Biopolymer–Lipid Bilayer Interaction Modulates the Physical

Page 1 of 37

Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

3

Biopolymer-lipid bilayer interaction modulates the physical properties of liposomes: mechanism and structure

4

Chen Tan, Yating Zhang, Shabbar Abbas, Biao Feng, Xiaoming Zhang, Wenshui Xia,

5

Shuqin Xia*

6

State Key Laboratory of Food Science and Technology, School of Food Science and

7

Technology, Jiangnan University, Lihu Road 1800, Wuxi, Jiangsu 214122, China

1 2

8

∗Corresponding author

9

E-mail: [email protected];

10

Telephone: +86-510-85884496;

11

Fax: +86-510-85884496

12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21

ACS Paragon Plus Environment


22

ABSTRACT

23

This study was conducted to elucidate the conformational dependence of

24

modulating ability of chitosan, a positively changed biopolymer, on a new type of

25

liposomes composed of mixed lipids including egg yolk phosphatidylcholine

26

(EYPC) and nonionic surfactant (Tween 80). Analysis on the dynamic and

27

structure of bilayer membrane upon interaction with chitosan by fluorescence and

28

electron paramagnetic resonance techniques demonstrated that, in addition to

29

providing the physical barrier for membrane surface, the adsorption of chitosan

30

extended and crimped chains rigidified the lipid membrane. However, the decrease

31

in relative microviscosity and order parameter suggested that the presence of

32

chitosan coils disturbed the membrane organization. It was also noted that the

33

increase of fluidity in lipid bilayer centre was not pronounced, indicating the

34

shallow penetration of coils into the hydrophobic interior of bilayer. Microscopic

35

observations revealed that chitosan adsorption not only affected the morphology of

36

liposomes, but also modulated the particle aggregation and fusion. Especially, a

37

number of much heterogeneous particles were visualized, which tended to confirm

38

the role of chitosan coils as a “polymeric surfactant”. Accompanying by the

39

particle deformation, the membrane permeability was also tuned. These findings

40

may provide a new perspective to understand the physiological functionality of

41

biopolymer and design the biopolymer-liposome composited structures as the

42

delivery systems for bioactive components.

43

Keywords: liposomes, chitosan, structure, morphology, polymeric surfactant

44 ACS Paragon Plus Environment

Page 2 of 37

Page 3 of 37


45

INTRODUCTION

46

Modifying the liposomal surface via decorating with a layer or alternate deposition

47

(layer by layer) of hydrophilic polymers has emerged as a novel way to improve

48

liposome delivery performance. As example, chitosan is a very promising

49

glycosaminoglycan for biological applications due to its biocompatibility,

50

biodegradability, and low toxicity.1 In the field of drug delivery, nanoparticles and

51

formulations containing chitosan have presented promising results in the search of

52

drug release systems optimizing disease treatments and reducing drug side effects.

53

These advantages of chitosan contribute to the development of composite

54

phospholipid-chitosan vesicles (chitosomes) as new structures for encapsulation of

55

drugs and vaccines aimed as vectors and tolls for controlled antigen release.2, 3 More

56

recently, food application of chitosomes has greatly increased for encapsulating

57

nutraceuticals to make them water-dispersible in aqueous food formulations and

58

increase their bioavailability.4, 5, 6

59

As a soft matter, liposomes may be subjected to change in the morphology,

60

integrity and structure upon interaction with anchored and/or adsorbed polymers.

61

These changes are closely related to the liposome properties, polymer characteristics

62

and preparation conditions. Through manipulating these factors, chitosan can form a

63

dense mesh covering the liposomal surface, thus improving the structural properties of

64

liposomes, biocompatibility, and drug delivery efficiency. Interestingly, it is also

65

argued that the strong interaction of chitosan with phospholipids may disrupt the cell

66

membrane7 and model liposomes,8 thereby increasing membrane permeability.9 The



67

contradiction in these reports aroused our great interest to study the mechanisms of

68

chitosan action. One effective way is to visualize the direct response of the membrane

69

upon interaction with chitosan. It has been revealed that the presence of chitosan

