Crystals: animal, vegetable or mineral?

What macromolecular crystallogenesis tells us - what is needed in the future

Crystallogenesis is a longstanding topic that has transformed into a discipline that is mainly focused on the preparation of crystals for practising crystallo-graphers. Although the idiosyncratic features of proteins have to be taken into account, the crystallization of proteins is governed by the same physics as the crystallization of inorganic materials. At present, a diversified panel of crystallization methods adapted to proteins has been validated, and although only a few methods are in current practice, the success rate of crystallization has increased constantly, leading to the determination of ∼105 X-ray structures. These structures reveal a huge repertoire of protein folds, but they only cover a restricted part of macromolecular diversity across the tree of life. In the future, crystals representative of missing structures or that will better document the structural dynamics and functional steps underlying biological processes need to be grown. For the pertinent choice of biologically relevant targets, computer-guided analysis of structural databases is needed. From another perspective, crystallization is a self-assembly process that can occur in the bulk of crowded fluids, with crystals being supramolecular assemblies. Life also uses self-assembly and supramolecular processes leading to transient, or less often stable, complexes. An integrated view of supramolecularity implies that proteins crystallizing either in vitro or in vivo or participating in cellular processes share common attributes, notably determinants and antideterminants that favour or disfavour their correct or incorrect associations. As a result, under in vivo conditions proteins show a balance between features that favour or disfavour association. If this balance is broken, disorders/diseases occur. Understanding crystallization under in vivo conditions is a challenge for the future. In this quest, the analysis of packing contacts and contacts within oligomers will be crucial in order to decipher the rules governing protein self-assembly and will guide the engineering of novel biomaterials. In a wider perspective, understanding such contacts will open the route towards supramolecular biology and generalized crystallogenesis.

Two sides of the coin. Part 1. Lipid and surfactant self-assembly revisited

Hofmeister, specific ion effects, hydration and van der Waals forces at and between interfaces are factors that determine curvature and microstructure in self assembled aggregates of surfactants and lipids; and in microemulsions. Lipid and surfactant head group interactions and between aggregates vary enormously and are highly specific. They act on the hydrophilic side of a bilayer, micelle or other self assembled aggregate. It is only over the last three decades that the origin of Hofmeister effects has become generally understood. Knowledge of their systematics now provides much flexibility in designing nanostructured fluids. The other side of the coin involves equally specific forces. These (opposing) forces work on the hydrophobic side of amphiphilic interfaces. They are due to the interaction of hydrocarbons and other "oils" with hydrophobic tails of surfactants and lipids. The specificity of oleophilic solutes in microemulsions and lipid membranes provides a counterpoint to Hofmeister effects and hydration. Together with global packing constraints these effects determine microstructure. Another factor that has hardly been recognised is the role of dissolved gas. This introduces further, qualitative changes in forces that prescribe microstructure. The systematics of these effects and their interplay are elucidated. Awareness of these competing factors facilitates formulation of self assembled nanostructured fluids. New and predictable geometries that emerge naturally provide insights into a variety of biological phenomena like anaesthetic and pheromone action and transmission of the nervous impulse (see Part 2).