Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
We explore how two nonionic polar groups (primary amine and primary amide) influence hydrophobic interactions of neighboring nonpolar domains. We designed stable β-peptide sequences that generated globally amphiphilic (GA) helices, each with a nonpolar domain formed by six cyclohexyl side chains arranged along one side of the 14-helix. The other side of the helix was dominated by three polar side chains, from β 3 -homolysine (K) and/or β 3 -homoglutamine (Q) residues. Variations in this polar side chain array included exclusively β 3 -hLys (GA-KKK) and β 3 -hLys/β 3 -hGln mixtures (e.g., GA-QKK and GA-QQK). Chemical force measurements in aqueous solution versus methanol allowed quantification of the hydrophobic interactions of the β-peptide with the nonpolar tip of an atomic force microscope (AFM). At pH 10.5, where the K side chain is largely uncharged, we measured hydrophobic adhesive interactions mediated by GA-KKK to be 0.61 ± 0.04 nN, by GA-QKK to be 0.54 ± 0.01 nN, and by GA-QQK to be 0 ± 0.01 nN. This finding suggests that replacing an amine group (K side chain) with a primary amide group (Q side chain) weakens the hydrophobic interaction generated by the six cyclohexyl side chains. AFM studies with solid-supported mixed monolayers containing an alkyl component (60%) and a component bearing either a terminal amide or an amine group (40%) revealed analogous trends. These observations from two distinct experiment systems indicate that proximal nonionic polar groups have pronounced effects on hydrophobic interactions generated by a neighboring nonpolar domain, and that the magnitude of the effect depends strongly on polar group identity.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Wang et al. (2017) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: