Katelyn Nagy-Smith1,2, Peter J Beltramo2, Eric Moore3, Robert Tycko3, Eric M Furst2, Joel P Schneider1. 1. Chemical Biology Laboratory, National Cancer Institute, Frederick, Maryland 21702, United States. 2. Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry and Department of Chemical and Biomolecular Engineering, University of Delaware, Newark, Delaware 19716, United States. 3. Laboratory of Chemical Physics, National Institute of Diabetes and Digestive and Kidney Diseases, National Institutes of Health, Bethesda, Maryland 20892-0520, United States.
Abstract
Hydrogels prepared from self-assembling peptides are promising materials for medical applications, and using both l- and d-peptide isomers in a gel's formulation provides an intuitive way to control the proteolytic degradation of an implanted material. In the course of developing gels for delivery applications, we discovered that a racemic mixture of the mirror-image β-hairpin peptides, named MAX1 and DMAX1, provides a fibrillar hydrogel that is four times more rigid than gels formed by either peptide alone-a puzzling observation. Herein, we use transmission electron microscopy, small angle neutron scattering, solid state NMR, diffusing wave, infrared, and fluorescence spectroscopies, and modeling to determine the molecular basis for the increased mechanical rigidity of the racemic gel. We find that enantiomeric peptides coassemble in an alternating fashion along the fibril long axis, forming an extended heterochiral pleat-like β-sheet, a structure predicted by Pauling and Corey in 1953. Hydrogen bonding between enantiomers within the sheet dictates the placement of hydrophobic valine side chains in the fibrils' dry interior in a manner that allows the formation of nested hydrophobic interactions between enantiomers, interactions not accessible within enantiomerically pure fibrils. Importantly, this unique molecular arrangement of valine side chains maximizes inter-residue contacts within the core of the fibrils resulting in their local stiffening, which in turn, gives rise to the significant increase in bulk mechanical rigidity observed for the racemic hydrogel.
Hydrogels prepared from self-assembling peptides are promising materials for medical applications, and using both l- and d-peptide isomers in a gel's formulation provides an intuitive way to control the proteolytic degradation of an implanted material. In the course of developing gels for delivery applications, we discovered that a racemic mixture of the mirror-image β-hairpin peptides, named MAX1 and DMAX1, provides a fibrillar hydrogel that is four times more rigid than gels formed by either peptide alone-a puzzling observation. Herein, we use transmission electron microscopy, small angle neutron scattering, solid state NMR, diffusing wave, infrared, and fluorescence spectroscopies, and modeling to determine the molecular basis for the increased mechanical rigidity of the racemic gel. We find that enantiomeric peptides coassemble in an alternating fashion along the fibril long axis, forming an extended heterochiral pleat-like β-sheet, a structure predicted by Pauling and Corey in 1953. Hydrogen bonding between enantiomers within the sheet dictates the placement of hydrophobic valine side chains in the fibrils' dry interior in a manner that allows the formation of nested hydrophobic interactions between enantiomers, interactions not accessible within enantiomerically pure fibrils. Importantly, this unique molecular arrangement of valine side chains maximizes inter-residue contacts within the core of the fibrils resulting in their local stiffening, which in turn, gives rise to the significant increase in bulk mechanical rigidity observed for the racemic hydrogel.
Self-assembling peptides can form a broad
array of supramolecular
structures including sheets,[1−5] disks,[6] spheres,[7] barrels,[8] tubes,[9−12] and fibrils.[13−22] Fibrils are privileged structures capable of higher order assembly
leading to the formation of networks that constitute the formation
of macroscopic hydrogels. The mechanical rigidities,[23−25] enzymatic degradability,[19,26,27] antibacterial activity,[28−30] and cellular compatibility[31−34] of peptide gels can be finely tuned through simple chemical and
material-based strategies to enable targeted applications. For example,
we recently reported the design of a UV-sensitive peptide gel that
enables microanastomosis, the suturing of ultrasmall blood vessels.[35]Chirality is now being employed as a design
modality in the fabrication
of hydrogels.[36−39] Heterochiral systems, containing both l- and d-isomers, offer unique material morphologies[40−43] as well as a control over hydrogel
degradability[44] as peptides composed of d-amino acids are resistant to proteolysis.[45,46] As such, we initially sought to control the biodegradation of hydrogels
formed by the peptide hydrogelator, MAX1, by preparing mixed gels
of the parent peptide with its enantiomer. In the course of analyzing
the rheological properties of the mixed hydrogels, a large, nonadditive,
synergistic enhancement in material rigidity was unexpectedly observed
compared to gels formed from enantiomerically pure peptides with the
greatest increase found in the racemic hydrogel.[47]MAX1 is a 20-amino acid peptide designed to undergo
triggered folding
and self-assembly into β-sheet rich fibrils that ultimately
lead to the formation of a self-supporting hydrogel.[24,48] The peptide’s primary sequence contains two segments of alternating
hydrophobic (valine) and hydrophilic (lysine) residues that flank
a tetrapeptide motif designed to adopt a reverse turn in the folded
state, Table . In
neutral pH and low ionic strength buffers, the peptide adopts an ensemble
of random coil conformations due to the electrostatic repulsion between
protonated lysine side chains affording a solution of monomeric peptide.
Increasing the ionic strength of the solution by the addition of NaCl
screens the lysine borne charges and allows the peptide to fold and
self-assemble into fibrils.[24] Increasing
the temperature also favors folding and assembly by driving the hydrophobic
effect and the burial of valine side chains into the dry interior
of the fibrils.[21] Solid state NMR shows
that MAX1, in its folded and assembled state, adopts an amphiphilic
β-hairpin structure that contains a type II′ β-turn
as designed, and that the peptide assembles with high fidelity into
monomorphic fibrils composed of a bilayered cross-β structure.
