4.7 Review

Protein-Polyelectrolyte Interaction: Thermodynamic Analysis Based on the Titration Method

Journal

POLYMERS
Volume 11, Issue 1, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym11010082

Keywords

polyelectrolyte; complexation; electrostatics; thermodynamic analysis; isothermal titration calorimetry

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [21676089, 81470581]
  2. Shanghai Talent Development Fund [2017038]
  3. Interantional One belt One Road Collaboration Project of Shanghai [18490740300]
  4. Fundamental Research Funds for the Central Universities [222201717013, 22221818014]
  5. 111 Project Grant [B08021]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This review discussed the mechanisms including theories and binding stages concerning the protein-polyelectrolyte (PE) interaction, as well as the applications for both complexation and coacervation states of protein-PE pairs. In particular, this review focused on the applications of titration techniques, that is, turbidimetric titration and isothermal titration calorimetry (ITC), in understanding the protein-PE binding process. To be specific, by providing thermodynamic information such as pH(c), pH(phi), binding constant, entropy, and enthalpy change, titration techniques could shed light on the binding affinity, binding stoichiometry, and driving force of the protein-PE interaction, which significantly guide the applications by utilization of these interactions. Recent reports concerning interactions between proteins and different types of polyelectrolytes, that is, linear polyelectrolytes and polyelectrolyte modified nanoparticles, are summarized with their binding differences systematically discussed and compared based on the two major titration techniques. We believe this short review could provide valuable insight in the understanding of the structure-property relationship and the design of applied biomedical PE-based systems with optimal performance.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available