anhydride (0.98 g, 10 mmol), vinyl acetate (0.25 g, 2.90 mmol), 4,4′-azobis-4-cyanovaleric
acid (0.0013 g, 4.63 μmol), and 1,4-dioxane (1 mL) were added
to a sealed vial. The solution was degassed by bubbling N2 through the solution for 30 min, and the reaction was then allowed
to polymerize at 80 °C for typically 16 h. The polymerization
reaction was stopped by plunging the resulting solution into liquid
nitrogen. Poly(maleic anhydride-alt-vinyl acetate)
was recovered as a beige solid after precipitation into diethyl ether.
The diethyl ether was then decanted and the solid dried under vacuum
overnight forming a pale beige solid.1H NMR (DMSO):
δ 1.88 (C2, br, 2H),
1.94 (C3COO, br, 3H), 3.38
(CC(O)OC(O)C, br, 2H), 5.10 (CC(O), br, 1H). 13C NMR (DMSO): δ 29 (H2), 67 (H–OC(O)),
131 (HC(O)OC(O)H), 139 (H3COO),
163 (CHC(O)O(O)CH),
171 (CH3OO). IR anhydride
C=O 1704, 1788 cm–1. MnSEC(DMF) = 5600 Da. Mw/Mn = 1.46.
Synthesis of Poly(maleic
anhydride-alt-isopropenyl
acetate)
As a representative example, 2-cyano-2-propyl benzodithioate
(5.6 mg, 25.3 μmol), maleic anhydride (0.99 g,10.1 mmol), isopropenyl
acetate (0.27 g, 2.70 mmol), ACVA (4,4′-azobis(4-cyanovaleric
acid); 1 mg, 3.47 μmol), and 1,4-dioxane (1 mL) were added to
a sealed vial. The solution was degassed by bubbling N2 through the solution for 30 min, and the reaction was then allowed
to polymerize at 80 °C for typically 24 h with the addition of
further ACVA (1 mg, 3.47 μmol) after 12 h. The polymerization
reaction was stopped by plunging the resulting solution into liquid
nitrogen. Poly(maleic anhydride-alt-isopropenyl acetate)
was recovered as a brown solid after precipitation into diethyl ether.
The diethyl ether was then decanted and the solid dried under vacuum
overnight forming a brown/black solid. 1H NMR (DMSO): δ
1.09 (C3, br, 3H), 1.83
(C2, br, 2H), 2.03 (C3COO, br, 3H), 3.38 (CC(O)OC(O)C br, 2H). 13C NMR (DMSO): δ 22 (H2), 31 (H3),
54 (H3COO), 66 (OC(O)), 129 (HC(O)O), 134 (HC(O)O), 168 (CH(O)O(O)CH),
170 (CH3OO). IR anhydride
C=O 1708, 1788 cm–1. MnSEC(DMF) = 18200 Da. Mw/Mn = 1.70.
Postpolymerization Modification
of Poly(maleic anhydride-alt-styrene) with N-Boc
Ethanolamine
As a representative
example, poly(maleic anhydride-alt-styrene) (0.06
g), was dissolved in THF (1 mL). After dissolution, N-boc ethanolamine
(0.32 g, 1.99 mmol) was added in excess. The solution was stirred
for 24 h at 40 °C. The product was diluted with water and dialyzed
(Fisher, 1000–3500 Da MWCO) for 48 h (7 water changes). The
water was removed under reduced pressure and the solid dissolved in
methanol (2 mL) before addition of excess trifluoroacetic acid (2
g, 17 mmol). The resulting solution was again concentrated in vacuo,
dissolved in water, and dialyzed (Fisher, 1000–3500 Da MWCO)
for 48 h (7 water changes). The resulting product was then freeze-dried
to evolve a white solid. IR ring opened C=O 1700, 1625 cm–1 (broad).
