Atomic Force Microscopy to Characterize Antimicrobial Peptide-Induced Defects in Model Supported Lipid Bilayers

Antimicrobial peptides (AMPs) interact with bacterial cell membranes through a variety of mechanisms, causing changes extending from nanopore formation to microscale membrane lysis, eventually leading to cell death. Several AMPs also disrupt mammalian cell membranes, despite their significantly different lipid composition and such collateral hemolytic damage hinders the potential therapeutic applicability of the AMP as an anti-microbial. Elucidating the mechanisms underlying the AMP–membrane interactions is challenging due to the variations in the chemical and structural features of the AMPs, the complex compositional variations of cell membranes and the inadequacy of any single experimental technique to comprehensively probe them. (1) Background: Atomic Force Microscopy (AFM) imaging can be used in combination with other techniques to help understand how AMPs alter the orientation and structural organization of the molecules within cell membranes exposed to AMPs. The structure, size, net charge, hydrophobicity and amphipathicity of the AMPs affect how they interact with cell membranes of differing lipid compositions. (2) Methods: Our study examined two different types of AMPs, a 20-amino acid, neutral, α-helical (amphipathic) peptide, alamethicin, and a 13-amino acid, non-α-helical cationic peptide, indolicidin (which intramolecularly folds, creating a hydrophobic core), for their interactions with supported lipid bilayers (SLBs). Robust SLB model membranes on quartz supports, incorporating predominantly anionic lipids representative of bacterial cells, are currently not available and remain to be developed. Therefore, the SLBs of zwitterionic egg phosphatidylcholine (PC), which represents the composition of a mammalian cell membrane, was utilized as the model membrane. This also allows for a comparison with the results obtained from the Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation (QCM-D) experiments conducted for these peptides interacting with the same zwitterionic SLBs. Further, in the case of alamethicin, because of its neutrality, the lipid charge may be less relevant for understanding its membrane interactions. (3) Results: Using AFM imaging and roughness analysis, we found that alamethicin produced large, unstable defects in the membrane at 5 µM concentrations, and completely removed the bilayer at 10 µM. Indolicidin produced smaller holes in the bilayer at 5 and 10 µM, although they were able to fill in over time. The root-mean-square (RMS) roughness values for the images showed that the surface roughness caused by visible defects peaked after peptide injection and gradually decreased over time. (4) Conclusions: AFM is useful for helping to uncover the dynamic interactions between different AMPs and cell membranes, which can facilitate the selection and design of more efficient AMPs for use in therapeutics and antimicrobial applications