• Volume/Page
  • Keyword
  • DOI
  • Citation
  • Advanced
   
 
 
 

You Tube Flickr Twitter UniPHY Group iResearch App Facebook

J. Chem. Phys. 136, 015102 (2012); http://dx.doi.org/10.1063/1.3673442 (12 pages)

Effect of glycerol and dimethyl sulfoxide on the phase behavior of lysozyme: Theory and experiments

Christoph Gögelein1, Dana Wagner2, Frédéric Cardinaux2, Gerhard Nägele3, and Stefan U. Egelhaaf2

1Max-Planck-Institut für Dynamik und Selbstorganisation, Am Faßberg 17, 37077 Göttingen, Germany
2Condensed Matter Physics Laboratory, Heinrich-Heine-University, Universitätsstraße 1, 40225 Düsseldorf, Germany
3Institute of Complex Systems (ICS-3), Forschungszentrum Jülich, 52425 Jülich, Germany

View MapView Map

(Received 27 October 2011; accepted 6 December 2011; published online 4 January 2012)

Salt, glycerol, and dimethyl sulfoxide (DMSO) are used to modify the properties of protein solutions. We experimentally determined the effect of these additives on the phase behavior of lysozyme solutions. Upon the addition of glycerol and DMSO, the fluid–solid transition and the gas–liquid coexistence curve (binodal) shift to lower temperatures and the gap between them increases. The experimentally observed trends are consistent with our theoretical predictions based on the thermodynamic perturbation theory and the Derjaguin-Landau-Verwey-Overbeek model for the lysozyme-lysozyme pair interactions. The values of the parameters describing the interactions, namely the refractive indices, dielectric constants, Hamaker constant and cut-off length, are extracted from literature or are experimentally determined by independent experiments, including static light scattering, to determine the second virial coefficient. We observe that both, glycerol and DMSO, render the potential more repulsive, while sodium chloride reduces the repulsion.

© 2012 American Institute of Physics

Article Outline

  1. INTRODUCTION
  2. MATERIALS AND EXPERIMENTAL METHODS
    1. Materials and sample preparation
    2. Determination of the phase boundaries
    3. Determination of the refractive indices
    4. Determination of the second virial coefficient
  3. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
    1. Protein–protein interaction potential
      1. DLVO model
      2. Values of the model parameters
        1. a. Refractive indices and static dielectric constants.
        2. b. Cut-off length δ.
    2. Phase behavior
      1. Phase behavior and free energy by thermodynamic perturbation theory
      2. Experimentally determined phase behavior
      3. Comparison of calculated and experimentally determined phase behavior
  4. CONCLUSIONS

RELATED DATABASES

To view database links for this article, you need to log in.

KEYWORDS and PACS

PACS

ARTICLE DATA

PUBLICATION DATA

ISSN

0021-9606 (print)  
1089-7690 (online)

For access to fully linked references, you need to log in.
    J. A. Barker and D. Henderson, Rev. Mod. Phys. 1976, 587 (1976).

    M. L. Broide, T. M. Tominc, and M. D. Saxowsky, Phys. Rev. E 53, 6325 (1996).

    R. Sinibaldi, M. G. Ortore, F. Spinozzi, F. Carsughi, H. Frielinghaus, S. Cinelli, G. Onori, and P. Mariani, J. Chem. Phys. 126, 235101 (2007)JCPSA6000126000023235101000001.

    H. Sedgwick, J. E. Cameron, W. C. K. Poon, and S. U. Egelhaaf, J. Chem. Phys. 127, 125102 (2007)JCPSA6000127000012125102000001.

    M. Muschol and F. Rosenberger, J. Chem. Phys. 103, 10424 (1995)JCPSA6000103000024010424000001.

    A. R. Denton, Phys. Rev. E 62, 3855 (2000).

    M. H. J. Hagen and D. Frenkel, J. Chem. Phys. 101, 4093 (1994)JCPSA6000101000005004093000001.

    T. W. Cochran and Y. C. Chiew, J. Chem. Phys. 121, 1480 (2004)JCPSA6000121000003001480000001.

    F. W. Tavares, D. Bratko, A. Striolo, H. W. Blanch, and J. M. Prausnitz, J. Chem. Phys. 120, 9859 (2004)JCPSA6000120000020009859000001.

    C. Gögelein, G. Nägele, R. Tuinier, T. Gibaud, A. Stradner, and P. Schurtenberger, J. Chem. Phys. 129, 085102 (2008)JCPSA6000129000008085102000001.

    L. Verlet and J. J. Weis, Phys. Rev. A 5, 939 (1972).

    M. S. Wertheim, Phys. Rev. Lett. 10, 321 (1963).

    G. J. Throop and R. J. Bearman, J. Chem. Phys. 42, 2408 (1965)JCPSA6000042000007002408000001.

    N. F. Carnahan and K. E. Starling, J. Chem. Phys. 51, 635 (1969)JCPSA6000051000002000635000001.

    W. W. Wood, J. Chem. Phys. 20, 1334 (1952)JCPSA6000020000008001334000001.

    K. P. Shukla, J. Chem. Phys. 112, 10358 (2000)JCPSA6000112000023010358000001.

    L. Lue and J. M. Prausnitz, J. Chem. Phys. 108, 5529 (1998)JCPSA6000108000013005529000001.

    D. Fu, Y. Li, and J. Wu, Phys. Rev. E 68, 011403 (2003).

    N. Asherie, A. Lomakin, and G. B. Benedek, Phys. Rev. Lett. 77, 4832 (1996).

    D. Rosenbaum, P. C. Zamora, and C. F. Zukoski, Phys. Rev. Lett. 76, 150 (1996).

    M. Muschol and F. Rosenberger, J. Chem. Phys. 107, 1953 (1997)JCPSA6000107000006001953000001.

    H. Liu, S. Garde, and S. Kumar, J. Chem. Phys. 123, 174505 (2005)JCPSA6000123000017174505000001.

    W. C. K. Poon, Phys. Rev. E 55, 3762 (1997).

    A. J. Archer, D. Pini, R. Evans, and L. Reatto, J. Chem. Phys. 126, 014104 (2007)JCPSA6000126000001014104000001.


Figures (11)

Access to article objects (figures, tables, multimedia) requires a subscription; log in to view available files.
(Access to supplementary files, where available, is free for this journal.)


Close
Google Calendar
ADVERTISEMENT

close