70

negatively influences the giant unilamelar vesicles (GUVs, 1-100 µm) due to the

71

increased spontaneous tension by chitosan adsorption,10 whereas, the effect of

72

spontaneous tension may not necessarily occur in the case of large unilamelar vesicles

73

(LUVs, 200-1000 nm).11 However, what happens to the response of more highly

74

curved vesicles (typically 2.0 mg/mL).13 Such

88

conformational change of chitosan molecules suggested that they could adopt various


Page 4 of 37

Page 5 of 37


89

interaction mechanisms with liposomal membrane, besides the flat adsorption, which

90

seemed of interest to further investigate.

91

On the other hand, it is important to point out that most of the suggestions

92

aforementioned were based on a simple model membrane system composed of

93

synthesized

94

phosphatidylcholine (EYPC) is the commonly used lipid for the preparation of

95

liposomes as it is generally recognized as a safe (GRAS) food ingredient. Previously,

96

we explored a new type of liposome composed of mixed lipids including egg yolk

97

phosphatidylcholine (EYPC) and nonionic surfactant (Tween 80) as carriers for

98

coenzyme Q10,14, 15 carotenoids,16, 17, 18, 19 and Vitamin E.20 The appropriate amount of

99

Tween 80 into the formulation was demonstrated to impart high rigidity to the

100

liposomal membrane, thus favoring the encapsulation efficiency and stability of

101

liposomes. To the best of our knowledge, however, there is little information

102

regarding the interaction of chitosan with mixed lipids-based liposomes.

phospholipids.

From

food

industry

perspective,

egg

yolk

103

Taken together, further detailed knowledge of such chitosan-lipid bilayer composite

104

structure is required with special attention on the role of polymer conformation.

105

Herein, the effect of chitosan conformation on the physical characterization of

106

liposomes is thoroughly investigated including membrane dynamics, structure,

107

hydrophobicity, surface morphology and size. Several analysis techniques are

108

introduced, including fluorescence anisotropy, electron paramagnetic resonance,

109

transmission electron microscopy, atomic force microscopy and dynamic light



Page 6 of 37

110

scattering. The aggregation and fusion behaviours of decorated liposomes as well as

111

membrane permeability against surfactant are also evaluated.

112

MATERIALS AND METHODS

113

Materials. Egg yolk phospholipid (EYPC, composed of approximately 80%

114

phosphatidylcholine, 5% lysophosphatidylcholine and phosphatidic acid, and 15%

115

fatty acids) was purchased from Chemical Reagent Plant of East China Normal

116

University (Shanghai, China). Polyoxyethylene sorbitan monooleate (Tween 80) was

117

obtained from China Medicine (Group) Shanghai Chemical Reagent Co. (Shanghai,

118

China). Partially deacetylated chitosan (85%) with average molecular weight of

119

200,000 was purchased from Ao Xing Biotechnology Co., Ltd (Zhejiang, China). The

120

fluorescent

121

phenyl]-6-phenyl-1,

122

8-anilino-1-naphthalene-sulfonic acid (ANS, 98% purity), and the spin labels

123

5-doxyl-stearic acid (5-DSA) and 16-doxyl-stearic acid (16-DSA) were all purchased

124

from Sigma Chemical Co. (St. Louis MO, USA). All other reagents were of analytical

125

grade.

probe,

5(6)-carboxyfluorescein 3,

5-hexatriene

(CF),

(TMA-DPH,

1-[4-(trimethylammonio) 98%

purity)

and

126

Preparation of Chitosan-decorated Liposomes. Bare liposomes were prepared

127

according to our earlier method.14 Briefly, phospholipid (6 g) and Tween 80 (4.32 g)

128

were dissolved in 12 mL warm ethanol at 55 ˚C. The ethanol solution was rapidly

129

injected using a syringe as a pump into 120 mL buffer solution (0.1 M acetic

130

acid/0.01 M phosphate, 75 mM NaCl, pH=4.0) at 55 ˚C in water bath under stirring at

131

700 r/min using an IKA® RW 20 digital overhead stirrer (IKA® Works Guangzhou).