Folded hairpins assemble in-register with a Syn arrangement
of their β-turns aligned along a given fibril monolayer. However,
across the bilayer, hairpins adopt an Anti orientation.[49] The resulting network formed by these fibrils
constitutes a mechanically rigid hydrogel.[50,51]
Table 1
Sequences of Peptides Utilized in
These Studiesa
peptide
sequence
MAX1
VKVKVKVKVDPLPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
DMAX1
VKVKVKVKVLPDPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
MAX1-Azide
VKVKVKVKVDPLPTKVKVKVKVK(azide)-NH2
DMAX1-Biotin
Biotin-KVKVKVKVKVLPDPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
MAX1-EDANS
VKVKVE(Edans)VKVDPLPTKVKVKVKVK-NH2
DMAX1-Dabcyl
VKVKVK(Dabcyl)VKVLPDPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
MAX1-IR1
VKVKVKVKVDPLPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
MAX1-IR2
VKVKVKVKVDPLPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
DMAX1-NMR1
VKVKVKVKVLPDPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
MAX1-NMR1
VKVKVKVKVDPLPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
MAX1-NMR2
VKVKVKVKVDPLPTKVKVKVKV-NH2
MAX35
IKVKIKVKVDPLPTKIKVKIKV-NH2
DMAX35
IKVKIKVKVLPDPTKIKVKIKV-NH2
MARK4
VRVKVRVKVDPLPTRVKVRVKV-NH2
DMARK4
VRVKVRVKVLPDPTRVKVRVKV-NH2
d-Amino acid residues
are italicized. Uniformly 13C and 15N isotopically
labeled residues are bold and underlined. 13C=18O isotopically labeled amino acid residues are in bold.
d-Amino acid residues
are italicized. Uniformly 13C and 15N isotopically
labeled residues are bold and underlined. 13C=18O isotopically labeled amino acid residues are in bold.As stated earlier, when MAX1
is mixed with its enantiomer, DMAX1,
a gel is formed that is significantly more rigid. When we initially
reported this behavior the physical basis for this enhancement in
material rigidity was unknown.[47] According
to theory for semiflexible biopolymer networks, hydrogel mechanical
rigidity is dependent on both the number of cross-links made between
fibrils in the network and the stiffness of the fibrils themselves.[52−54] In the context of MAX1 and DMAX1, we envisioned that mixtures of
these enantiomers could either self-sort to form an interpenetrating
network of enantiomerically pure fibrils or coassemble into mixed
fibrils, Figure .
It had been unclear which scenario was more likely to occur and how
either outcome would lead to an increase in network cross-link density,
fibril stiffness, or both. Further, the molecular basis guiding the
assembly process for these mirror-image peptides was not known. Herein,
we use an arsenal of microscopy, scattering, spectroscopic techniques,
rational peptide design, and modeling to uncover the physical basis
for this material enhancement at the molecular, local-fibril, and
hydrogel network length scales.
Figure 1
Possible modes of self-assembly for enantiomeric
peptides MAX1
(green) and DMAX1 (purple) include self-sorting (solid-colored fibrils)
or coassembly (dual-colored fibrils) into mixed fibrils.
Possible modes of self-assembly for enantiomeric
peptides MAX1
(green) and DMAX1 (purple) include self-sorting (solid-colored fibrils)
or coassembly (dual-colored fibrils) into mixed fibrils.
Results and Discussion
Rheological, Microscopic,
and Spectroscopic Evidence of Enantiomer
Co-Assembly into Mixed Fibrils
Frequency-sweep rheology experiments
measuring the storage modulus (G′, a measure
of a gel’s mechanical rigidity) show that an equimolar mixture
of MAX1 and DMAX1 self-assembles to form a hydrogel that is four times
more stiff than gels formed by either pure enantiomer at identical
peptide concentrations, Figure A. We previously reported that a racemic mixture of these
peptides undergoes triggered folding to adopt β-hairpins that
self-assemble into β-sheet rich fibrils where each fibril is
comprised of a bilayer of hairpins.[47] Thus,
the local fibril morphology in the racemic network was identical to
that of both pure MAX1 and DMAX1 fibrils, with measured fibril heights
of ∼2.5 nm and widths of ∼3 nm. Although the local morphology
of the fibrils comprising the racemic network was known, the composition
and arrangement of enantiomers within those fibrils was a mystery.
Interestingly, both assemblies (self-sorted or coassembled) illustrated
in Figure would lead
to hydrogel networks composed of fibrils having identical local dimensions.
Figure 2
Dynamic
frequency-sweep oscillatory rheology measuring the storage
moduli of 1 wt % hydrogels as a function of frequency. A 4-fold increase
in storage modulus is achieved in the racemic hydrogel (■)
with respect to either pure MAX1 (◇) or DMAX1 (●) gels
(N = 3) (A). Time-sweeps of two racemic gels. The
first prepared by allowing independent solutions of MAX1 and DMAX1
to self-assembly independently at 25 °C for 10 min, then mixed
and further gelled at 37 °C (×). The second gel prepared
by premixing solutions of monomeric unfolded MAX1 and DMAX1 and then
triggering gelation at 37 °C (▲) (N =
3) (B).
Dynamic
frequency-sweep oscillatory rheology measuring the storage
moduli of 1 wt % hydrogels as a function of frequency. A 4-fold increase
in storage modulus is achieved in the racemic hydrogel (■)
with respect to either pure MAX1 (◇) or DMAX1 (●) gels
(N = 3) (A). Time-sweeps of two racemic gels. The
first prepared by allowing independent solutions of MAX1 and DMAX1
to self-assembly independently at 25 °C for 10 min, then mixed
and further gelled at 37 °C (×). The second gel prepared
by premixing solutions of monomeric unfolded MAX1 and DMAX1 and then
triggering gelation at 37 °C (▲) (N =
3) (B).Rheology was used to probe the
nature of the racemic assembly process.
We had previously determined that the rate of peptide folding, self-assembly,
and thus fibril formation leading to gelation could be controlled
by temperature.[55] The higher the temperature,
the faster the rate of gelation. Figure B shows experiments where temperature and
self-assembly conditions were controlled to mimic the formation of
a self-sorted interpenetrating network of fibrils to assess if this
type of network would lead to an enhancement in material rigidity.
Here, individual peptide solutions in separate containers were triggered
to assemble at 25 °C. At this temperature, each peptide can slowly
fold and assemble to form local regions of soluble fibrils in solution
but not a fully percolated network. The two fibrillar solutions were
then mixed in equal volumes, and the temperature was raised to 37
°C where the evolution of an interpenetrating network could be
formed. The time-sweep measurement shown in panel B demonstrates that
the gel resulting from this network realizes a storage modulus that
is not significantly greater than gels prepared from pure enantiomers
alone (G′ ≈ 300 Pa). A control experiment
was performed in which an equimolar mixture of the enantiomers was
initially prepared in the same container at 5 °C, where assembly
is prohibited. The temperature of the mixed solution was then increased
to 37 °C to trigger folding and self-assembly. Under these conditions,
coassembly is possible. Data in panel B show that the gel resulting
from these conditions displays the 4-fold increase in material rigidity
(G′ ≈ 750 Pa). These data suggest that
the enantiomers do not self-sort, but rather coassemble to form a
network of mixed fibrils. Figure S1 shows
CD data defining the temperature-dependent folding and assembly process.We further investigated possible enantiomer coassembly by TEM.
