Evidence Hub

Rediscovering Chemical Gardens: Self-Assembling Cytocompatible Protein-Intercalated Silicate-Phosphate Sponge-Mimetic Tubules

Punia K, Bucaro M, Mancuso A, Cuttitta C, Marsillo A, Bykov A, L'Amoreaux W, Raja KS

Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids, 2016

Abstract

The classic chemical garden experiment is reconstructed to produce protein-intercalated silicate-phosphate tubules that resemble tubular sponges. The constructs were synthesized by seeding calcium chloride into a solution of sodium silicate-potassium phosphate and gelatin. Sponge-mimetic tubules were fabricated with varying percentages of gelatin (0-15% w/v), in diameters ranging from 200 μm to 2 mm, characterized morphologically and compositionally, functionalized with biomolecules for cell adhesion, and evaluated for cytocompatibility. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy analysis (EDS) experiments showed that the external surface of the tubules was relatively more amorphous in texture and carbon/protein-rich in comparison to the interior surface. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images indicate a network composed of gelatin incorporated into the inorganic scaffold. The presence of gelatin in the constructs was confirmed by infrared spectroscopy. Powder X-ray diffraction (XRD) was used to identify inorganic crystalline phases in the scaffolds that are mainly composed of Ca(OH)2, NaCl, and Ca2SiO4 along with a band corresponding to amorphous gelatin. Bioconjugation and coating protocols were developed to program the scaffolds with cues for cell adhesion, and the resulting constructs were employed for 3D cell culture of marine (Pyrocystis lunula) and mammalian (HeLa and H9C2) cell lines. The cytocompatibility of the constructs was…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a experimental / empirical study, done in animal and cell cultures (in vitro), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free