| Literature DB >> 30925720 |
Diego Sebastián Insuasty Cepeda1, Héctor Manuel Pineda Castañeda2, Andrea Verónica Rodríguez Mayor3, Javier Eduardo García Castañeda4, Mauricio Maldonado Villamil5, Ricardo Fierro Medina6, Zuly Jenny Rivera Monroy7.
Abstract
A methodology was implemented for purifying peptides in one chromatographic run via solid-phase extraction (SPE), reverse phase mode (RP), and gradient elution, obtaining high-purity products with good yields. Crude peptides were analyzed by reverse phase high performance liquid chromatography and a new mathematical model based on its retention time was developed in order to predict the percentage of organic modifier in which the peptide will elute in RP-SPE. This information was used for designing the elution program of each molecule. It was possible to purify peptides with different physicochemical properties, showing that this method is versatile and requires low solvent consumption, making it the least polluting one. Reverse phase-SPE can easily be routinely implemented. It is an alternative to enrich and purified synthetic or natural molecules.Entities:
Keywords: gradient elution; peptide; preparative purification; solid phase extraction (SPE); solid phase peptide synthesis
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30925720 PMCID: PMC6479624 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24071215
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1Dwell time determination [26,27,28]. Programed elution gradient (red line), experimental gradient performed by the HPLC system (black line). Delay time (ti), gradient time (tG), dwell time (tD).
Figure 2RP-HPLC analysis of crude 0–25LfcinB/32–35BFII. The chromatographic profile shows a main peak at 5.10 min, corresponding to the peptide with a purity of 60%. The chromatographic profile of fractions N° 3, 6, and 11 collected during reversed-phase solid phase extraction (RP-SPE) purification is also shown. Specifically, those fractions contained 11, 18, and 23% solvent B, respectively.
Program designed for the purification of 20–25LfcinB/32–35BFII via RP-SPE. The framed fractions correspond to where the purest fraction probably elutes. The final volume of each fraction was 12 mL.
| Fraction N° | Solvent B | Purity b (%) | |
|---|---|---|---|
| % | μL | ||
| 1 | 0 | 0 | - |
| 2 | 5 | 600 | - |
| 3 | 11 | 1320 | - |
| 4 | 16 | 1920 | - |
| 5 | 17 | 2040 | 66 |
| 6 | 18 | 2160 | 96 |
| 7 | 19 | 2280 | 94 |
| 8 | 20 | 2400 | 92 |
| 9 a | 21 | 2520 | 88 |
| 10 | 22 | 2640 | 77 |
| 11 | 23 | 2760 | 23 |
| 12 | 24 | 2880 | - |
| 13 | 25 | 3000 | - |
| 14 | 50 | 6000 | - |
| 15 | 100 | 12000 | - |
a Fraction closest to calculated %Be. b Chromatographic purity.
Figure 3Purification of Fmoc-Asn(GlcAc4)-OtBu (2) by RP-SPE. (A) Crude product chromatographic profile. (B) Chromatograms of collected fractions (6 to 13) (left) and used elution program (right). (C) Purified product chromatographic profile (fractions 11–13).
Peptides purified by RP-SPE.
| Peptide Code | Sequence | GRAVY a | %Ha a | Net Charge | tR | Purity b | Purification Yield | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Crude | Purified | |||||||
| 1 | Fc- | N.D. | N.D. | +2 | 6.0 | 65 | 95 | 6 |
| 2 | Fc- | N.D. | N.D. | +4 | 7.2 | 77 | 90 | 28 |
| 3 | N.D. | N.D. | +2 | 4.4 | 46 | 99 | 10 | |
| 4 | KKWQWK | −2.8 | 33 | +3 | 3.7 | 94 | 98 | 48 |
| 5 | IHSMNSTIL | 0.6 | 44 | +1 | 4.3 | 71 | 81 | 71 |
| 6 | PNNNKILVPK | −0.9 | 30 | +2 | 3.0 | 71 | 91 | 60 |
| 7 | LYIKGSGSTANLASSNYFPT | −0.1 | 30 | +1 | 4.9 | 55 | 72 | 16 |
| 8 | VSGLQYRVFR | −1.8 | 40 | +2 | 3.6 | 54 | 92 | 35 |
| 9 | N(Glc(Ac4))- | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 6.0 | 64 | 76 | 61 |
| 10 | RWQWRWQWR- | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 6.4 | 60 | 66 | 70 |
| 11 | N(Glc(Ac4))- | N.D. | N.D. | N.D. | 6.6 | 66 | 80 | 13 |
| 12 | KKWQWKAKKLG | −1.8 | 36 | +5 | 3.9 | 89 | 99 | 63 |
| 13 | RRWQWRKKKLG | −2.5 | 27 | +6 | 3.8 | 91 | 99 | 66 |
| 14 | (RRWQWRKKKLG)2-K- | −2.2 | 29 | +13 | 4.4 | 73 | 93 | 27 |
| 15 | Fc- | N.D. | N.D. | +3 | 5.8 | 72 | 92 | 13 |
| 16 | AcFer- | N.D. | N.D. | +3 | 6.7 | 70 | 89 | 15 |
| 17 | RKKKMKKALQYIKLLKE | −1.2 | 35 | +7 | 4.9 | 61 | 86 | 7 |
| 18 | RYRRKKK | −3.8 | 0 | +6 | 0.7 | 93 | 99 | 41 |
| 19 | KMKKALQY | −1.1 | 37 | +3 | 3.1 | 84 | 98 | 42 |
| 20 | YIKLLKE | −0.1 | 42 | +1 | 4.2 | 99 | 99 | 26 |
| 21 | MKKALQYIKLLKE | −0.3 | 46 | +3 | 5.2 | 86 | 99 | 28 |
| 22 | FYFY | 0.8 | N.D. | 0 | 5.2 | 57 | 83 | 7 |
| 23 | KLLKKLLK | −0.1 | 50 | +4 | 4.0 | 90 | 99 | 55 |
| 24 | KLLK | −0.1 | N.D. | +2 | 1.6 | 89 | 92 | 53 |
%HA: Percentage of hydrophobic amino acids, GRAVY: Hydrophobicity. a Evaluated by prediction through the use of the online computer tool APD3: Antimicrobial Peptide Calculator and Predictor (http://aps.unmc.edu/AP/). b Chromatographic purity measured by area percentage. AcOx: Oxolinic acid, Fc: ferrocen motif, Glc(Ac4): Tetra acetylated Glucose, Ahx: 6-aminohexanoic residue, AcFer: Ferulic acid.