Here, two enantiomeric derivatives, namely, MAX1-Azide and DMAX1-Biotin,
were designed to bind 10 and 5 nm gold nanoparticles (GNP) respectively
while in the fibrillar state. Their sequences are shown in Table along with the other
peptides employed in this study. Peptides were prepared by standard
Fmoc solid phase peptide synthesis and purified to homogeneity (Figures S2–S16). MAX1-Azide contains an
azide moiety that can react with a dibenzylcyclooctyne (DBCO)-conjugated
10 nm GNP. DMAX1-Biotin is designed to bind to streptavidin-conjugated
5 nm GNPs. In the experiment depicted in Figure A, a fibrillar hydrogel was prepared from
an equimolar mixture of these two peptides, diluted and deposited
onto a TEM grid, and incubated with sequential additions of each gold
nanoparticle. Should these peptides coassemble to form mixed fibrils,
each individual fibril should be adorned by both 5 and 10 nm GNPs.
Conversely, if the peptides self-sort into independent fibrils, distinct
populations of fibrils decorated with only 5 nm or only 10 nm GNPs
will exist. The micrograph shows fibrils that are decorated with both
5 and 10 nm nanoparticles. The inset shows a statistical evaluation
of binding where it is clear that the frequency of fibrils observed
bound by both nanoparticles is much greater than fibrils bound by
a single-sized GNP, supporting a coassembly mechanism. Although the
two enantiomeric derivatives are not strictly non-superimposible mirror
images, the gel formed by an equimolar mixture of these derivatives
also displays the 4-fold increase in mechanical rigidity (Figure S17). Additionally, TEM control experiments
were performed on fibrils composed of either pure MAX1-Azide or, separately,
pure DMAX1-Biotin which showed that these homogeneous fibrils preferentially
bound 10 or 5 nm GNPs respectively (Figure S18).
Figure 3
Coassembly of enantiomers MAX1 and DMAX1 is accessed by nanoparticle
labeling of peptide fibrils using TEM (A) and fluorescence quenching
(B). (A) DMAX1-Biotin and MAX1-Azide peptides were visualized within
individual fibrils by the binding of 5 or 10 nm gold nanoparticles,
respectively (scale bar = 200 nm). Five nanometer particles are false
colored magenta for clarity. Magenta and black arrows indicate examples
of bound 5 and 10 nm GNPs, respectively. The original noncolored micrograph
is provided as Figure S18E. Inset: frequency
of particles binding to distinct individual fibrils (N = 30). (B) Fluorescence spectra of MAX1-EDANS fibrils (◆),
MAX1-EDANS fibrils and DMAX1-Dabcyl fibrils formed separately, then
mixed (□) and a premixed solution of 1:1 MAX1-EDANS:DMAX1-Dabcyl
that was allowed to assemble together (■) (N = 3).
Coassembly of enantiomers MAX1 and DMAX1 is accessed by nanoparticle
labeling of peptide fibrils using TEM (A) and fluorescence quenching
(B). (A) DMAX1-Biotin and MAX1-Azide peptides were visualized within
individual fibrils by the binding of 5 or 10 nm gold nanoparticles,
respectively (scale bar = 200 nm). Five nanometer particles are false
colored magenta for clarity. Magenta and black arrows indicate examples
of bound 5 and 10 nm GNPs, respectively. The original noncolored micrograph
is provided as Figure S18E. Inset: frequency
of particles binding to distinct individual fibrils (N = 30). (B) Fluorescence spectra of MAX1-EDANS fibrils (◆),
MAX1-EDANS fibrils and DMAX1-Dabcyl fibrils formed separately, then
mixed (□) and a premixed solution of 1:1 MAX1-EDANS:DMAX1-Dabcyl
that was allowed to assemble together (■) (N = 3).The coassembly of the peptide
enantiomers within racemic fibrils
was further confirmed by fluorescence spectroscopy, Figure B. Here, derivatives of MAX1
and DMAX1, namely, MAX1-EDANS and DMAX1-Dabcyl respectively (Table ), were prepared to
obtain spectroscopic evidence of the peptide coassembly via fluorescence
quenching. EDANS and Dabcyl are often exploited as a fluorophore/quencher
pair in biological assays[56−58] and have a distance-limited Förster’s
radius of ∼3 nm. If these peptide derivatives coassemble, solutions
containing the mixed fibrils should display diminished fluorescence
compared to fibrils formed by pure MAX1-EDANS. As in the peptide pair
used in the TEM experiments discussed above, the hydrogel produced
from a 1:1 mixture of MAX1-EDANS and DMAX1-Dabcyl retains the 4-fold
increase in storage modulus with respect to either MAX1-EDANS or DMAX1-Dabcyl
hydrogels (Figure S19).Solutions
of pure MAX1-EDANS fibrils are highly fluorescent as
shown in Figure B
with an emission maximum centered at 494 nm. When a gel is formed
from an equimolar mixtures of MAX1-EDANS and DMAX1-Dabcyl and diluted,
the fluorescence of the resulting solution is highly attenuated, again
suggesting that the peptides have coassembled into a given fibril
where the enantiomeric pairs are in close proximity to each other.
If the peptides were to self-sort, one would expect a solution of
these fibrils to be highly fluorescent because the distance between
the fluorophore and quenchers is greater than 3 nm. A control experiment
was
performed where separate gels of MAX1-EDANS and DMAX1-Dabcyl were
prepared and mixed upon dilution mimicking the formation of a self-sorted
fibrillar network. Figure B shows that the resulting solution is nearly as fluorescent
as MAX1-EDANS fibrils alone. Taken together, the rheology, TEM, and
fluorescence spectroscopy data show that the parent peptides MAX1
and DMAX1 coassemble into mixed fibrils where enantiomers are in close
proximity within the solid state.