Synthesis of Poly(2-(dimethylamino)ethyl
Acrylate-co-tert-butyl acrylate)
As a representative
example, 2-(dodecylthiocarbonothioylthio)-2-methylpropionic acid (0.044
g, 120 μmol), tert-butyl acrylate (0.769 g,
6 mmol), 2-(dimethylamino)ethyl acrylate (0.859 g, 6 mmol), ACVA (4,4′-azobis(4-cyanovaleric
acid); 6.7 mg, 24 μmol), and 1,4-dioxane (1 mL) were added to
a sealed vial. The solution was degassed by bubbling N2 through the solution for 30 min, and the reaction was then allowed
to polymerize at 80 °C for 2 to 4 h (depending on the target
length). The polymerization reaction was stopped by plunging the resulting
solution into liquid nitrogen. Poly(2-(dimethylamino)ethyl acrylate-co-tert-butyl acrylate) was recovered as
a yellow liquid after precipitation into cold petroleum ether. The
product was then dried under vacuum to remove any remaining solvent
to evolve a viscous yellow liquid.1H NMR (DMSO):
δ 1.38 (CH2, br, 2H), 1.44 (OC(CH3)3, s, 9H), 2.16 (CH,
s, 1H), 2.21 (N(CH3)2), s, 6H),
3.57 (NCH2, br, 2H), 4.18 (OCH2, t, 2H). MnSEC (THF) = 8600 Da. Mw/Mn = 1.32.
Synthesis of Poly(2-(dimethylamino)ethyl
Acrylate--butyl Acrylate-co-methyl
acrylate)
As a representative example, 2-(dodecylthiocarbonothioylthio)-2-methylpropionic
acid (0.055 g, 150 μmol), tert-butyl acrylate
(0.865 g, 6.75 mmol), methyl acrylate (0.123 g, 1.5 mmol), 2-(dimethylamino)ethyl
acrylate (0.966 g, 6.75 mmol), ACVA (4,4′-azobis(4-cyanovaleric
acid); 8.4 mg, 30 μmol), and 1,4-dioxane (1 mL) were added to
a subasealed vial. The solution was degassed by bubbling N2 through the solution for 30 min, and the reaction was then allowed
to polymerize at 80 °C for 2 h (depending on the target length).
The polymerization reaction was stopped by plunging the resulting
solution into liquid nitrogen. Poly(2-(dimethylamino)ethyl acrylate-co-tert-butyl acrylate-co-methyl acrylate) was recovered as a yellow liquid after precipitation
into cold petroleum ether. The product was then dried under vacuum
to remove any remaining solvent to evolve a viscous yellow liquid.1H NMR (DMSO): δ 1.39 (CH2, br, 2H), 1.44 (OC(CH3)3, s,
9H), 2.16 (CH, s, 1H), 2.21 (N(CH3)2), s, 6H), 3.57 (NCH2, br, 2H),
3.68 (OCH3, s, 3H), 4.18 (OCH2, t, 2H). MnSEC (THF) = 7800. Mw/Mn = 1.22.
Results and Discussion
To enable
the first detailed study on structure–activity
relationships in well-defined and regioregular polyampholytes, copolymers
based on maleic anhydride were designed to give a perfectly alternating
structure.[39] This structure (Figure ) ensures that the positive
and negative charges are in an exact stoichiometric ratio (as previous
results have shown this to be crucial[33]) but also avoids any composition drift or random placement of functionalities
associated with postpolymerization modification or statistical copolymerization.
By judicious choice of the comonomer polymerized with maleic anhydride,
the backbone hydrophobicity, as well as side chain hydrophobicity
can be sequentially modified, and is discussed later. Styrene/MA (PSx) and isopropenyl acetate/MA (PIPACx) were
polymerized using a dithioester RAFT agent and the vinyl acetate/MA
(VACx) using a xanthate. Following polymerization all
polymers were isolated by precipitation and characterized by SEC and 1H NMR, Table .
Figure 1
(A) Concept taken here to produce regioregular ampholytes compared
to other previous synthetic strategies; (B) Copolymerization of maleic
anhydride with styrene, isopropenyl acetate, and vinyl acetate.
Table 1
Alternating Polymers
Synthesized
MA copolymera
[M]/[CTA]b
Mnc (SEC) (g mol–1)
Đd
DPe
PS100
310
20300
1.11
100
PS46
150
9200
1.08
46
PIPAC36
100
7200
1.11
36
PIPAC92
420
18200
1.70
92
PVAc30
140
5600
1.46
30
PVAc57
280
10500
1.34
57
PS100 indicates a poly(styrene-alt-maleic anhydride)
copolymer with 100 of the alternating
repeat units, see Figure A.
Total monomer
to RAFT agent ratio.
Monomers were used in a 4:1 ratio of maleic anhydride to comonomer.
Determined by SEC.
Đ is Mw/Mn from SEC.
Number-average degree of polymerization
from SEC.
