Macromolecular crowding and size effects on probe microviscosity.
Development of biologically relevant crowding solutions necessitates improved understanding of how the relative size and density of mobile obstacles affect probe diffusion. Both the crowding density and relative size of each co-solute in a mixture will contribute to the measured microviscosity as assessed by altered translational mobility. Using multiphoton fluorescent correlation spectroscopy, this study addresses how excluded volume of dextran polymers from 10 to 500 kDa affect microviscosity quantified by measurements of calmodulin labeled with green fluorescent protein as the diffusing probe. Autocorrelation functions were fit using both a multiple-component model with maximum entropy method (MEMFCS) and an anomalous model. Anomalous diffusion was not detected, but fits of the data with the multiple-component model revealed separable modes of diffusion. When the dominant mode of diffusion from the MEMFCS analysis was used, we observed that increased excluded volume slows probe mobility as a simple exponential with crowder concentration. This behavior can be modeled with a single parameter, beta, which depends on the dextran size composition. Two additional modes of diffusion were observed using MEMFCS and were interpreted as unique microviscosities. The fast mode corresponded to unhindered free diffusion as in buffer, whereas the slower agreed well with the bulk viscosity. At 10% crowder concentration, one finds a microviscosity approximately three times that of water, which mimics that reported for intracellular viscosity.
Goins
Aron B
AB
Department of Neurobiology and Anatomy, University of Texas Health Science Center at Houston, Houston, Texas 77030, USA.
Sanabria
Hugo
H
Waxham
M Neal
MN
D003911:Dextrans / Q000737:chemistry; D004058:Diffusion; D019277:Entropy; D042541:Intracellular Space / Q000737:chemistry*; D008958:Models, Molecular; D014783:Viscosity
D003911:Dextrans
J Cell Sci. 2006 Jul 15;119(Pt 14):2863-9
16825427
Biophys J. 1998 Jul;75(1):557-67
9649418
J Mol Recognit. 2004 Sep-Oct;17(5):441-7
15362103
Int Rev Cytol. 2000;192:189-221
10553280
Appl Opt. 2000 Mar 1;39(7):1194-201
18338003
Biophys J. 2005 Sep;89(3):2077-90
15994890
Am J Physiol Renal Physiol. 2005 Apr;288(4):F605-13
15753324
Cell. 2004 Aug 6;118(3):389-401
15294163
J Bacteriol. 2006 Sep;188(17):6115-23
16923878
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1997 Oct 28;94(22):11753-7
9342306
Microsc Res Tech. 2007 Aug;70(8):682-6
17393490
Biophys J. 2005 Jun;88(6):4319-36
15792970
Biophys J. 2005 Nov;89(5):2960-71
16113107
Mol Biotechnol. 2004 May;27(1):33-57
15122046
Biophys J. 2003 Mar;84(3):1977-84
12609900
Biophys J. 2007 Mar 15;92(6):2139-49
17189316
Cytometry. 1999 Jul 1;36(3):176-82
10404965
Biomacromolecules. 2007 May;8(5):1595-600
17441767
Eur Biophys J. 2006 Aug;35(6):517-22
16612584
Biophys J. 2007 Jan 1;92(1):313-22
17040979
Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2004 Jan 6;101(1):105-10
14695888
Biochem J. 1979 Oct 1;183(1):1-9
534474
Appl Opt. 2003 Sep 20;42(27):5566-76
14526848