Construction and Evaluation of Biomimetic Adhesion Peptides Based on Mussel and <i>Phragmatopoma californica</i>

doi:10.13523/j.cb.2303061

China Biotechnology

2023, Vol. 43

Issue (9): 1-8 DOI: 10.13523/j.cb.2303061

Construction and Evaluation of Biomimetic Adhesion Peptides Based on Mussel and Phragmatopoma californica

AN Wen-zheng,LIU Qing,ZHANG Chao,XING Wei-wei,CAI Gui-ling,FU Wen-liang^**(

),XU Dong-gang^**(

)

Institute of Military Cognition and Brain Sciences, Institute of Military Medical Sciences, Academy of Military Sciences, Beijing 100850, China

Download:

HTML

PDF(1652KB) HTML
Export: BibTeX | EndNote (RIS)

Abstract

Objective: Inspired by the principle of bionics, both anionic and cationic peptides with adhesive properties are designed and analyzed the effect of their mixing on adhesion to lay the foundation for the development of new bionic adhesive materials. Methods: The structural characteristics of mussel foot protein 5 (Mfp5) and cement precursor protein of the phragmatopoma californica 3 (Pc3) were analyzed, according to which the anionic and cationic peptides with adhesion properties were designed and screened. The adhesive force and adsorption capacity of these peptides were tested by tensile strength testing machine, atomic force microscope (AFM) and Quartz crystal microbalance (QCM). Furthermore, their underlying adhesion mechanisms were analyzed in terms of their compositions and interactions. Results: The anionic and cationic peptides with the purity of over 95% were synthesized using the solid phase peptide synthesis method. The tensile test showed that the adhesive forces of anionic and cationic peptides increased with the extension of curing time, with the highest value reaching 174.04 kPa and 180.11 kPa, respectively. In addition, the adhesive force of the mixed anionic and cationic peptides was significantly enhanced compared to their own adhesive forces, and the adhesive force of their mixture mixed in equal proportions reached 347.81 kPa. The QCM results showed that the adsorption capacity of cationic peptide, and the mixture of both anionic and cationic peptides on gold (Au) surface reached 82.67 ng/cm² and 151.53 ng/cm², respectively. The average microscopic adhesions of anionic and cationic peptides detected by AFM were 5.43 nN and 4.95 nN, respectively, while the average microscopic adhesion of their mixture mixed in equal proportions reached 18.54 nN. Conclusion: The anionic and cationic peptides designed based on mussel and Phragmatopoma californica had certain adhesion properties, which could be significantly increased by electrostatic force mediated complex condensation. Therefore, our study provides a basis for the development of new bionic adhesion materials.

Key words： Mussel Phragmatopoma californica Adhesion peptide Electrostatic action Complex condensation

Received: 22 March 2023 Published: 08 October 2023

ZTFLH:

Q819

	Service
	E-mail this article
	Add to my bookshelf
	Add to citation manager
	E-mail Alert
	RSS
	Articles by authors
	Wen-zheng AN
	Qing LIU
	Chao ZHANG
	Wei-wei XING
	Gui-ling CAI
	Wen-liang FU
	Dong-gang XU

Cite this article:

AN Wen-zheng, LIU Qing, ZHANG Chao, XING Wei-wei, CAI Gui-ling, FU Wen-liang, XU Dong-gang. Construction and Evaluation of Biomimetic Adhesion Peptides Based on Mussel and Phragmatopoma californica. China Biotechnology, 2023, 43(9): 1-8.

URL:

https://manu60.magtech.com.cn/biotech/10.13523/j.cb.2303061 OR https://manu60.magtech.com.cn/biotech/Y2023/V43/I9/1

Fig.1 MS identification of anionic peptide (a)and cationic peptide(b)

Fig.2 HPLC identification of anionic peptide (a)and cationic peptide(b)

Fig.3 Picture of contact angle (a) and mean value (b) of the anionic and cationic peptides

Fig.4 Test results of the hydrophilicity of non-Dopa modified the anionic(a) and cationic peptides(b) In the detection results, the horizontal axis represents the amino acid number of the protein, the vertical axis represents hydrophobicity, the larger the value is, the more hydrophobic it is, and if the value is negative, the more hydrophilic it is

Fig.5 Tensile strength test results

Fig.6 Determination of adsorption capacity of the anionic and cationic peptides

Fig.7 Detection results of single molecular force spectrum


[1]	Zhao H, Sun C J, Stewart R J, et al. Cement proteins of the tube-building polychaete Phragmatopoma californica. Journal of Biological Chemistry, 2005, 280(52): 42938-42944. doi: 10.1074/jbc.M508457200 pmid: 16227622

