| Literature DB >> 28820461 |
Carmen M González-Henríquez1, Vanessa A Villegas-Opazo2, Dallits H Sagredo-Oyarce3, Mauricio A Sarabia-Vallejos4, Claudio A Terraza5.
Abstract
Biomimetic planar artificial membranes have been widely studied due to their multiple applications in several research fields. Their humectation and thermal response are crucial for reaching stability; these characteristics are related to the molecular organization inside the bilayer, which is affected by the aliphatic chain length, saturations, and molecule polarity, among others. Bilayer stability becomes a fundamental factor when technological devices are developed-like biosensors-based on those systems. Thermal studies were performed for different types of phosphatidylcholine (PC) molecules: two pure PC bilayers and four binary PC mixtures. These analyses were carried out through the detection of slight changes in their optical and structural parameters via Ellipsometry and Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR) techniques. Phospholipid bilayers were prepared by Langmuir-Blodgett technique and deposited over a hydrophilic silicon wafer. Their molecular inclination degree, mobility, and stability of the different phases were detected and analyzed through bilayer thickness changes and their optical phase-amplitude response. Results show that certain binary lipid mixtures-with differences in its aliphatic chain length-present a co-existence of two thermal responses due to non-ideal mixing.Entities:
Keywords: binary phospholipid mixture; ellipsometry; heterogeneous membranes; surface plasmon resonance; thermal phase transitions
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28820461 PMCID: PMC5618040 DOI: 10.3390/bios7030034
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosensors (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6374
Figure 1Schematic diagram of Surface Plasmon Resonance (SPR) assembly used for the experiments.
Refractive indexes measured by Abbe refractometer in solution and in solid (film) used for ellipsometry model.
| Material | Refractive Index (Solution) | Refractive Index (Film) | Extinction Coefficient |
|---|---|---|---|
| Silicon (Si100) | N/A | 3.870 | 0.019 |
| Silicon Dioxide (SiO2) | N/A | 1.462 ± 0.025 | N/A |
| DPPC | 1.489 ± 0.063 | 1.484 ± 0.058 | N/A |
| DSPC | 1.426 ± 0.089 | 1.439 ± 0.086 | N/A |
| DPPC:DMPC (2:1) | 1.461 ± 0.068 | 1.488 ± 0.072 | N/A |
| DPPC:DOPC (7:1) | 1.459 ± 0.078 | 1.481 ± 0.067 | N/A |
Figure 2Optical response and some schemes of the bilayers measured under heating cycles for (a) 1,2-dipalmitoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DPPC) (ellipsometry and SPR) and (b) 1,2-distearoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DSPC) (ellipsometry).
Figure 3Thermal behavior detected by optical studies (ellipsometry and SPR) with their respective diagrams for (a) DPPC: 1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DMPC) (2:1) and (b) DPPC: 1,2-dioleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine (DOPC) (7:1).
Figure 4Thermal behavior detected for optical studies (ellipsometry) and a diagram of (a) DSPC:DMPC (2:1) and (b) DSPC:DOPC (7:1).
Figure 5Atomic Force Microscope (AFM) micrographs of the samples DPPC and DPPC:DMPC (2:1), respectively.
Total thickness bilayer variation for each phospholipid mixture.
| Thickness (nm) | |||
|---|---|---|---|
| 21 °C | 55.0 °C | Difference (Δ) | |
| DPPC | 5.6 ± 0.2 | 5.0 ± 0.3 | ~0.6 |
| DSPC | 6.4 ± 0.3 | 4.6 ± 0.4 | ~1.8 |
| DPPC:DMPC (2:1) | 6.9 ± 0.2 | 6.1 ± 0.5 | ~0.8 |
| DPPC:DOPC (7:1) | 5.7 ± 0.1 | 5.2 ± 0.6 | ~0.5 |
| DSPC:DMPC (2:1) | 4.2 ± 0.3 | 4.0 ± 0.4 | ~0.2 |
| DSPC:DOPC (7:1) | 5.1 ± 0.2 | 3.8 ± 0.5 | ~1.3 |
* Value took at 23.8 °C.