The Influence of Natural and Model Forms of Humic Acids on the Dynamic Parameters of Model Membranes

Pisarek, Izabella; Pytel, Barbara; Filipiak, Aneta; Engel, Grzegorz; Olchawa, Ryszard; Man, Dariusz; Najwer, Karolina

doi:10.1515/eces-2016-0049

Abstract

In this paper the influence of humic acid concentrations extracted from Histosols (HA-A) and their model forms (HA-B) separated from humic substances commercially produced by Carl Roth GmbH + Co.KG on the dynamic properties of liposome membranes was determined. Differences in the quality of the humic acids (HA-A and HA-B) were determined by the ¹HNMR and FTIR methods. Liposomes from the sonication of egg yolk lecithin (EYL) in an aqueous solution and synthetic Dipalmitoylphosphatidylcholine (DPPC) were used. Fluidity of liposome membranes was determined by the EPR technique with spin probes (TEMPO, 16DOIXYL). The electrical parameters of membranes were found using a Keithley 6517 electrometer. Our study showed significant differences in the influence of HA-A and HA-B on the membranes. In the bilayer membranes of the liposomes of HA-A admixture there was slightly more stiffening of the interior of the membrane in comparison to HA-B. A similar effect was observed in the surface layer of the liposome membranes. This difference is particularly evident for DPPC liposomes, however, the EYL liposomes admixture with HA-B slightly increased the fluidity of the surface layer. Electrical study confirmed this effect. The study shows that natural and model forms of humic acids differ in their effects on the activity of tested membrane models. The strong differences in the interaction of HA-A and HA-B on parameter F in DPPC liposomes can be result from the transport of humic acids connected to the metal ions inside the membranes (xenobiotics present in the environment).

