Journal of Molecular Modeling

, Volume 19, Issue 12, pp 5539–5543 | Cite as

Molecular dynamics approach to investigate the coupling of the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance with the configuration distribution function in biosurfactant-based emulsions

  • Melissa Álvarez Vanegas
  • Angie Macías Lozano
  • Vanessa Núñez Vélez
  • Nathalia Garcés Ferreira
  • Harold Castro Barrera
  • Oscar Álvarez Solano
  • Andrés Fernando González Barrios
Original Paper

Abstract

Emulsion stability has been characterized by macroscopic variables such as the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance, with the aim being to predict the surfactant properties of molecules. Nevertheless, this parameter does not take the topology of the molecule into account, as it only considers its lipophilic degree. On the other hand, the classical Derjaguin–Landau–Verwey–Overbeek approach (based on the continuum model), which has been widely utilized to evaluate the stabilities of colloids, polymers, and surfactants, takes some bulk macroscopic parameters such as the shear viscosity coefficient and the dielectric permittivity into account. In the work reported here, molecular dynamics simulations were used to elucidate the mechanism of layer formation and micellar structure for different combinations of valine–aspartic acid peptides in dodecane–water emulsions, as well as their associations with the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance. The peptide–dodecane radial distribution function showed that the first peak intensity was inversely correlated with the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance; moreover, the oscillatory structural forces became increasingly prominent when the hydrophilic–lipophilic balance was decreased. Our results seem to indicate that the radial distribution function could be utilized to evaluate the stabilities of emulsions of peptides via molecular simulations.

Keywords

Molecular dynamics Emulsions Radial distribution function Hydrophilic–lipophilic balance 

References

  1. 1.
    Makkar RS, Cameotra SS (2002) An update on the use of unconventional susbstrates for biosurfactant production and their new applications. Appl Microbiol Biotechnol 58:428–434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Jones DB, Middlerberg APJ (2002) Mechanical properties of interfacially absorbed peptide networks. Langmuir 18(26):10357–10362CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dexter AF, Malcom AS, Middelberg AP (2006) Reversible active switching of the mechanical properties of a peptide film at a fluid–fluid interface. Nat Mater 5:502–506Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Makkar RS, Cameotra SS (1999) Biosurfactant production by microorganisms on unconventional carbon sources. J Surf Det 2:237–241Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Wasan DT, Nikolov AD, Almetti F (2004) Texture and stability of emulsions and suspensions: role of oscilatory structural forces. Adv Colloid Interface Sci 20:108–109Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Orstein LS, Zernike F (1914) Accidental deviations of density and opalescence at the critical point of a single substance. Proc Acad Sci Amsterdam 17:793–806Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Denkov ND, Kralchevsky PA (1995) Colloid structural forces in thin liquid films. Prog Colloid Polym Sci 98:18–22Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Davies JT (1949) What determines the emulsion type? J Soc Cosmetic Chem Gt Brit 12:193Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Vauthey S, Santoso S, Gong H, Waton, N, Zhang S (2002) Molecular self-assembly of surfactant-like peptides to form nanotubes and nanovesicles. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA 99:5355–5360Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Van Der Spoel D, Lindahl E et al (2005) GROMACS: fast, flexible and free. J Comp Chem 16:1701–1718Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Castro HE, Villamizar MJ, Rosales EE (2011) Paper 88: Unagrid/UnaCloud: a desktop grid and cloud computing solution. In: Iványi P, Topping BHV (eds) Proocedings of the Second International Conference on Parallel, Distributed, Grid and Cloud Computing Engineering. Civil-Comp, StirlingGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Kawakami Y (1953) Kagaku 23:546–551Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Asakura S, Oosawa F (1958) Interaction between particles suspended in solutions of macromolecules. J Polymer Sci 23:183–192Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Laird BB, Haymet DJ (1992) Calculation of entropy of binary hard sphere mixtures from pair correlation functions. J Chem Phys 97:2153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Finkeltstein A, Ptitsyn O (2002) Protein physics: a course of lectures. Academic, LondonGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • Melissa Álvarez Vanegas
    • 1
  • Angie Macías Lozano
    • 1
  • Vanessa Núñez Vélez
    • 1
  • Nathalia Garcés Ferreira
    • 2
  • Harold Castro Barrera
    • 2
  • Oscar Álvarez Solano
    • 1
  • Andrés Fernando González Barrios
    • 1
  1. 1.Grupo de Diseño de Productos y Procesos (GDPP), Department of Chemical EngineeringUniversidad de los AndesBogotáColombia
  2. 2.Grupo de Comunicaciones y Tecnología de la información (COMIT), Systems and Computing Engineering DepartmentUniversidad de los AndesBogotáColombia

Personalised recommendations