J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2001, 123, 7939-7940
7939
The Structural Role of Cholesterol in Biological
Membranes
Exchangeable forms of cholesterol and phospholipids that were
selected for these NNR studies were 1a, 1b, 1c, 2, 3a, 3b, and
c. The design of 2 was based on two considerations. A carbamate
3
moiety was introduced as a headgroup to provide a means for
attaching a pendant thiol group while maintaining a hydrogen-
bonding element off of the C-3 (â) position. In addition, having
the thiol moiety distal from the A-ring was expected to avoid
conformational strain within dimers 2, 3a, 3b, and 3c. With these
ideas in mind, cholesteryl chloroformate was condensed with
cystamine to give homodimer, 2. The corresponding heterodimers,
3a, 3b, and 3c were synthesized by condensing cholesteryl
chloroformate with 2-amino-1-ethyl-2′-pyridyl disulfide, followed
by displacement with the thiol monomer of 1a, 1b, or 1c. The
Michihiro Sugahara, Maki Uragami, Xun Yan, and
Steven L. Regen*
Department of Chemistry and Zettlemoyer
Center for Surface Studies, Lehigh UniVersity
Bethlehem, PennsylVania 18015
ReceiVed May 15, 2001
ReVised Manuscript ReceiVed June 26, 2001
Cholesterol is a major component of mammalian cell mem-
branes. In erythrocytes and in myelin, it is present in concentra-
tions that approach those of phospholipids.1-3 Despite numerous
investigations involving monolayers and bilayers derived from
cholesterol and phospholipids, the structural role that this sterol
plays in producing condensed, fluid membranes has remained a
mystery. In particular, the mechanism by which cholesterol uncoils
6
syntheses of 1a, 1b, and 1c have previously been described.
4
phospholipids has yet to be elucidated. Here we report the use
of the nearest-neighbor recognition (NNR) methodsa chemical
technique that takes “molecular-level snapshots” of membrane
organizationsto clarify this long-standing issue.5
In essence, NNR experiments detect and measure the thermo-
dynamic tendency of two lipids to become nearest-neighbors in
5
the bilayer state. Thus, two lipids of interest are converted into
exchangeable dimers, which are allowed to undergo monomer
interchange via thiolate-disulfide displacement. The equilibrium
dimer distribution that is produced is then analyzed as formal,
noncovalent bonds between pairs of adjacent lipids. Specifically,
a membrane that is composed of A and B monomers may be
treated as an equilibrium mixture of homodimers and heterodimers
according to eqs 1 and 2. Here, K is the equilibrium constant for
the AA homodimer, BB homodimer, and the AB heterodimer.
When phase separation occurs, however, K represents an apparent
equilibrium constant. If a membrane is made from an equimolar
quantity of AA and BB, and if A and B are randomly distributed
after equilibrium is reached, the observed dimer distribution would
be statistical. In other words, the mole ratio of AA/AB/BB would
be 1/2/1, and the equilibrium constant would be equal to 4. If a
thermodynamic preference for hetero-associations existed, how-
ever, this would be reflected by a value of K that is greater than
To ensure the appropriateness of these lipids in model studies,
we compared the monolayer properties of 1a and 2 with those of
1,2-dimyristoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphatidylglycerol (DMPG) and
cholesterol at the air/water interface (Figure 1). It should be noted
that both 1a and DMPG have identical acyl chains, very similar
melting behavior, and negatively charged phosphate headgroups.
Similar to literature reports, cholesterol yielded a surface pres-
sure-area isotherm having low compressibility and a limiting
6
2
-1 7
area of 0.395 nm ‚molecule . Examination of 2, under identical
conditions, showed slightly greater compressibility in the region
-
1
2
-1
of 0 to 15 mN‚m and a limiting area of 0.809 nm ‚molecule .
The greater compressibility of this dimer is a likely consequence
of the bridging disulfide unit, which imparts greater flexibility to
the surfactant. The fact that the limiting area of 2 is close to twice
that of cholesterol indicates a strong similarity in their packing
behavior. Additionally, the fact that 1a has a limiting area (1.58
4. In contrast, favored homo-associations are indicated by a value
of K that is less than 4.
K
AA + BBy
\
z2AB
(1)
(2)
2
-1
2
2
nm ‚molecule ), which is twice that of DMPG (0.80 nm ‚mole-
1
K ) [AB] /[AA][BB]
-
cule ), also indicates similar packing behavior. Finally, the
suitability of 2 as an exchangeable form of cholesterol was
confirmed by comparing its condensing effect on 1a with the
condensing effect of cholesterol on DMPG. Thus, a series of
surface pressure-area isotherms were recorded using varying
mixtures of 1a plus 2, and also DMPG plus cholesterol (not
shown). Plots of average molecular areas as a function of the
Two features of the NNR method are noteworthy. First, the
NNR method is a highly sensitive technique that can detect
differences in nearest-neighbor interactions that are as low as ca.
50 cal/mol. It is well-suited, therefore, for probing sterol-
phospholipid interactions, where differences in nearest-neighbor
interactions are expected to be small. Second, although this
method involves the use of exchangeable dimers, it provides
thermodynamic information that relates to nearest-neighbor
interactions between indiVidual lipid monomers; that is, the
-
1
mole fraction of phospholipid at 25 mN‚m are also given in
Figure 1. As is evident from this figure, the condensing effect of
cholesterol on DMPG is very similar to the condensing effect of
2
on 1a.
8
disulfide bridge has a negligible influence on K values.
Lipid bilayers, which were used for NNR experiments, were
(
1) Van Deenen, L. L. M.; DeGier, J. The Red Blood Cell; Academic
Press: New York, 1964.
2) Asnell, G. B.; Hawthorne, J. N. Phospholipids; Plenum Press: Am-
prepared in the form of large unilamellar vesicles via reverse phase
(
(6) Krisovitch, S. M.; Regen, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 9828-
sterdam, 1964.
9835.
(
3) Gennis, R. B. Biomembranes: Molecular Structure and Function;
(7) Mingotaud, A. F. Handbook of Monolayers; Academic Press: San
Springer-Verlag: New York, 1989.
Diego, 1993.
(4) Vist, M. R.; Davis, J. H. Biochemistry 1990, 29, 451-464.
(8) Vigmond, S.; Dewa, T.; Regen, S. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117,
7838-7839.
(
5) Davidson, S. K.; Regen, S. L. Chem. ReV. 1997, 97, 1269-1279.
1
0.1021/ja016199c CCC: $20.00 © 2001 American Chemical Society
Published on Web 07/20/2001