References

[1] Barancikova G, Makovnikokova J. The influence of soil humic acid quality on sorption and mobility of heavy metals. Plant Soil Environ. 2003;49:565-571. http://www.agriculturejournals.cz/publicFiles/52956.pdf.10.17221/4195-PSE
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[2] Grassi M, Rosa M. Humic acids of different origin as modifiers of cadmium-ion chemistry: A spectroscopic approach to structural properties and reactivity. Inorg Chim Acta. 2010;363:495-503. DOI: 10.1016/j.ica.2009.07.033.10.1016/j.ica.2009.07.033
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[3] Jamroz E. Właściwości próchnic gleb leśnych pod zaroślami kosodrzewiny w Rezerwacie Śnieżnik Kłodzki [Properties of soil organic matter in the forest soils under mountain dwarf pine in the Snieznik Klodzki Reserve]. Sylwan. 2012;156(11):825-832. http://yadda.icm.edu.pl/yadda/element/bwmeta1.element.agro-d61e6f8a-e7de-4914-b52e-1f959e6d2e95.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[4] http://www.humicsubstances.org/index.html.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[5] Feller Ch, Brossard M, Chen Y, Landa ER, Trichet J. Selected pioneering works on humus in soils and sediments during the 20^th century: A retrospective look from the International Humic Substances Society view. Phys Chem Earth. 2010;35:903-912. DOI: 10.1016/j.pce.2010.10.004.10.1016/j.pce.2010.10.004
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[6] Filella M, Hummel W. Trace element complexation by humic substances: issues related to quality assurance. Accred Qual Assur. 2011;16:215-223. DOI: 10.1007/s00769-010-0716-3.10.1007/s00769-010-0716-3
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[7] Gonzalez Perez M, Martin-Neto L, Saab SC, Novotny EH, Milori DMBP, Bagnato VS, et al. Characterization of humic acids from Brazilian Oxisol under different tillage systems by EPR, ¹³CNMR, FTIR and fluorescence spectroscopy. Geoderma. 2004;118:181-190. DOI: 10.1016/S0016-7061(03)00192-7.10.1016/S0016-7061(03)00192-7
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[8] Jerzykiewicz M. The effect of Hg(II) ions on the free radicals of humic substances and their model compound. Chemosphere. 2013;92/4:445-450. DOI: 10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.01.048.10.1016/j.chemosphere.2013.01.048
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[9] Filip Z, Kubat J. Microbial utilization and transformation of humic substances extracted from soils of long-term field experiments. Eur J Soil Biol. 2001;37:167-174. DOI: 10.1016/S1164-5563(01)01080-9.10.1016/S1164-5563(01)01080-9
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[10] Man D. Fluidity of liposome membranes doped with organic tin compounds: ESR study. J Liposome Res. 2008;182:225-234. DOI: 10.1080/08982100802309461.10.1080/0898210080230946118770072
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[11] Shimshick EJ, McConnell HM. Lateral phase separation in phospholipid membranes. Biochemistry. 1973;12:2351-2360. https://www.jstor.org/stable/62988?seq=1#page_scan_tab_contents.10.1021/bi00736a0264351059
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[12] Hagelueken G, Duthie FG, Florin N, Schubert E, Schiemann O. Expression, purification and spin labelling of the ferrous iron transporter FeoB from Escherichia coli BL21 for EPR studies. Protein Express Purificat. 2015;114:30-36. DOI: 10.1016/j.pep.2015.05.014.10.1016/j.pep.2015.05.01426067172
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[13] Petelska AD, Naumowicz M, Figaszewski ZA. The influence of pH on Phosphatidylethanolamine monolayer at the air/aqueous solution interface. Cell Biochem Biophys. 2013;65:229-235. DOI: 10.1007/s12013-012-9424-4.10.1007/s12013-012-9424-4
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[14] Choudhry GG. Humic Substances: Structural, Photophysical, Photochemical and Free Radical Aspects and Interactions with Environmental Chemicals. New York: Gordon and Breach Science Publishers, Inc. 1984. https://www.cabdirect.org/cabdirect/abstract/19841989409.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[15] Conclin Jr AR. Introduction to Soil Chemistry. New Jersey: John Wiley & Sons, Inc.; 2014:274-287. DOI: 10.1002/0471728225.10.1002/0471728225
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[16] Marita JM, Hatfield JRRD, Chapple C. NMR characterization of lignins in Arabidopsis altered in the activity of ferulate 5-hydroxylase. Proc Natl Acad Sci USA. 1999;96(22):12328-12332. DOI: 10.1073/pnas.96.22.12328.10.1073/pnas.96.22.12328
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[17] Schnitzer M, Khan SU. Soil Organic Matter. Amsterdam: Elsevier Sc. Publ. Co; 1978. http://store.elsevier.com/Soil-Organic-Matter/isbn-9780080869759/.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[18] Man D, Pisarek I, Braczkowski M. The impact of humic substances on the liposome structures: ESR method. Nukleonika. 2013;58(3):439–442. http://www.nukleonika.pl/www/back/full/vol58_2013/v58n3p439f.pdf.
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[19] Singleton WS, Gray MS, Brown ML, White JL. Chromatographically homogeneous lecitin from egg phospholipids. J Am Oil Chem Soc. 1965;42:53-56.10.1007/BF02558256
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[20] Hemminga MA. Interpretation of ESR and saturation transfer ESR spectra of spin labeled lipids and membranes. Chem Phys Lipids. 1973;32:323-383.10.1016/0009-3084(83)90040-3
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[21] Stuart BH. Infrared Spectroscopy: Fundamentals and Applications. New Jersey: John Wiley Sons. Ltd.; 2004. DOI: 10.1002/0470011149.10.1002/0470011149
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[22] Rodríguez FJ, Schlenger P, García-Valverde M. Monitoring changes in the structure and properties of humic substances following ozonation using UV-Vis, FTIR and ¹H NMR techniques. Sci Total Environ. 2016; 541:623-637. DOI:org.sd.han.uni.opole.pl/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.09.127.10.1016/j.scitotenv.2015.09.12726433328
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[23] Man D, Pisarek I, Braczkowski M, Pytel B, Olchawa R. The impact of humic substances on the liposome structures: ESR method. J Liposome Res. 2014;24:106-112. DOI: 10.3109/08982104.2013.839998.10.3109/08982104.2013.83999824144352
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[24] Yasuda S, Hamaguchi E, Asano K. Ready chemical conversion of acid hydrolysis lignin into water-soluble lignosulfonates. III. Successive treatment of acid hydrolysis lignin and lignin model compounds by phenolation and aryl-sulfonation. J Wood Sci. 1999;45:245-249. DOI: 10.1007/BF01177733.10.1007/BF01177733
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[25] Podolak M, Engel G, Man D. Effect of organic compounds of tin on the electric properties of model membranes. Zeit Naturforsch. 2006;61c:453-457.10.1515/znc-2006-5-62416869507
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[26] Christoforidis KC, Un S, Deligiannakis Y. Effect of metal ions on the indigenous radicals of humic acids: high field Electron Paramagnetic Resonance study. Environ Sci Technol. 2010;44:7011-7016. DOI: 10.1021/es101708f.10.1021/es101708f20715767
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[27] Witwicki M, Jerzykiewicz M, Jaszewski A, Jezierska J, Ozarowski A. Influence of Pb(II) ions on the EPR properties of the semiquinone radicals of humic acids and model compounds: High field EPR and relativistic DFT studies. J Phys Chem A. 2009;113(51):14115-14122. DOI: 10.1021/jp906289d.10.1021/jp906289d19928890
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[28] Jajić I, Wiśniewska-Becker A, Sarna T, Jemioła-Rzemińska M, Strzałka K. EPR spin labeling measurements of thylakoid membrane fluidity during barley leaf senescence. J Plant Phys. 2014;171:12:1046-1053. DOI: 10.1016/j.jplph.2014.03.017.10.1016/j.jplph.2014.03.01724974331
Search in Google Scholar Back to article
[29] Alloway BJ. Heavy Metals in Soils. Dodrecht: Springer Science Business Media; 2013. DOI: 10.1007/978-94-007-4470-7.10.1007/978-94-007-4470-7
Search in Google Scholar Back to article

The Influence of Natural and Model Forms of Humic Acids on the Dynamic Parameters of Model Membranes

Abstract

Paradigm

My account