(A) Concept taken here to produce regioregular ampholytes compared
to other previous synthetic strategies; (B) Copolymerization of maleic
anhydride with styrene, isopropenyl acetate, and vinyl acetate.PS100 indicates a poly(styrene-alt-maleic anhydride)
copolymer with 100 of the alternating
repeat units, see Figure A.Total monomer
to RAFT agent ratio.
Monomers were used in a 4:1 ratio of maleic anhydride to comonomer.Determined by SEC.Đ is Mw/Mn from SEC.Number-average degree of polymerization
from SEC.To ensure an alternating
polymer was formed (discussed further
below), a 4-fold excess of the maleic anhydride to comonomer was used
(reducing homopolymer blocks). The reactions were also stopped at
low conversion for the same reason, meaning relatively large [M]:[CTA]
ratios were required to achieve the desired molecular weights. A consequence
of this was that the total [I] was low and, hence, contributed to
the observed dispersities being a bit larger than expected for a controlled
radical polymerization, alongside the nonideal SEC solvents for these
polymers.[35,42] Vinyl ester monomers (VAc and IPAc) are
also deactivated so more challenging to polymerize than other common
monomers.[35]Key to this present investigation
is that the polymers produced
had not only a 1:1 ratio of each monomer component, but that they
are regioregular with a perfectly alternating structure, as would
be predicted by their reactivity ratios. To investigate this, quantitative 13C NMR was employed; homopolymers of the non-MA component
should show distinct peaks associated with, for example, styrene–styrene
units, whereas an alternating copolymer should not show any of these. Figure A shows styrene homopolymer
compared to copolymer with the cross peak clearly (asterisk) not being
present in the copolymers. The same is seen for the VAc polymers in Figure B. For PIPAc it was
not possible to obtain a homopolymer control (as this monomer does
not self-polymerize readily[35]), but the 13C still showed only a single peak in the region of the PIPAC
backbone confirming the alternating structure.
Figure 2
13C NMR sequence
analysis of alternating copolymers.
*Indicates peak associated with homopolymer.
13C NMR sequence
analysis of alternating copolymers.
*Indicates peak associated with homopolymer.With these alternating polymers to hand, it was necessary
to introduce
the desired amine functionality postpolymerization. N-Boc ethanolamine was used as a nucleophile to ring-open the anhydride,
which following deprotection with TFA (trifluoroacetic acid), generates
the ampholyte structure, Scheme . An alcohol nucleophile was chosen to prevent the
undesired ring-closing reaction associated with amines (to give a
malemide) which would stop the formation of the carboxylic acid group,
essential for IRI activity (later). To indicate installation of the
amine (and for convenience when other side chains are used later)
the polymers are appended with −NH2 in our naming
convention. (e.g., PS-NH2 is PS/MA copolymer with primary
amine installed side chain).
Scheme 1
Ring-Opening of Anhydride and Subsequent
Deprotection
Successful ring-opening
was confirmed by IR spectroscopy. The two
peaks associated with the anhydride carbonyls (1850 and 1790 cm–1) were quantitatively removed and the installation
of an ester and carboxylic acid at lower wavelengths could be seen, Figure .
Figure 3
Infrared analysis of
PS-100 showing removal of anhydride peaks
following ring opening and deprotection.
Infrared analysis of
PS-100 showing removal of anhydride peaks
following ring opening and deprotection.With this library of polyampholytes containing variable chain
lengths
and backbone hydrophobicites, the ice recrystallization inhibition
(IRI) activity could be evaluated. IRI was measured using the “splat”
assay.[27] 10 μL droplets of the polymers
in PBS were dropped onto a glass coverslip sat on a chilled (−80
°C) aluminum plate. This generates a large number of <10 μm
ice crystals by rapid nucleation, which were then incubated on a cold
stage for 30 min at −8 °C. The average area of the ice
crystals (by counting the total number in a fixed area to generate
an average, note this is slightly different to our previous reports
using the mean largest grain size which did not account for the population[21,27,43,44]) relative to a PBS control. Smaller numbers indicate more activity.
The results of this are shown in Figure as a function of concentration.
Figure 4
IRI activity
of amino side chain polyampholytes with various backbones.
(A) IRI activity; (B) Cryo-micrograph of PBS buffer control; (C) Cryo-micrograph
of PS100-NH2 at 20 mg·mL–1. MGS = mean grain size reported as an area. Averages are from a
minimum of three repeats and error bars are the standard deviation.