Why Do Co-Assembled Fibrils
Afford a Stiffer Hydrogel Network?
Theory for semiflexible
polymers[52−54] predicts that the rigidity
of a densely cross-linked gel is dependent on both the mesh size,
ξ, and fibril bending modulus, κ, as in eq .Thus, it is likely
that changes in
the mesh size and/or fibril bending modulus result in the enhancement
in rigidity that is observed in the racemic hydrogel. Mesh size is
directly related to the cross-link density: more cross-links lead
to a smaller mesh size and a more rigid gel. With respect to the fibril
bending modulus, if the fibrils comprising the network are themselves
more stiff, the resulting gel will be more rigid.Small angle
neutron scattering (SANS) interrogates the hydrogel
network structure at length scales relevant to the mesh size of a
1 wt % hydrogel, which was estimated to be in the tens of nanometers.[50] This corresponds to a regime centered at q ≈ 0.01 Å–1 in the SANS experiment.
If the racemic gel contains more cross-links and a smaller mesh, then
qualitatively, one should expect the scattering intensity to be greater
than the pure enantiomeric gels in this regime. Figure shows SANS data for MAX1, DMAX1, and racemic
hydrogels; panel D clearly shows that all the scattering profiles
are superimposable, suggesting that the mesh sizes for these three
gels are very similar. Further, each scattering profile (Figure A–C) was fit
to a fractal model, where the scattering intensity I(q) = P(q)S(q), to determine the mesh size of the
hydrogels.[51] Here, the form factor, P(q), is calculated for spherical particleswhere R0 is the
radius of the spherical particles with volume, VP= 4/3πR03 and
Figure 4
SANS
scattering for 1 wt % hydrogels of pure MAX1, (◇) (A);
pure DMAX1, (○) (B); and a mixture of 1:1 MAX1/DMAX1,
(□) (C). Each scattering profile is an average of three independent
experiments on separate gels performed on separate days. Error bars
are smaller than the symbol where not evident. Colored lines represent
fractal model fits for the individual hydrogels. (D) Scattering profiles
of MAX1 (green), DMAX1 (purple), and racemic (blue) hydrogels are
coplotted to emphasize that the enantiomeric assemblies have similar
mesh sizes.
SANS
scattering for 1 wt % hydrogels of pure MAX1, (◇) (A);
pure DMAX1, (○) (B); and a mixture of 1:1 MAX1/DMAX1,
(□) (C). Each scattering profile is an average of three independent
experiments on separate gels performed on separate days. Error bars
are smaller than the symbol where not evident. Colored lines represent
fractal model fits for the individual hydrogels. (D) Scattering profiles
of MAX1 (green), DMAX1 (purple), and racemic (blue) hydrogels are
coplotted to emphasize that the enantiomeric assemblies have similar
mesh sizes.In this model, the peptide
fibrils within the hydrogel network
are approximated as an assembly of spherical building blocks that
further associate to form fractal-like clusters with a defined average
size, namely, the correlation length, λ, and self-similarity
dimension, Df. These clusters are characterized
by the structure factorFitting
these data for MAX1 and DMAX1 hydrogels results in a fractal
dimension of 1.33 and correlation length of 125 nm for both gels.
The racemic gel has a very similar fractal dimension and correlation
length of 1.36 and 118 nm. Thus, the SANS data show that the observed
increase in mechanical rigidity enjoyed by the racemic gel is not
a result of a more cross-linked network.On the basis of eq above, the alternative
to a decrease in mesh size
to bring about an increase in gel rigidity is an increase in the bending modulus of individual fibrils comprising the racemic
gel. However, the small widths (∼3 nm) of the racemic fibrils
make it incredibly difficult to measure their stiffness by established
methods such as atomic force microscopy (AFM).[59,60] Thus, we turned our attention to diffusing wave spectroscopy (DWS).[61−63] DWS offers a noninvasive method to access the high frequency linear
rheology of biomaterials, beyond the capabilities of conventional
mechanical rheometers and particle tracking microrheology methods,
enabling precise characterization of their mechanical properties.[64] This technique has previously been applied to
colloidal gels,[65,66] emulsions,[65] worm-like micelles,[67−69] and F-actin solutions.[70,71] Here, we use DWS for the first time to measure the stiffness of
peptide fibrils, namely, those formed by pure MAX1, DMAX1, and their
corresponding racemate.In DWS experiments, the fibril stiffness
is extracted by monitoring
the mean-squared displacement, MSD ⟨Δr2(t)⟩ of polystyrene microspheres
embedded within the hydrogels at high frequencies, Figure A. The MSD was fit to a stretched
exponential of the form ⟨Δr2(τ)⟩ = δ2(1 – e(−τ/τ).[66] Here, a is the short-time logarithmic slope, whose scaling (0.75) is characteristic
of semiflexible polymer networks. τc is the characteristic
relaxation time of the particle in the gel, and δ2 (defined by the plateau region) corresponds to the maximal particle
displacement in the network (Table ). The relaxation time for particles in the racemic
gel is faster (62 μs) than that in either of the enantiomeric
gels (∼118 μs), and the maximal displacement is correspondingly
smaller for the racemate. This indicates that particle movement is
significantly more restricted in the racemic gel. In panel B, MSD
data are converted to the storage (G′) and
loss (G′’, a measure of the material’s
viscous response to stress) moduli numerically through calculation
of the complex modulus, G*(ω), using the approximate
form of the Generalized Stokes–Einstein Relation given in eqs S5–S7 in the Materials and Methods
section. The 4-fold enhancement in material rigidity for the racemic
hydrogel is observed in the low frequency plateau regime, which is
in agreement with the bulk rheology measurements.
Figure 5
Diffusing wave spectroscopy
monitoring the mean squared displacement,
⟨Δr2(t)⟩,
of particles embedded in 1 wt % MAX1 (◇), DMAX1 (●),
and 1:1 MAX1/DMAX1 (□) hydrogels (N = 3) (A)
(B) Corresponding storage, G′ (closed symbols)
and loss, G″ (open symbols) moduli of 1 wt
% MAX1 (green), DMAX1 (purple) and 1:1 MAX1/DMAX1 hydrogels (blue)
obtained from DWS measurements. Nonlinear fit with logarithmic slope
of 3/4 of early time regime in (A) and high frequency regime in (B)
is indicated by colored lines. Loss moduli, G″,
at high frequencies are fit to calculate persistence length. In panel
C, the persistence length and G′ are coplotted
against the mole fraction of DMAX1 used in the gel formulation (N = 3). Line is included to guide the eye.