[2]	Zhang L H, Lipik V, Miserez A. Complex coacervates of oppositely charged co-polypeptides inspired by the sandcastle worm glue. Journal of Materials Chemistry B, 2016, 4(8): 1544-1556. doi: 10.1039/c5tb02298c pmid: 32263121

[3]	Wang J, Scheibel T. Recombinant production of mussel Byssus inspired proteins. Biotechnology Journal, 2018, 13(12): 1800146. doi: 10.1002/biot.v13.12

[4]	DeMartini D G, Errico J M, Sjoestroem S, et al. A cohort of new adhesive proteins identified from transcriptomic analysis of mussel foot glands. Journal of the Royal Society, Interface, 2017, 14(131): 20170151. doi: 10.1098/rsif.2017.0151

[5]	Li N N, Tan L, Yang L, et al. Purification, cDNA clone and recombinant expression of foot protein-3 from Mytilus coruscus. Protein and Peptide Letters, 2011, 18(12): 1265-1272. doi: 10.2174/092986611797642779

[6]	Hwang D S, Gim Y, Yoo H J, et al. Practical recombinant hybrid mussel bioadhesive fp-151. Biomaterials, 2007, 28(24): 3560-3568. doi: 10.1016/j.biomaterials.2007.04.039 pmid: 17507090

[7]	Guo Q, Chen J S, Wang J L, et al. Recent progress in synthesis and application of mussel-inspired adhesives. Nanoscale, 2020, 12(3): 1307-1324. doi: 10.1039/c9nr09780e pmid: 31907498

[8]	Li Y R, Cao Y. The molecular mechanisms underlying mussel adhesion. Nanoscale Advances, 2019, 1(11): 4246-4257. doi: 10.1039/c9na00582j pmid: 36134404

[9]	Danner E W, Kan Y J, Hammer M U, et al. Adhesion of mussel foot protein Mefp-5 to mica: an underwater superglue. Biochemistry, 2012, 51(33): 6511-6518. doi: 10.1021/bi3002538 pmid: 22873939

[10]	Lv Y W, Zhang Y J, Gao W Y, et al. Expression and functional evaluation of Mytilus galloprovincialis foot protein type 5 (Mgfp-5), the recombinant mussel adhesive protein. African Journal of Biotechnology, 2017, 16(36): 1840-1848. doi: 10.5897/AJB

[11]	Stewart R J. Protein-based underwater adhesives and the prospects for their biotechnological production. Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 2011, 89(1): 27-33. doi: 10.1007/s00253-010-2913-8 pmid: 20890598

[12]	Silverman H G, Roberto F F. Understanding marine mussel adhesion. Marine Biotechnology, 2007, 9(6): 661-681. doi: 10.1007/s10126-007-9053-x pmid: 17990038

[13]	Shin M, Shin J Y, Kim K, et al. The position of lysine controls the catechol-mediated surface adhesion and cohesion in underwater mussel adhesion. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 2020, 563: 168-176. doi: S0021-9797(19)31550-4 pmid: 31874305

[14]	Maier Greg P, Rapp Michael V, Herbert W J, et al. Adaptive synergy between catechol and lysine promotes wet adhesion by surface salt displacement. Science, 2015, 349(6248): 628-632. doi: 10.1126/science.aab0556 pmid: 26250681

[15]	Li Y R, Cheng J, Delparastan P, et al. Molecular design principles of Lysine-DOPA wet adhesion. Nature Communications, 2020, 11(1): 1-8. doi: 10.1038/s41467-019-13993-7

[16]	Dompé M, Cedano-Serrano F J, Heckert O, et al. Thermoresponsive complex coacervate-based underwater adhesive. Advanced Materials, 2019, 31(21): 1808179. doi: 10.1002/adma.v31.21

[17]	Stewart R J, Wang C S, Song I T, et al. The role of coacervation and phase transitions in the sandcastle worm adhesive system. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science, 2017, 239: 88-96. doi: S0001-8686(16)30109-9 pmid: 27393642

[18]	Wang C S, Stewart R J. Localization of the bioadhesive precursors of the sandcastle worm, Phragmatopoma californica (Fewkes). Journal of Experimental Biology, 2012, 215(2): 351-361. doi: 10.1242/jeb.065011

[1]	XUE Rui,YAO Lin,WANG Rui,LUO Zheng-shan,XU Hong,LI Sha. Advances and Applications of Recombinant Mussel Foot Proteins[J]. China Biotechnology, 2020, 40(11): 82-89.

Viewed

Full text

Abstract

Cited

Shared

Discussed