Images are 660 μm wide.
IRI activity
of amino side chain polyampholytes with various backbones.
(A) IRI activity; (B) Cryo-micrograph of PBS buffer control; (C) Cryo-micrograph
of PS100-NH2 at 20 mg·mL–1. MGS = mean grain size reported as an area. Averages are from a
minimum of three repeats and error bars are the standard deviation.
Images are 660 μm wide.In line with our previous studies on polyampholytes, these
polymers
were moderately active, compared to, for example, poly(vinyl alcohol),
which is the most potent non-AF(G)P IRI known, but as very few synthetic
materials have this property, it is still a remarkable observation.[2,6] All the polymers appeared to have similar activity without any strong
molecular weight trends, with all of them leading to 35–50%
crystal areas at the highest concentration tested (20 mg·mL–1), which is more potent than ampholytes reported by
Matsumura and co-workers.[34] This does not
necessarily rule out molecular weight dependence, just in the range
tested. Interestingly, the PS-NH2 copolymers appeared to
have higher activity at 20 mg·mL–1 compared
to the other polymers, but less at low concentration. Careful analysis
of the solutions releveled that the PS-NH2 were actually
slightly turbid due to some aggregation. This means that the actual
concentration of dissolved chains is less making a critical comparison
challenging. The styrene units, when compared to the other comonomers
used in this study, are significantly more hydrophobic, and these
copolymers are less soluble, demonstrating the delicate balance between
hydrophobicity (expected to increase activity) and hydrophilicity
(needed to ensure solubility in biological buffers).The above
results showed that modulation of the backbone of polyampholytes,
for the range of materials tested, did not have a large impact on
their overall activity, or was not suitable due to solubility issues.
However, the modular synthetic strategy employed here enables the
side-chain to also be varied, by using differently substituted amines.
Guided by the above, we wanted to see if instead of backbone hydrophobicity
we could vary the alkyl chain on the amine as a route to modulate
activity as there is literature evidence that this might enhance activity
in other polyampholytes.[34] It was decided
that the VAc and IPAc based polymers were to be studied further, as
these were more soluble than the styrenes to enable comparison. Four
different amino alcohols with different hydrophobic chains on the
amine were chosen and used to ring open the anhydride unit, Scheme . Again, IR spectroscopy
was used to confirm successful ring-opening and installation of the
desired functional groups.
Scheme 2
Installation of a Range of Different Amine
Side Chains into Alternating
Copolymers by Ring Opening of Malemide Unit
This second set of polymers were tested for IRI activity,
as a
function of concentration using the same methodology as the first
set of polymers, Figure . For the diethyl, diisopropyl, and primary amine, the activity observed
was largely identical across concentrations. However, for the dimethyl,
on the longest (PIPAC92) the dimethyl amino polymers were
dramatically more active at high concentrations, inhibiting nearly
all ice growth. This was a remarkable level of activity, and was only
achieved by achieving a fine balance between backbone hydrophobicity,
side chain hydrophobicity, chain length, and solubility.
Figure 5
IRI activity
of side chain modified polyampholytes. Averages are
from a minimum of three repeats and error bars are the standard deviation.
IRI activity
of side chain modified polyampholytes. Averages are
from a minimum of three repeats and error bars are the standard deviation.The data in Figure suggests that hydrophobicity plays a role
in activity, but the trends
are not clear. To obtain a measure of hydrophobicity, the Log P (partition coefficient) for each repeat unit used was
calculated and compared to IRI activity (see Supporting Information). This did not reveal any correlation. IRI activity
has been linked to localization of hydrophobic/hydrophilic domains
in native AFPs, small molecules,[45] supramolecular
mimics,[8] and in other macromolecules,[30] and the Log P does not capture
this level of detail, but rather just the overall lipophilicity. This
observation supports the idea that hydrophobic domains are essential
for IRI activity, but that the exact 3-D position of these is crucial,
and that simply adding “more hydrophobicity” will not
lead to an increase in activity. The results presented also challenge
the assumption that to have a potent IRI you must have a good “match”
for a specific face of an ice crystal to enable binding (which is
essential for AFP function), suggesting multiple potential mechanisms
can lead to the macroscopic effect of IRI. The ampholytes used have
no obvious binding units for ice such as hydroxyls and the individual
homopolymers (e.g., polyamine) have no activity.[33]To determine if the sequence and placement of the
carboxyl/amine
groups promote IRI activity, random sequenced analogues were designed
based upon poly(acrylates). This enables investigation into the effect
of the sequence and hydrophobicity on IRI under identical testing
parameters. Acrylates were chosen as an analogue to the maleic anhydride
units which do not have a methyl side chain (as seen in methacrylates). t-Butyl acrylate (BA) was chosen as a precursor to the carboxylic
acid group and N,N-dimethyl aminoethyl
acrylate (DMAEA) as the dimethyl amino group was identified (above)
as a potent cationic group. To probe the role of added hydrophobicity,
10–30% methyl acrylate (MA) was also copolymerized into this
while maintaining the charge balance. RAFT polymerization was used
to ensure narrow dispersities and control of the molecular weight, Scheme . The t-butyl group was removed by TFA treatment post polymerization and
confirmed by IR and 1H NMR spectroscopy. Table lists the polymers synthesized.
Scheme 3
Random Copolymers Prepared via RAFT Polymerization
Table 2
Random Sequence Polyampholytes
copolymera
[M]/[CTA]b
Mnc (SEC) (g mol–1)
Đd
conversione (%)
DPf
Mnf (conversion) (g mol–1)
DMAEA-AA22
50
10000
1.22
43
22
2400
DMAEA-AA75
100
8600
1.32
75
75
8100
DMAEA-AA100
400
10900
1.30
25
100
10800
DMAEA-AA128
400
17300
1.30
32
128
13800
DMAEA-AA232
400
19400
1.43
58
232
25000
DMAEA-AA-MA(10%)51
100
7800
1.22
51
51
5400
DMAEA-AA-MA(20%)45
100
7400
1.21
45
45
4600
DMAEA-AA-MA(30%)57
100
7900
1.22
57
57
5800
Name of
polymer sample, DMAEA-AA22 indicates a poly(dimethylaminoethyl
acrylate-co-acrylic acid) copolymer with 22 randomly
incorporated units, and
DMAEA-AA-MA(10%)51 indicates a poly(dimethylaminoethyl
acrylate-co-acrylic acid-co-methyl
acrylate) terpolymer with 51 randomly incorporated units of which
10% is methyl acrylate.
Monomer to RAFT agent ratio.
Determined by SEC.
Đ is equal
to Mw/Mn.
Determined by 1H
NMR.
Estimated from conversion.
Name of
polymer sample, DMAEA-AA22 indicates a poly(dimethylaminoethyl
acrylate-co-acrylic acid) copolymer with 22 randomly
incorporated units, and
DMAEA-AA-MA(10%)51 indicates a poly(dimethylaminoethyl
acrylate-co-acrylic acid-co-methyl
acrylate) terpolymer with 51 randomly incorporated units of which
10% is methyl acrylate.Monomer to RAFT agent ratio.Determined by SEC.Đ is equal
to Mw/Mn.Determined by 1H
NMR.Estimated from conversion.The polymer library in Table was screened for
IRI activity using the same “splat”
method as described earlier. Initial observations revealed these polymers
to be significantly less active than the alternating polymers. Even
at 50 mg·mL–1 (max concentration used for regioregular
polymers was 20 mg·mL–1) only 80% activity
relative to PBS was observed which would indicate essentially zero
activity, similar to the nonactive negative control poly(ethylene
glycol). This observation suggests that both the sequence and the
precise architecture of the backbone is essential to the overall function
of the polymers. Our previous studies have shown that random poly(methacrylate)-based
ampholytes are more potent than these poly(acrylates) suggesting the
backbone methyl is important,[33] but both
are less potent than the alternating polymers from Figure . To probe the role of hydrophobicity
the polymers containing methyl acrylate to enhance side-chain hydrophobicity
were assessed for activity with the chain length for all targeted
at 50 repeat units, Figure . It was found that addition of 10% MA, gave rise to the most
significant enhancement in activity, compared to either 20 or 30%
MA. At 50 mg·mL–1, the addition of MA increased
activity from ∼80% to ∼40% representing a significant
increase. At all these concentrations, the polymers were fully soluble,
suggesting that the benefit from additional hydrophobicity is subtle
and a fine balance between that and the reduction in density of the
ampholyte units. This is in contrast to the alternating polymers where
a constant ampholyte unit density was maintained.