Table 2
Fibril Parameters Derived from Diffusing
Wave Spectroscopy
gel
τc (μs)a
δ2 (× 10–6 μm2)a
d (nm)b
L (nm)c
ρ (×104 μm–2)d
lp (nm)a
κ(pN·nm2)a
MAX1
118 (5)
5.45 (0.70)
3
125
2.36
7.5 (1.1)
30.8 (4.5)
DMAX1
119 (18)
5.66 (1.27)
3
125
2.36
7.4 (0.8)
30.4 (3.3)
racemate
62 (14)
2.21 (0.37)
3
118
2.23
12.6 (0.8)
51.8 (3.3)
Measured from DWS;
errors in parentheses.
Measured
from TEM.
Determined by
SANS.
Calculated from polymer
concentration.
Diffusing wave spectroscopy
monitoring the mean squared displacement,
⟨Δr2(t)⟩,
of particles embedded in 1 wt % MAX1 (◇), DMAX1 (●),
and 1:1 MAX1/DMAX1 (□) hydrogels (N = 3) (A)
(B) Corresponding storage, G′ (closed symbols)
and loss, G″ (open symbols) moduli of 1 wt
% MAX1 (green), DMAX1 (purple) and 1:1 MAX1/DMAX1 hydrogels (blue)
obtained from DWS measurements. Nonlinear fit with logarithmic slope
of 3/4 of early time regime in (A) and high frequency regime in (B)
is indicated by colored lines. Loss moduli, G″,
at high frequencies are fit to calculate persistence length. In panel
C, the persistence length and G′ are coplotted
against the mole fraction of DMAX1 used in the gel formulation (N = 3). Line is included to guide the eye.Measured from DWS;
errors in parentheses.Measured
from TEM.Determined by
SANS.Calculated from polymer
concentration.Importantly,
at lag times <100 μs, corresponding to the
high frequency regime in panel B, the probe particles are displaced
on the order of 1 nm and their response is dictated by the single
filament mechanics of the peptide network. This regime is used to
determine the persistence length and bending modulus of the fibrils
that comprise the hydrogel networks. Here, the theory for high frequency
rheology of semiflexible polymers is invoked, and data are fit to eq below:[52,72,73]where ρ is the fibril length
per unit
volume, lp = κ/kT is the fibril persistence length, and ζ ≈ 4πη/ln(0.6L/d) is the lateral drag coefficient per unit length for filaments of
length L and diameter d. Previous
work (see Table )
has determined all relevant parameters in eq except the persistence length for MAX1, DMAX1,
and racemic assemblies.[47,50,51] This allows the loss modulus to be fit in the high frequency regime
with the persistence length as the only adjustable parameter. All
peptide samples exhibit the characteristic ω3/4 scaling
as predicted by semiflexible polymer theory. Resulting values for
fibril persistence length are shown in Table .As expected, average persistence
length (lp) values for fibrils formed
from MAX1 and DMAX1 are nearly
identical, 7.5 ± 1.1 nm and 7.4 ± 0.8 nm, respectively.
However, the average persistence length of fibrils formed within the
racemic network is nearly twice as long (12.6 ± 0.8 nm). The
corresponding bending moduli for fibrils within each hydrogel can
be calculated from κ = lpkT (Table ), and it is clear that the fibrils in the racemic gel are significantly
more stiff (51 vs 31 pN nm2). Further, the Job plot in Figure C nicely shows that
the persistence length of the fibrils and the corresponding rigidity
of their respective gels measured by bulk rheology track with the
mole fraction of enantiomer used in the gel formulation. Taken together,
the SANS and DWS show that the racemic hydrogel is mechanically more
rigid because the fibrils that comprise the gel are, themselves, more
rigid.
Molecular Arrangement of Enantiomers within Racemic Fibrils
It is likely that unique molecular-level interactions, made between
MAX1 and DMAX1 in the assembled state, are responsible for the enhanced
stiffness of the racemic fibrils. Three arrangements can be envisioned
for the coassembly of MAX1 and DMAX1, Figure . In the first arrangement (panel A), each
enantiomer self-segregates into its respective monolayer. Here, MAX1
and DMAX1 make facial contact across the bilayer. However, within
each monolayer, each enantiomer only makes lateral contact with itself
as it traverses down the long axis of the fibril. In panel B, each
enantiomer pairs with itself across the bilayer, but alternates down
the long axis of the fibril. In the last arrangement (panel C), enantiomers
pair across the bilayer and alternate down the fibril long axis.
Figure 6
Possible
arrangements of enantiomeric coassembly within racemic
fibrils. (A) MAX1 and DMAX1 self-segregate into distinct monolayers.
(B) Each enantiomer pairs with itself across the bilayer, but alternates
down the long axis of the fibril. (C) MAX1 and DMAX1 pair across the
bilayer and laterally within each monolayer.
Possible
arrangements of enantiomeric coassembly within racemic
fibrils. (A) MAX1 and DMAX1 self-segregate into distinct monolayers.
(B) Each enantiomer pairs with itself across the bilayer, but alternates
down the long axis of the fibril. (C) MAX1 and DMAX1 pair across the
bilayer and laterally within each monolayer.The possibility of enantiomers assembling as depicted in Figure A was investigated
using isotope-edited Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (IE-FTIR).
This technique has been utilized to monitor the assembly and alignment
of β-sheet peptides.[41,74−78] The fibrils that constitute the MAX1 and DMAX1 hydrogel networks
exhibit a characteristic strong amide I stretch at ∼1615 cm–1 due to their large β-sheet secondary structure
content.[79] Spectra also included a weaker
band centered at 1680 cm–1. This band can be assigned
either to the intramolecular arrangement of antiparallel β-strands
within each hairpin of the assembly or the β-turn secondary
structure also contained with each hairpin.[80] In the experiment presented in Figure A, 13C/18O-labeled
amino acids were incorporated into MAX1 at Lys6 and Val14 (namely,
MAX1-IR1, Table ).