Page 7 of 37


132

After agitation for 30 min, the liposomal system was transferred to a round-bottom

133

flask attaching to a rotary evaporator at 55 ˚C and reduced pressure to remove

134

ethanol. The obtained liposomal suspension was then submitted to a probing

135

sonication process in an ice bath for 10 min at 240 W with a sequence of 1 s of

136

sonication and 1s rest using a sonicator (Sonics & Materials, Inc., 20 kHz). The final

137

samples were filled into vials (The headspace of the vials was blanketed with nitrogen)

138

and kept in the refrigerator (4 ˚C in the dark). The CF-entrapped liposomes was

139

prepared in the same way expect for using 20 mM CF solution (0.1 M acetic acid/0.01

140

M phosphate, 75 mM NaCl, pH=4.0) instead of buffer solution. Un-encapsulated CF

141

was removed from the liposomal suspension by gel filtration through a Sephadex

142

G-25 column.

143

The chitosan-decorated liposomes were prepared as follows: the chitosan was

144

dissolved in the same buffer solution for bare liposomes and then added dropwise to

145

bare liposomal suspension at equal volume at 1000 r/min for 30 min using an

146

overhead stirrer at room temperature. The final concentration of chitosan was adjusted

147

from 0.5 to 4 mg/mL. The phospholipid concentration was kept at 25 mg/mL. The

148

final samples were filled into vials and stored at the same conditions as bare

149

liposomes.

150

Liposomal Membrane Fluidity. A weighted amount of ANS probe was dissolved

151

in ethanol solution, and the final concentration was 6×10-3 mol/L. The TMA-DPH

152

stock

153

tetrahydrofuran/water (1:1, v/v) and adjusting the concentration to 10-2 mol/L. The

solution

was

prepared

by

dissolving

the

TMA-DPH


powders

in


154

final TMA-DPH concentration was adjusted to 10-4 mol/L by PBS dilution before use.

155

When determining the liposomal fluidity, aliquots of probe solution was first mixed

156

with bare liposomes in a 10 mL tube, incubating at 37 oC for 30 min. Then, the

157

chitosan of different concentration in the same buffer was added dropwise to the

158

incubated sample under stirring at 1000 r/min for 30 min. Note that before mixed with

159

liposomal samples, the ANS solution should be dried by nitrogen to avoid the

160

destroying effect of ethanol to liposomal membrane.

161

Microviscosity of liposomal membrane was measured at 25 oC using a fluorescence

162

spectrometer (Hitachi F-7000, Japan) equipped with excitation and emission

163

polarization filters. The excitation and emission wavelengths were respectively: for

164

ANS: λex=337 nm and λem=480 nm; TMA-DPH: λex=365 nm and λem=430. The slit

165

widths for both excitation and emission were 5 nm. The fluorescence intensities were

166

measured according to our previous study

167

by fluorescence polarization (P) according to the following equation:21

19

. The microviscosity (η) was calculated

η=2P/(0.46-P)

168 169

P= (I0,0-GI0,90)/( I0,0+GI0,90), G= I90, 0 / I90, 90.

170

where I0,0 and I0,90 are the fluorescence intensities of the emitted light polarized

171

parallel and vertical to the exciting light, respectively, and G is the grating correction

172

coefficient.22

173

Electron Paramagnetic Resonance (EPR). EPR technique was applied to monitor

174

the molecular dynamics of lipids by observing the changes in the spin tropic

175

movement of an unpaired electron. EPR measurements were performed using a


Page 8 of 37

Page 9 of 37


176

Bruker EMX spectrometer (Bruker, Rheinstetten, Germany) at the X-band (9 GHz).

