As the rules for cell permeability continue to be elucidated, peptides are increasingly being used to deliver either themselves or cargo to the cell’s interior.  One thing is clear, increasing the overall cationic charge of the peptide enhances it’s delivery to not only the cytoplasm, but also the nucleus or other subcellular compartments.  To achieve the positive charge, large numbers of arginine residues are most often incorporated into the peptide sequence.

This begs the question though, should I change my cleavage protocol?  In today’s post, I’ll evaluate several lengths of time used to cleave and fully deprotect an Arg-rich peptide sequence.

In my role as a peptide application scientist, I have had the pleasure of working with many groups that are venturing into the world of peptides for the first time.  Although it seems rather  straightforward to experienced synthetic chemists, producing acceptable yield and purity certainly comes with unique challenges in solid phase peptide synthesis .

In this post I would like to present some of the tips and tricks that I have picked up along the way.

Purification by reversed-phase chromatography relies primarily on a hydrophobic interaction of the molecule with the alkyl chains bonded to the stationary phase for column retention and elution through a partitioning mechanism.  While this is certainly true for purification of peptides, surface area accessibility and media particle size also play critical roles in the resolving power of a particular stationary phase.  The particle size influences the loading capacity, however pore size greatly influences molecular accessibility and therefore resolving power.

In today’s post, I will demonstrate how pore size can impact your peptide purification using flash column chromatography.

In the past, when I have synthesized a new peptide, I always ran a “scout run” – a small scale injection, usually with an analytical HPLC column – to both get an idea of the crude purity and also to identify a shorter, more optimal gradient for the actual purification.  This strategy is still recommended when you want to use reversed phase flash chromatography for your purification strategy, but is there a better way?

In today’s post, I’ll discuss using a scouting column to screen gradient conditions prior to peptide purification with reversed phase flash chromatography.

More and more groups are exploring the utility of peptides with an ever widening variety of applications. And although peptides are getting cheaper to purchase outright, many groups are continuing to bring peptide synthesis in house. As more groups join the peptide community, I frequently encounter questions about the basics of peptide synthesis.

Since the development of Fmoc-based solid phase peptide synthesis, a wide variety of cleavage cocktails have emerged.  Each cleavage cocktail contains a unique combination of scavengers designed to prevent either side reactions mediated by the released protecting groups or the side chains themselves, or both during the peptide cleavage reaction.  As the number of scientists performing peptide synthesis grows, the question “which cleavage cocktail should I use?” comes up more often than not.

In today’s post, I’ll highlight the role of of scavengers for peptides containing cysteine residues.