A control gel prepared from pure MAX1-IR1 exhibits a red-shifted vibrational
frequency stretch at 1571 cm–1 due to the heavy-atom
labeled carbonyl groups[81] (Figure A). The large magnitude of
this frequency shift is indicative of the extended vibrational coupling
between labeled amides that traverse uninterrupted along the long
axis of the fibrils constituting the gel. Conceptually, if one prepares
a racemic gel comprising equimolar mixtures of MAX1-IR1 and DMAX1
and the enantiomers self-segregate into monolayers, then a similar
shift should be observed.
Figure 7
Isotope edited FTIR spectra of MAX1-IR1 (A),
MAX1-IR2 (B), and
1:1 MAX1-IR1/DMAX1 (C) hydrogels. Dotted line indicates the coupled
stretch at 1571 cm–1 for reference.
Isotope edited FTIR spectra of MAX1-IR1 (A),
MAX1-IR2 (B), and
1:1 MAX1-IR1/DMAX1 (C) hydrogels. Dotted line indicates the coupled
stretch at 1571 cm–1 for reference.A second control gel was prepared using MAX1-IR2
(Table ). This peptide
incorporates
only one 13C=18O group at Val7. As such,
a gel prepared from this peptide alone will consist of fibrils in
which only alternating β-strands contain the label, and thus
the extended coupling is lost. This results in a stretch at 1582 cm–1, blue-shifted relative to the pure MAX1-IR1 gel, Figure B. Again, conceptually,
if one prepares a racemic gel comprised of MAX1-IR1 and DMAX1 and
the peptides now alternate within each of the monolayers of a racemic
fibril, the extended coupling would be lost. This would result in
a blue-shift relative to that observed for a pure MAX1-IR1 gel.Figure C shows
the IE-FTIR spectrum of a hydrogel resulting from the equimolar mixture
of MAX1-IR1 with unlabeled DMAX1. The lower vibrational frequency
stretch at 1579 cm–1 is blue-shifted relative to
that in pure MAX1-IR1 (dotted line), indicating that extended vibrational
coupling does not occur. On the basis of these results, the arrangement
depicted in Figure A is unlikely. Rather, MAX1 and DMAX1 enantiomers coassemble within
each monolayer that defines the racemic fibril, as shown in Figure B or C. These two
arrangements differ in the formation of facial associations made between
the enantiomers across the bilayer. In panel B, homochiral facial
contacts are made, whereas in panel C, MAX1 and DMAX1 make heterochiral
facial contact. A further complication exists in that enantiomers
within a given fibril monolayer can adopt a Syn orientation,
where β-hairpin turns align along the monolayer, or an Anti arrangement, where turns alternate down the long axis
of the fibril as shown in panels B and C.To examine the arrangement
of enantiomers within the fibril monolayer
as well as across the fibril bilayer, solid state nuclear magnetic
resonance (ssNMR) was employed. We recently determined the molecular
structure of pure MAX1 in its fibrillar state (PDB file 2N1E) through a series
of REDOR, PITHIRDS-CT, and two-dimensional (2D) 13C–13C radio frequency-assisted diffusion (RAD) measurements.[49] MAX1 adopts a Syn/Anti arrangement
where the β-turns of each hairpin align Syn along a given monolayer. Across the bilayer, hairpins are arranged Anti where β-turns occupy opposite fibril edges, much
like the arrangement depicted in Figure A if all the peptides were MAX1. With the
structural knowledge of pure MAX1 fibrils in hand, isotopically labeled
peptides were designed to identify relative enantiomer orientation
within the racemic fibril monolayer and across the bilayer. Peptides
DMAX1-NMR1 and MAX1-NMR1 (Table , Figure ) were designed with 13C-labeled DP11 and V1
respectively to allow for the determination of enantiomeric orientation
within the fibril monolayer using PITHIRDS-CT measurements. MAX1-NMR2
was designed with uniformly labeled P11, T12, and V20 residues to
enable the identification of bilayer partners through the absence
or presence of through-space cross-peaks between isotopically labeled
residues in 2D RAD measurements.
Figure 8
ssNMR of racemic fibrils. (A, B) PITHIRDS-CT
experiments indicate
an Anti arrangement of enantiomers within each fibril
monolayer employing isotopically labeled DMAX1-NMR1 and MAX1-NMR1
peptides. Color-coded lines in panel B are simulations of PITHIRDS-CT
data for 13C spin pairs with the indicated distances. (C,
D) Expected couplings between Val20 and Thr12 (shorter interaction
at left) and between Val20 and Pro11 (longer interaction at right)
if peptides are paired across the bilayer in a homochiral fashion.
Spectra and arrows are defined in the main text.
ssNMR of racemic fibrils. (A, B) PITHIRDS-CT
experiments indicate
an Anti arrangement of enantiomers within each fibril
monolayer employing isotopically labeled DMAX1-NMR1 and MAX1-NMR1
peptides. Color-coded lines in panel B are simulations of PITHIRDS-CT
data for 13C spin pairs with the indicated distances. (C,
D) Expected couplings between Val20 and Thr12 (shorter interaction
at left) and between Val20 and Pro11 (longer interaction at right)
if peptides are paired across the bilayer in a homochiral fashion.
Spectra and arrows are defined in the main text.To test if enantiomers adopt an Anti or Syn orientation within the racemic monolayer, a gel comprising
a 1:1 mixture of MAX1-NMR1/DMAX1-NMR1 was prepared. PITHIRDS-CT measurements
of this sample reveal signal decays consistent with a close proximity
between isotopically labeled DP11 and V1, Figure B. This experiment affords
a measured distance of approximately 6.5 Å between the labeled
proline and valine, which can only be achieved if the enantiomers
are oriented in an Anti arrangement where β-turns
alternate along the fibril long-axis, Figure A.Next, the relative enantiomer pairing
across the bilayer was examined
by preparing a gel comprising an equimolar mixture of labeled MAX1-NMR2
and unlabeled DMAX, Table . If MAX1-NMR2 makes homochiral interfacial contact as depicted
in Figures B and 8C, intermolecular coupling between two MAX1-NMR2
hairpins should be observed across the bilayer. The absence of interfacial-residue
coupling would argue against this arrangement and argue for heterochiral
pairing as depicted in Figure C, where the distances between spin labels are too long (>8
Å) to observe intermolecular coupling. Figure D shows one-dimensional (1D) slices at the
Cα (green) and Cβ (blue) chemical shifts of labeled valine
20 (V20) derived from 2D RAD13C–13C
spectra of fibrils comprised of a 1:1 MAX1-NMR2/DMAX mixture. Careful
inspection of the 2D spectrum with a 500 ms mixing period suggests
the possibility of weak Val20-Thr12 and Val20-Pro11 cross-peaks, which
are not observed in the 2D RAD spectrum with a 25 ms mixing period
(Figure S20). Although these observations
support the arrangement depicted in Figure B, we cannot definitively rule out heterochiral
pairing as shown in panel C. This is because the Val20 signals in
the spectra are not fully resolved from Pro11 and Thr12 signals, making
it difficult to clearly distinguish these weak intermolecular cross-peaks
from stronger intraresidue Pro11-Thr12 cross-peaks. At any rate, the
IR and NMR studies support the formation of racemic fibrils comprised
of an Anti arrangement of alternating enantiomers
in each monolayer, and the possible homochiral pairing of enantiomers
across the bilayer as depicted in Figure B.