177

The spectra were recorded on microwave power 20 mW with sweep width 120 G,

178

centre field 3511 G, and 20 s sweep time. All measurements were performed in a

179

triplicate at room temperature. In the present study, 5-DSA and 16-DSA were used as

180

spin markers. These compounds consist of a radical group and a hydrocarbonated

181

chain (stearic acid) which acts as a radical support (Figure 1). The radical in the 5 or

182

in the 16 position of the alkyl chain will determine local motional profiles in the two

183

main regions of the lipid bilayer, near the polar head group (5-DSA) or at the end of

184

the hydrophobic chain (16-DSA). A weighed amount of 5-DSA or 16-DSA was

185

dissolved in ethanol solution, adjusting the final concentration to 1.0 and 0.9 mol/L,

186

respectively. One millilitres of spin probe solution was added into a 10 mL tube

187

followed by nitrogen dryness to remove the ethanol solution. An aliquot of 2.5 mL

188

bare liposomes was added into the tube, incubating at 25 oC for 30 min. Then, the

189

chitosan solution was added dropwise to the incubated sample under stirring for 30

190

min.

191

Line widths 2Amax, 2Amin, and ∆H, in Gauss (G) and heights of the high- and

192

mid-field lines, h-1 and h0, respectively, were obtained from the first derivative of each

193

absorption spectrum. Spectral parameters used to study the location of spin labels in

194

liposomal membrane were shown in Figure 1.

195

The order parameter (S) reflects the segmental order parameter of the segment to

196

which the nitroxide fragment is attached.23 It can be obtained from the conventional

197

EPR spectra and calculated as S=0.5407×(Amax-Amin)/a0, where a0 =(Amax+2Amin)/3.



198

The order parameter S is equal to zero for the membrane in total disorder. When it

199

equals 1, the membrane has a crystal structure.24

200

The EPR spectrum of 16-DSA incorporated into the lipid bilayer reflects an

201

isotropic motion of the acyl-chain. In this case, rotational correlation time (τ, ns),

202

assuming isotropic rotational diffusion of 16-DSA can be used to measure the motion

203

of the phospholipid acyl-chains near the hydrophobic end.25 An increase in τ indicates

204

a decrease of membrane fluidity. It can be calculated from the following equation:

205

ℎ0 τ = 6.5 × 10−10 × ∆‫( × ܪ‬ඨ − 1) ℎ−1

206

Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM). TEM micrographs were performed

207

on a HITACHI-7650 at an accelerating voltage of 200 kV. The samples (bare

208

liposomes and chitosan-decorated liposomes) were prepared as described above. An

209

aqueous suspension of the samples was deposited upon a carbon-coated copper grid,

210

followed by air-drying for 1 min. Then, the sample was instantly stained with 2 wt%

211

phosphotungstic acid for 15 s.

212

Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM). AFM imaging was carried out using a

213

commercial AFM (Dimension icon, Bruker Co., USA). The ScanAsyst mode was

214

applied using silicon tip (TESP, Bruker, nom. frep. 320 kHz, nom. Spring constant of

215

42 N/m) with scan resolution of 512 samples per line. Mica sheets were freshly

216

cleaved to obtain a flat and uniform surface and were used as the substrate for AFM

217

observations. Just before the analysis, the liposomal samples were diluted in water to

218

obtain a less sticky fluid. An aliquot of 1 µL liposome suspension were deposited on

219

the mica surface and incubated for 30 min at room temperature. Afterward, samples


Page 10 of 37

Page 11 of 37


220

were carefully washed with ultrapure water to eliminate salts and non-adsorbed

221

vesicles, and dried for 24 h at room temperature. Height mode images are acquired

222

simultaneously at a fixed scan rate (0.997 Hz) with a resolution of 512 × 512 pixels in

223

the dimension of 5 µm × 5 µm. Processing of images and analysis was carried out

224

using NanoScopeTM software (Digital Instruments, version V614r1). All height

225

images are presented after the zero-order two-dimensional flattening.

226

Particle Size Distribution. Size measurements were performed at (25±0.1)˚C

227

using a commercial zeta-sizer (Nano-ZS90, Malvern Instruments Ltd, United

228

Kingdom) with a He / Ne laser (λ = 633 nm) and scattering angle 90°. To evaluate the

229

aggregation and fusion of particles, the liposomal sample was heated at 37 ˚C for 5 h.

230

After heat treatment, 2 mL liposomal dispersion was transferred into the polystyrene

231

cuvette for size determination and then the particle size distribution were recorded by

232

dynamic light scattering (DLS). The measurements were repeated three times.

233

CF Release Study. It is generally assumed that the fluorescence emission of CF is

234

quenched to the high extent when the molecules were encapsulated in the interior

235

aqueous compartments of liposomes at high concentration.26 Upon release of CF from

236

liposomes to the bulk aqueous phase, the fluorescence intensity would increase

237

greatly. Therefore, the release of CF was taken as a measure of the membrane

238

permeability after incubating liposomes with chitosan. Briefly, an aliquot of chitosan

239

solution (1 mL) at different concentrations was added into the 1 mL of liposomal

240

suspension. At proper time intervals, 10 µL of sample were withdrawn and diluted

241

with 2 mL of tris buffer (50 mM, pH 7.5). The fluorescence intensity of the samples



242

was then measured at 25 oC with a spectrofluorimeter (Hitachi F-7000, Japan) with

243

excitation at 488 nm and emission at 520 nm. The percentage of CF release from

244

liposomes was calculated from the equation: % Release=100×(Ft-F0)/( F∞-F0), where

245

F0 and Ft are the fluorescence intensities of the liposome samples before and after

246

incubation with chitosan for the time period t, F∞ is the total flurescence intensity

247

after liposome lysis with 10% Triton X-100. To evaluate the stability of

248

decorated-liposomes against surfactant Triton X-100, 100 µL of 10% Triton X-100

249

solution was added to the liposomal sample (1 mL). The CF fluorescence was

250

immediately monitored every second by spectrofluorimeter.

251

Statistical Analysis. Data are presented as a mean value with its standard deviation

252

indicated (mean ± SD). All experiments were carried out in triplicate using freshly

253

prepared samples.

254

RESULTS AND DISCUSSION

255

Fluidity of Liposomal Membrane. Fluidity of liposomal membrane quantitatively

256

characterizes the mobility and molecular rotation rate of lipid.27 Lower membrane

257

fluidity represents a higher structural order. It is well known that ANS and TMA-DPH

258

serve as markers for the molecular movement on the exterior membrane surface28 and

259

superficial region including the surface and glycerol side chain region,29 respectively.

260

The relative microviscosity η/η0 as a function of chitosan shows that the influence of

261

chitosan binding was more pronounced on the fluidity in membrane surface than

262

glycerol side chain region (Figure 2). As the chitosan concentration increased from

263

0.25 to 1.5 mg/mL, microviscosity in membrane surface region was considerably


Page 12 of 37

Page 13 of 37


264

increased, but remained virtually unchanged in the superficial region. Apparently,

265

chitosan chains mainly adsorbed to membrane surface and restricted the motion of

266

polar headgroup. Notably, restriction was stronger in the case of crimped chains.

267

Considering the appearance of hydrophobic interaction accompanied by crimped

268

chains, we speculated that besides electrostatic attraction, a weak hydrophobic force

269

also contributed to the stabilizing effect on liposomal membrane. This hypothesis was

270

supported by the earlier research which concluded that the involvement of

271

hydrophobic interaction could promote the physical adsorption and deposition of

272

chitosan on membrane.11 However, when concentration was > 1.5 mg/mL, η/η0 values

273

were decreased greatly surrounding ANS, while slightly surrounding TMA-DPH. It

274

indicated that the presence of coils not only increased the fluidity of membrane

275

surface but also somewhat disturbed the superficial region. The destabilization of

276

chitosan coils might be correlated with the enhancement of hydrophobic interaction

277

and consequently, different adsorption patterns are expected instead flat adsorption.

278

Motion of Alkyl Chains. EPR is a useful technique for determining the fluidity

279

and structural changes of the lipid bilayers of liposomes. Figure 3 reveals that

280

decoration of chitosan chains ( 248-286, a Dramatic Enhancer of HIV Infectivity, Promotes Lipid Aggregation and Fusion. Biophys. J. 2009, 97, 2474-2483. 43. Heurtault B; Saulnier P; Pech B; Proust J-E; Benoit J-P, Physico-chemical stability of colloidal lipid particles. Biomaterials 2003, 24, 4283-4300.

