ArticleACS omega2024
Sucrose versus Trehalose: Observations from Comparative Study Using Molecular Dynamics Simulations.
Article in ACS omega, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Interactions of Sucrose and Trehalose with Lysozyme in Different Media: A Perspective from Atomistic Molecular Dynamics Simulations.Molecular pharmaceutics · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Binary mixtures of sucrose and trehalose in water were investigated using classical molecular dynamics (MD) simulations and free energy calculations. By classical MD simulations, the behavior of sugars was studied across the entire range of concentrations, from 0 to 100 wt % of water. Sugar-sugar and sugar-water affinities in diluted systems were in focus when using umbrella sampling and well-tempered metadynamics calculations. Moreover, in classical MD simulations, two approaches for system equilibration were applied: in the first, mixtures were preheated (using simulated annealing) before simulations under desired conditions, while in the second, no preliminary heating was used. It was discovered that sucrose has a stronger tendency to aggregate than trehalose, while the latter forms more hydrogen bonds with water. Below the concentration of 10 wt % of water, the number of hydrogen bonds between sugars is higher than the number of hydrogen bonds between sugars and water. The free energy calculations and hydrogen bonding analysis reveal certain dissimilarities in the hydration of oxygen-containing molecular groups. While there are noticeable differences in the hydration of various hydroxyl groups in sucrose and trehalose, all hydroxyl groups are clearly more hydrated than the ether oxygens in both sugars. Three factors contribute to the lower hydration of ether oxygens: they do not donate hydrogen bonds, they are slightly less polar than the oxygen atoms in hydroxyl groups, and they are less accessible to the solvent. Moreover, hydroxyl groups play the main role in binding water, and the geometry of trehalose is energetically preferable compared to the geometry of sucrose. Effects of preheating were demonstrated at water concentrations below 70 wt %, with more significant differences between mixtures observed at water concentrations below 40 wt %. Disaccharides bind stronger to each other and weaker with water molecules in preheated systems than in mixtures that were not preheated. The hydroxyl groups of sucrose and trehalose in preheated mixtures rotate slower than in systems that did not undergo thermal treatment. Therefore, while preheating is not necessary for liquid solutions, it is vital for the equilibration of samples in their amorphous solid state. In the experimental community, these findings are relevant for decision-making when choosing one of the disaccharides as a preservative.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.