Figure 6
IRI activity of the random
poly(acrylate) copolymers. Student t test comparing
DMAEA-AA75 and DMAEA-AA-MA(10%)51 at 50 mg·mL–1 showed a p-value of 0.0164 indicating
significance.
IRI activity of the random
poly(acrylate) copolymers. Student t test comparing
DMAEA-AA75 and DMAEA-AA-MA(10%)51 at 50 mg·mL–1 showed a p-value of 0.0164 indicating
significance.The above data shows
that consideration of the distribution of
charged units in polyampholytes is crucial in the rational design
of new IRI active macromolecules. The random polymers had less activity
than the regioregular, which was shown to be a delicate balance between
position of the hydrophobicity, but most importantly maintaining solubility.
None of the polymers had noticeable ice shaping effects, but this
property (DIS) is normally seen at high concentrations so might be
limited by solubility. The polymers used here may also not be directly
applicable for cryopreservation and will require a detailed analysis
of toxicological profile but also cell uptake/exclusion.
Conclusions
This study reports the first investigation into the effect of sequence/regiochemistry
on the ice recrystallization inhibition (IRI) activity of polyampholytes,
with the intention of mimicking the function of antifreeze (glyco)proteins.
The mode of interaction of polyampholytes with ice is still unknown
and is one of the few classes of synthetic polymer known to display
this activity. Alternating copolymers were obtained by exploiting
the tendency of maleic anhydride to cross-polymerize with a range
of (hydrophobic) comonomers. The anhydride ring could then be opened
to introduce a range of amino-functionalities as well as a carboxylic
acid, with an exact 1:1 ratio of functional groups, positioned adjacent
to each other. Such control is not possible by a normal radical copolymerization.
Quantitative IRI (ice recrystallization) assays revealed that the
hydrophobic comonomer (styrene) had little impact on the IRI activity
which may be due to its dramatic effect on aqueous solubility. Conversely,
alkylation of the amines (side chain hydrophobicity) lead to changes
in activity. Dimethylation lead to more activity than longer alkyl
chains, or a primary amine demonstrating that although hydrophobicity
can increase IRI activity the nature and placement of this must be
carefully considered to prevent aggregation/precipitation and to maximize
activity. These observations support the concept that spatially segregated
hydrophilic/hydrophobic domains are essential to ensure potent IRI
in synthetic materials. A comparison was made against a nonsequenced
ampholyte obtained from acrylates. These polymers had significant
lower activity compared to the regioregular ones. Addition of side
chain hydrophobicity by inclusion of methyl acrylate, however, did
enhance the activity but this effect decreased above 10 mol % highlighting
that simply adding more hydrophobicity does not increase activity.
These results are significant, in that they provide evidence that
control of a polymer’s microstructure can be used to enhance
IRI activity and provide insight into the design rules needed to synthesize
antifreeze protein mimics, particularly for cellular cryopreservation.
Authors: Chantelle J Capicciotti; Jayme D R Kurach; Tracey R Turner; Ross S Mancini; Jason P Acker; Robert N Ben Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2015-04-08 Impact factor: 4.379
Authors: Antonio Laezza; Angela Casillo; Sandro Cosconati; Caroline I Biggs; Antonio Fabozzi; Luigi Paduano; Alfonso Iadonisi; Ettore Novellino; Matthew I Gibson; Antonio Randazzo; Maria M Corsaro; Emiliano Bedini Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2017-07-11 Impact factor: 6.988
Authors: Caroline I Biggs; Christopher Packer; Steven Hindmarsh; Marc Walker; Neil R Wilson; Jonathan P Rourke; Matthew I Gibson Journal: Phys Chem Chem Phys Date: 2017-08-23 Impact factor: 3.676
Authors: Daniel E Mitchell; Guy Clarkson; David J Fox; Rebecca A Vipond; Peter Scott; Matthew I Gibson Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2017-07-18 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Caroline I Biggs; Trisha L Bailey; Christopher Stubbs; Alice Fayter; Matthew I Gibson Journal: Nat Commun Date: 2017-11-16 Impact factor: 14.919
Authors: Ben Graham; Alice E R Fayter; Judith E Houston; Rachel C Evans; Matthew I Gibson Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2018-04-19 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Guillaume Hedir; Christopher Stubbs; Phillip Aston; Andrew P Dove; Matthew I Gibson Journal: ACS Macro Lett Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 6.903