Molecular Basis for Enhanced Fibril Stiffness:
Predictions from
Pauling and Corey
Thus far, the data indicate that the racemic
gel of MAX1 and DMAX1 is more mechanical rigid because the individual
fibrils that comprise the gel are themselves more rigid. Further,
these fibrils contain both enantiomers arranged in a unique alternating
molecular orientation within each monolayer of a fibril’s bilayered
β-sheet rich structure. The question remains as to why this
molecular arrangement leads to the formation of fibrils that are more
stiff than fibrils comprised of either enantiomer alone. Using the
structural insights gained from the spectroscopic data, an energy-minimized
model of the racemic assembly was constructed and compared to a model
of an assembly formed by pure MAX1 based on ssNMR.[49]Shown in the top panel of Figure A is a dimer formed by two enantiomers within
a monolayer of the racemic fibrillar assembly. Although each individual
hairpin contains two intramolecular β-strands arranged in an
antiparallel fashion, the β-sheet interface between the two
hairpins comprises β-strands aligned in a parallel manner. Thus, MAX1 and DMAX1 form an extended network of intermolecular parallel β-strands that traverse the
long axis of a given fibril. In contrast, hairpins within enantiomerically
pure MAX1 fibrils are defined by an extended array of anti-parallel hydrogen bonded β-strands as shown in Figure B. Both the racemic and pure enantiomeric
fibrils maximize the hydrogen-bonding potential of every strand in
their respective systems. Although the exact geometry of the H-bonds
is different in each assembly (bent versus linear), the number of
bonds formed is identical. Thus, it is unlikely that enthalpic contributions
from H-bonding are responsible for the large enhancement in fibril
stiffness for the racemate. The central image in panel A shows a tetrameric
portion of a fibril monolayer. The formation of bent H-bonds between
enantiomeric strands is evident and is responsible for defining the
alignment of strands within the β-sheet assembly. Importantly,
these bent H-bonds not only define strand alignment but also dictate
the exact placement of the hydrophobic valine side chains into the
dry interior core of the fibril. As shown in the CPK rendering, valine
side chains form intimate nested hydrophobic interactions where the
entire isopropyl group of one residue nestles between the isopropyl
groups of its valine neighbors. This facilitates tight packing and
maximizes side-side/side-chain van der Waals contacts. The bottom
panel in Figure A
shows the entire fibril viewed axially down its long axis showing
the interior of the bilayer. The staggered arrangement of the nested
valines is clearly evident with the side chains of each successive
enantiomer translated relative to its mirror image neighbor. These
nested interactions are not realized in enantiomerically pure fibrils, Figure B (center and bottom
images). Here, the antiparallel arrangement of β-strands, with
its linear H-bonds, dictates that the valine side chains are arranged
in a head-to-head manner within the core of the fibril. Although packing
can occur between the valines where one Cγ atom of a valine
side chain can penetrate the fork of a neighboring isopropyl group,
this interaction does not pack the interior of the fibril as efficient
as does nesting of an entire isopropyl side chain. This is especially
apparent when comparing the axial views of the fibril interiors, Figure (bottom panels).
Interestingly, nested hydrophobic interactions between β-branched
residues in sheet-rich proteins frequently occur, as first noted by
Curmi at el.[82] As in naturally occurring
proteins where effective packing of side chains stabilizes their folded
state, the well-packed interior of the racemic fibril is also stabilizing
and results in its local stiffening (Table ).
Figure 9
(A) Model of MAX1/DMAX1 in their coassembled,
racemic fibrillar
state. (B) Model of pure MAX1 in its self-assembled state. ChemDraw
figures at top define strand orientation in each assembly. Central
images highlight the relative orientation of hairpins within a single
monolayer of each fibril type with the valine side chains rendered
in CPK (magenta). Bottom images view the racemic and pure enantiomeric
fibrils along their long axes. The central and bottom images illustrate
the differential packing of the valine residues within the racemic
and pure enantiomeric fibrils.
