DNA Nanostructure Deposition on Self-Assembled Monolayers
Source abstract
Abstract
We report the deposition of DNA nanostructures on self-assembled monolayers (SAMs), focusing on the stability of DNA nanostructures on both hydrophilic and hydrophobic SAMs. Our study reveals distinct outcomes based on the nature of the SAMs. DNA nanostructures maintain structural integrity on hydrophilic SAMs, whereas they experience deformation on the most hydrophobic SAMs. Interestingly, the stability of DNA nanostructures is also sensitive to postdeposition washing procedures. The observations shed light on the intricate interplay between the wettability of SAMs and the structural stability of the DNA nanostructures. An empirical trend emerged where increased hydrophobicity is associated with a more severe deformation of DNA nanostructures. This deformation is hypothesized to arise from disrupted hydrogen bonding within DNA nanostructures and is exacerbated by interfacial tension during the drying process. Our study also highlights the potential role of π-π stacking interactions between the DNA bases and the SAMs in stabilizing the DNA nanostructures. Our work expands the type of substrates that can be used for applications of DNA nanotechnology and highlights the need for a comprehensive understanding of the interactions between DNA nanostructures with different surfaces.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Advanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques · Molecular Junctions and Nanostructures · Gold and Silver Nanoparticles Synthesis and Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Chemistry
University of Pittsburgh
Duquesne University
Funding
Division of Electrical, Communications and Cyber Systems · Division of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing Innovation
References (38)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1038/nature0458610.1038/nature04586 ↗
2. 10.3390/s14101932910.3390/s141019329 ↗
3. 10.1021/acs.langmuir.7b0165910.1021/acs.langmuir.7b01659 ↗
4. 10.1002/cbic.20170054510.1002/cbic.201700545 ↗
5. 10.1021/acsanm.1c0168210.1021/acsanm.1c01682 ↗
6. 10.1021/acsomega.9b0116610.1021/acsomega.9b01166 ↗
7. 10.1002/advs.20240697710.1002/advs.202406977 ↗
8. 10.1021/acs.nanolett.9b0368810.1021/acs.nanolett.9b03688 ↗
9. 10.1021/la027047d10.1021/la027047d ↗
10. 10.1021/acs.biomac.5b0046910.1021/acs.biomac.5b00469 ↗
11. 10.1039/D0CS01220C10.1039/D0CS01220C ↗
12. 10.1021/ja00521a01610.1021/ja00521a016 ↗
13. 10.1016/j.aca.2013.01.02510.1016/j.aca.2013.01.025 ↗
14. 10.1016/j.apsusc.2016.05.00610.1016/j.apsusc.2016.05.006 ↗
15. 10.1039/C6CS00509H10.1039/C6CS00509H ↗
16. 10.1002/pmic.20120020210.1002/pmic.201200202 ↗
17. 10.1146/annurev-anchem-061417-01000710.1146/annurev-anchem-061417-010007 ↗
18. 10.1088/0957-4484/27/39/39530110.1088/0957-4484/27/39/395301 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.actbio.2005.05.00410.1016/j.actbio.2005.05.004 ↗
20. 10.1021/jp108865q10.1021/jp108865q ↗
21. 10.1117/12.84839210.1117/12.848392 ↗
22. 10.1021/acsnano.9b0934810.1021/acsnano.9b09348 ↗
23. 10.1021/ja203888610.1021/ja2038886 ↗
24. 10.1016/j.msec.2013.11.01710.1016/j.msec.2013.11.017 ↗
25. 10.1016/0021-9797(91)90139-Y10.1016/0021-9797(91)90139-Y ↗
26. 10.1021/la102742e10.1021/la102742e ↗
27. 10.1021/cr950235710.1021/cr9502357 ↗
28. 10.1021/la020697x10.1021/la020697x ↗
29. 10.1063/1.36710110.1063/1.367101 ↗
30. Woollam J. · 1999 · 10294
31. Albrechts B. · 2010 · 1
32. 10.1021/la053387y10.1021/la053387y ↗
33. 10.1021/la062475v10.1021/la062475v ↗
34. 10.1021/acsnano.0c0449310.1021/acsnano.0c04493 ↗
35. 10.1016/j.orgel.2010.03.00610.1016/j.orgel.2010.03.006 ↗
36. 10.1016/j.bioelechem.2004.05.00910.1016/j.bioelechem.2004.05.009 ↗
37. 10.1021/acs.langmuir.6b0383610.1021/acs.langmuir.6b03836 ↗
38. 10.1021/acs.langmuir.9b0156910.1021/acs.langmuir.9b01569 ↗