Hostname: page-component-cd9895bd7-hc48f Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-12-27T02:05:55.076Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Biomimetic Mineral-Protein Composites formed by an Automated Alternate Soaking Process

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  23 April 2012

Oliver E. Armitage
Affiliation:
Cambridge University, Engineering Department, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, CB2 1PZ, UK
Daniel G.T. Strange
Affiliation:
Cambridge University, Engineering Department, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, CB2 1PZ, UK
Michelle L. Oyen
Affiliation:
Cambridge University, Engineering Department, Trumpington Street, Cambridge, CB2 1PZ, UK
Get access

Abstract

Biomineralized composite materials found in nature have a compromise of good mechanical properties and relatively small embodied energies in the process of their formation. The Alternate Soaking Process (ASP) is a laboratory technique that has only recently been applied to replicating composite biomineralization. The nexus of the ASP – heterogeneous nucleation – makes it ideal for replicating biominerals where the mineral is templated onto an organic substrate, such as occurs in avian eggshell. Here we demonstrate the deposition of a calcium carbonate gelatin composite on either glass cover slips or demineralized eggshell membranes using an automated ASP. SEM images and FTIR spectra of the resulting mineral show that by altering the amount of gelatin in the growth solutions the final organic component can be controlled accurately in the range of 1-10%, similar to that of natural eggshell. This study shows for the first time the co-precipitation of a CaCO3 – gelatin composite by an ASP and that the organic fraction of this mineral can be tuned to mimic that of natural biomineralized composites.

Type
Research Article
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2012

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Munch, E., Launey, M. E., Alsem, D. H., Saiz, E., Tomsia, A. P., and Ritchie, R. O., Science, vol. 322, no. 5907, pp. 15161520, 2008.Google Scholar
2. Hunter, G. K., Current Opinion in Solid State and Materials Science, vol. 1, no. 3, pp. 430435, 1996.Google Scholar
3. Taguchi, T., Kishida, A., and Akashi, M., Chemistry Letters, vol. 27, no. 8, pp. 711712, 1998.Google Scholar
4. Taguchi, T., Kishida, A., and Akashi, M., Journal of Biomaterials Science Polymer Edition, vol. 10, no. 3, pp. 331339, 1999.Google Scholar
5. Taguchi, T., Kishida, A., and Akashi, M., Journal of Biomaterials Science Polymer Edition, vol. 10, no. 8, pp. 795804, 1999.Google Scholar
6. Watanabe, J. and Akashi, M., Applied Surface Science, vol. 255, no. 2, pp. 344349, 2008.Google Scholar
7. Strange, D. G. T. and Oyen, M. L., Acta Biomaterialia, vol. 7, no. 10. June, pp. 35863594, Jun. 2011.Google Scholar
8. Ogomi, D., Serizawa, T., and Akashi, M., Journal of Biomedical Materials Research. Part A, vol. 67, no. 4, pp. 1360–6, Dec. 2003.Google Scholar
9. NIH, “ImageJ.” [Online]. Available: http://rsbweb.nih.gov/ij/.Google Scholar
10. Krimm, S. and Bandekar, J., Advances in Protein Chemistry, vol. 38, pp. 181364, 1986.Google Scholar
11. White, V. C., Farmer, W. B., The Infrared Spectra of Minerals, Mineralogical Society of London Monograph, 1974.Google Scholar
12. Wu, T. M. et al. ., Matrix biology: Journal of the International Society for Matrix Biology, vol. 14, no. 6, pp. 507–13, Feb. 1995.Google Scholar
13. Pines, M., Knopov, V., and Bar, A., Matrix biology: Journal of the International Society for Matrix Biology, vol. 14, no. 9, pp. 765771, 1995.Google Scholar
14. Addadi, L., Moradian, J., Shay, E., Maroudas, N. G., and Weiner, S., Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the USA, vol. 84, no. 9, pp. 27322736, 1987.Google Scholar