(A) Model of MAX1/DMAX1 in their coassembled,
racemic fibrillar
state. (B) Model of pure MAX1 in its self-assembled state. ChemDraw
figures at top define strand orientation in each assembly. Central
images highlight the relative orientation of hairpins within a single
monolayer of each fibril type with the valine side chains rendered
in CPK (magenta). Bottom images view the racemic and pure enantiomeric
fibrils along their long axes. The central and bottom images illustrate
the differential packing of the valine residues within the racemic
and pure enantiomeric fibrils.Remarkably, the arrangement of β-strands afforded by
the
racemic assembly results in a supersecondary structure predicted by
Pauling and Corey over 60 years ago, which they termed the rippled
sheet.[40] They proposed models of both antiparallel
and parallel extended rippled sheets formed by the alternating assembly
of linear β-strands of opposing chirality. These models were
based directly on their earlier predictions of the pleated sheet formed
by homochiral β-strands and were generated simply by “the
reflection of alternate chains into their enantiomers”. Although
the Corey and Pauling models comprise β-strands as opposed to
the β-hairpins studied here, the similarity with respect to
overall sheet topology formed by both is striking. Further, since
our initial report,[47] Nilsson et al. observed
rippled sheet formation via the assembly of fibril forming linear
β-strand amphiphiles, suggesting that this structural topology
may be more prevalent than previously appreciated for sheet forming
heterochiral peptides.[41] Importantly, the
few models of rippled sheets that have been reported[40,41] are largely derived based on hydrogen-bonding arguments with little
mention of side chain packing. In fact, the models drawn by Pauling
and Corey only show the main chain atoms of the peptide’s backbone,
omitting all side chains entirely. Our work demonstrates that side-chain
packing is indeed important to the overall formation of this unique
sheet topology and is responsible for the enhanced material properties
enjoyed by the hydrogels formed by the racemic fibrils described here.The model shown in Figure A, which underscores the importance of side chain interactions,
makes several predictions. The first is that design can be used to
modulate the bulk mechanical properties of the gel by incorporating
amino acids that either enhance or diminish side-chain interactions
between enantiomers. This prediction was first tested by preparing
MAX35 and DMAX35, enantiomers that incorporate four isoleucine residues
on their hydrophobic faces among a background of valines, Table . When assembled into
racemic fibrils, both Ile–Ile and Val–Val pairwise interactions
can form between neighboring enantiomers. Ile–Ile cross-pairs
within β-sheets are generally rare in natural proteins especially
when compared to Ile–Val or Va–Val pairs,[82] suggesting that they are less energetically
favorable. The rheological time-sweep experiment in Figure A shows that the MAX35/DMAX35
racemic gel displays only a 2-fold enhancement in rigidity compared
to either of the pure enantiomeric gels. Importantly, the enhancement
displayed by the MAX35/DMAX35 gel is 2-fold less than that displayed
by the MAX1/DMAX1 gel, suggesting weaker inter-enantiomer interactions
in the former.
Figure 10
Dynamic time sweep oscillatory rheology measuring storage
moduli
of 1 wt % hydrogels formed from MAX35 and DMAX35 (A) and MARK4 and
DMARK4 (B). The rigidity of each racemic gel (□) is greater
than their respective pure enantiomeric gels (◇, ○),
but by varying degrees based on the design of each enantiomeric peptide
pair.
Dynamic time sweep oscillatory rheology measuring storage
moduli
of 1 wt % hydrogels formed from MAX35 and DMAX35 (A) and MARK4 and
DMARK4 (B). The rigidity of each racemic gel (□) is greater
than their respective pure enantiomeric gels (◇, ○),
but by varying degrees based on the design of each enantiomeric peptide
pair.To strengthen the enantiomeric
interaction, MARK4 and DMARK4 were
designed with residue changes on the hydrophilic face of the hairpin, Table . Here, arginine residues
were incorporated to enhance inter-enantiomer interactions in the
fibrillar state through the formation of inter-guanidino hydrogen
bonds. These interactions are not possible in the pure enantiomer
assemblies. Figure B shows that the racemic gel displays an impressive 11-fold enhancement
in its mechanical rigidity. Thus, modulating side-chain–side-chain
interactions between enantiomers, whether in the fibril’s core
or on its solvent exposed exterior, provide a means to tune the gel’s
bulk properties via molecular-level engineering.The second
prediction our model makes is that the hairpins comprising
the “racemic” fibrils need not be related as true enantiomers
(e.g., non-superimposable mirror images) to realize the enhancement
in fibril stiffness and corresponding gel rigidity. As long as important
side-chain/side-interactions are not disrupted, alterations that break
mirror image symmetry are tolerated. In fact, the fluorophore-, azide-,
and biotin-labeled derivatives used in this study assembled readily
with their nonmirror image partners. These hairpins were chemically
modified at their strand termini or on their hydrophilic faces; regions
of the amphiphile that do not participate in the formation of critical
pairwise interactions that stabilize the fibril.
Conclusion
Heterochiral peptide assembly affords materials with unique macroscopic
traits that are dependent on the sequence and composition of monomers
used in their preparation. A racemic mixture of enantiomeric peptides
MAX1 and DMAX1 assembled into a fibrillar hydrogel that is 4-fold
more rigid than enantiomerically pure gels formed from either peptide
alone. Herein, we thoroughly characterize the racemic hydrogel across
molecular, local-fibril, and hydrogel network length scales using
an arsenal of spectroscopy, microscopy, and scattering techniques
to undercover the physical basis for this enhancement in mechanical
rigidity. MAX1 and DMAX1 coassemble into fibrils comprised of a bilayer
of peptides that H-bond along the long axis of a given fibril. Within
each monolayer, enantiomers coassemble in an alternating fashion forming
an extended heterochiral rippled sheet, a structure predicted by Pauling
and Corey in 1953. Importantly, valine residues display their side
chains into the fibrils’ dry interior, forming nested hydrophobic
interactions between enantiomers, interactions not accessible within
enantiomerically pure fibrils. This arrangement maximizes inter-residue
hydrophobic contacts within the interior of fibrils that results in
their local stiffening, which in turn, gives rise to the significant
increase in bulk mechanical rigidity observed for the racemic hydrogel.
We go on to show that modulation of inter-enantiomer interactions
within fibrils can be used as a design tool to control the bulk mechanical
properties of gels.
Authors: Karthikan Rajagopal; Matthew S Lamm; Lisa A Haines-Butterick; Darrin J Pochan; Joel P Schneider Journal: Biomacromolecules Date: 2009-09-14 Impact factor: 6.988
Authors: Sureshbabu Nagarajan; Humeyra Taskent-Sezgin; Dzmitry Parul; Isaac Carrico; Daniel P Raleigh; R Brian Dyer Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2011-11-28 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Ana Salomé Veiga; Chomdao Sinthuvanich; Diana Gaspar; Henri G Franquelim; Miguel A R B Castanho; Joel P Schneider Journal: Biomaterials Date: 2012-09-17 Impact factor: 12.479
Authors: Spencer A Hughes; Fengbin Wang; Shengyuan Wang; Mark A B Kreutzberger; Tomasz Osinski; Albina Orlova; Joseph S Wall; Xiaobing Zuo; Edward H Egelman; Vincent P Conticello Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2019-07-01 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Radhika P Nagarkar; Stephen E Miller; Sheng Zhong; Darrin J Pochan; Joel P Schneider Journal: Protein Sci Date: 2018-03-14 Impact factor: 6.725
Authors: Corey J Wilson; Andreas S Bommarius; Julie A Champion; Yury O Chernoff; David G Lynn; Anant K Paravastu; Chen Liang; Ming-Chien Hsieh; Jennifer M Heemstra Journal: Chem Rev Date: 2018-10-03 Impact factor: 60.622