4.7 Article

Destruction of hydrogen bonds of poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) aqueous solution by trimethylamine N-oxide

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHEMICAL PHYSICS
卷 136, 期 23, 页码 -

出版社

AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1063/1.4729156

关键词

-

资金

  1. Council of Scientific Industrial Research (CSIR), New Delhi [01(2343)/09/EMR-II]
  2. Department of Science and Technology (DST), New Delhi, India [SR/SI/PC-54/2008]
  3. University Grants Commission (UGC), New Delhi
  4. National Science Council of Taiwan [NSC99-2811-E-011-023]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Trimethylamine N-oxide (TMAO) is a compatible or protective osmolyte that stabilizes the protein native structure through non-bonding mechanism between TMAO and hydration surface of protein. However, we have shown here first time the direct binding mechanism for naturally occurring osmolyte TMAO with hydration structure of poly(N-isopropylacrylamide) (PNIPAM), an isomer of polyleucine, and subsequent aggregation of PNIPAM. The influence of TMAO on lower critical solution temperature (LCST) of PNIPAM was investigated as a function of TMAO concentration at different temperatures by fluorescence spectroscopy, viscosity (eta), multi angle dynamic light scattering, zeta potential, and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy measurements. To address some of the basis for further analysis of FTIR spectra of PNIPAM, we have also measured FTIR spectra for the monomer of N-isopropylacrylamide (NIPAM) in deuterium oxide (D2O) as a function of TMAO concentration. Our experimental results purportedly elucidate that the LCST values decrease with increasing TMAO concentration, which is mainly contributing to the direct hydrogen bonding of TMAO with the water molecules that are bound to the amide (-CONH) functional groups of the PNIPAM. We believed that the present work may act as a ladder to reach the heights of understanding of molecular mechanism between TMAO and macromolecule. (C) 2012 American Institute of Physics. [http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.4729156]

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据