592 593 594 595



596

Figure captions

597

Figure 1. Molecular formula of the spin probe 5-DSA and 16-DSA, and the

598

corresponding EPR spectrum.

599

Figure 2. Relative microviscosity η/η0 in liposomes for ANS and TMA-DPH as a

600

function of decorated chitosan concentration. η0 refers to the calculated microviscosity

601

in bare liposomes, η refers to the microviscosity in chitosan-decorated liposomes.

602

Each point represents the mean value ± standard deviation (n=3).

603

Figure 3. Order parameter S of spin probes and rotational correlation time of 16-DSA

604

measured as a function of decorated chitosan concentration. Each point represents the

605

mean value ± standard deviation (n=3).

606

Figure 4. Isotropic hyperfine coupling constant a0 of 5-DSA and 16-DSA in

607

chitosan-decorated liposomes as a function of concentration. Each point represents the

608

mean value ± standard deviation (n=3).

609

Figure 5. Transmission electron micrographs of bare liposomes (A) and liposomes

610

decorated by chitosan at 1.0 mg/mL (B), 1.5 mg/mL (C), 2.0 mg/mL (D), 3.0 mg/mL

611

(E) and 4.0 mg/mL (F).

612

Figure 6. Scan Asyst mode AFM images of bare liposomes and liposomes decorated

613

by chitosan at the concentration of 1.0 mg/mL, 1.5 mg/mL, 2.0 mg/mL, 3.0 mg/mL

614

and 4.0 mg/mL. The study was performed immediately after the preparation. Scan

615

size 5 µm×5µm.

616

Figure 7. Diameter distribution of bare liposomes and chitosan-decorated liposome

617

after 5 h incubation at 37 oC.


Page 26 of 37

Page 27 of 37


618

Figure 8. Scan Asyst mode AFM images of bare liposomes (A) and liposomes

619

decorated by chitosan at the concentration of 1.0 mg/mL (B), 1.5 mg/mL (C), 2.0

620

mg/mL (D), 3.0 mg/mL (E) and 4.0 mg/mL (F). The study was performed after 5 h

621

incubation at 37 oC. Scan size 5 µm×5µm.

622

Figure 9. Time course of CF release kinetic from bare liposomes after exposure to

623

chitosan of different concentrations (A), or from chitosan decorated-liposomes after

624

exposure to Triton X-100 (B). When Triton X-100 was added to the suspension, the

625

CF fluorescence was immediately monitored every second by spectrofluorimeter.

626 627



628

Figures

629

Figure 1. 5-DSA

16-DSA

630 631


Page 28 of 37

Page 29 of 37


632

Figure 2. 5 ANS T MA-DP H

Relative microviscosity

4 3 2 1 0 0

633

1 2 3 Chitosan concentration (mg/mL)

634 635


4


Figure 3. 1.3

0.56 S/5-DSA S/16-DSA τ

Order parameter S

0.54 1.2 0.52 0.13 1.1 0.12

0.11

1.0 0

637 638



4

Rotational correlation time (ns)

636

Page 30 of 37

Page 31 of 37


639

Figure 4. 15.0 5-DSA 16-DSA

a0 (G)

14.5

14.0

13.5 0

640


641


4


642 643

Figure 5.

644 645


Page 32 of 37

Page 33 of 37


646

Figure 6.

647 648



649

Figure 7. 15 0.0 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 4.0

Volumn (%)

10

5

0 10

650 651

100

1000 Diameter (nm)


10000

Page 34 of 37

Page 35 of 37


652

Figure 8.

653 654 655



656

Figure 9. 40

8

CF release (%)

4

CF release (%)

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 4.0

6

0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 3.0 4.0

30

20

10

2 A

0 0

657

Page 36 of 37

B

0

10 20 Incubation time (min)

30

0

20

40 60 80 100 Incubation time (sec)

658


120

Page 37 of 37


659

Graphic for table of contents

660


Biopolymer–Lipid Bilayer Interaction Modulates the Physical

Recommend Documents