Nanoengineering in biomedicine: Current development and future perspectives
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Recent advances in biomedicine largely rely on the development in nanoengineering. As the access to unique properties in biomaterials is not readily available from traditional techniques, the nanoengineering becomes an effective approach for research and development, by which the performance as well as the functionalities of biomaterials has been greatly improved and enriched. This review focuses on the main materials used in biomedicine, including metallic materials, polymers, and nanocomposites, as well as the major applications of nanoengineering in developing biomedical treatments and techniques. Research that provides an in-depth understanding of material properties and efficient enhancement of material performance using molecular dynamics simulations from the nanoengineering perspective are discussed. The advanced techniques which facilitate nanoengineering in biomedical applications are also presented to inspire further improvement in the future. Furthermore, the potential challenges of nanoengineering in biomedicine are evaluated by summarizing concerned issues and possible solutions.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Graphene and Nanomaterials Applications · Nanotechnology research and applications · Machine Learning in Materials Science
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Department of Architecture and Civil Engineering, City University of Hong Kong , Hong Kong , China
Department of Mechanical Engineering, University of New Orleans , New Orleans , LA 70148 , United States of America
Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, Massachusetts Institute of Technology , Cambridge , Massachusetts 02139 , United States of America
References (100+)
Show source-provided references
1. Kim D, Shin K, Kwon SG, Hyeon T. Synthesis and biomedical applications of multifunctional nanoparticles. Adv Mater. 2018;30(49):1802309.10.1002/adma.201802309 ↗
2. Yan Q, Dong H, Su J, Han J, Song B, Wei Q, et al. A review of 3D printing technology for medical applications. Engineering. 2018;4(5):729–42.10.1016/j.eng.2018.07.021 ↗
3. Li J, Liu Y, Ren J, Tay BZ, Luo T, Fan L, et al. Antibody-coated microstructures for selective isolation of immune cells in blood. Lab Chip. 2020;20:1072–82.10.1039/D0LC00078G ↗
4. Lau D, Jian W, Yu Z, Hui D. Nano-engineering of construction materials using molecular dynamics simulations: prospects and challenges. Composites Part B. 2018;143:282–91.10.1016/j.compositesb.2018.01.014 ↗
5. Sanchez F, Sobolev K. Nanotechnology in concrete – a review. Constr Build Mater. 2010;24(11):2060–71.10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2010.03.014 ↗
6. Karplus M, McCammon JA. Molecular dynamics simulations of biomolecules. Nat Struct Biol. 2002;9(9):646–52.10.1038/nsb0902-646 ↗
7. Buehler M. Atomistic modeling of materials failure. New York: Springer Science & Business Media; 2008.10.1007/978-0-387-76426-9 ↗
8. Ramakrishna S, Mayer J, Wintermantel E, Leong KW. Biomedical applications of polymer-composite materials: a review. Compos Sci Technol. 2001;61(9):1189–224.10.1016/S0266-3538(00)00241-4 ↗
9. Niinomi M. Recent metallic materials for biomedical applications. Metall Mater Trans A. 2002;33(3):477.10.1007/s11661-002-0109-2 ↗
10. Tibbitt MW, Rodell CB, Burdick JA, Anseth KS. Progress in material design for biomedical applications. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2015;112(47):14444.10.1073/pnas.1516247112 ↗
11. Jain PK, Huang X, El-Sayed IH, El-Sayed MA. Noble metals on the nanoscale: optical and photothermal properties and some applications in imaging, sensing, biology, and medicine. Acc Chem Res. 2008;41(12):1578–86.10.1021/ar7002804 ↗
12. Pardeep S. NiTi shape memory alloy: physical and tribological characterization. J Mech Behav Mater. 2018;27(1–2):20180009.10.1515/jmbm-2018-0009 ↗
13. Daw MS, Baskes MI. Embedded-atom method: derivation and application to impurities, surfaces, and other defects in metals. Phys Rev B Condens Matter Mater Phys. 1984;29(12):6443–53.10.1103/PhysRevB.29.6443 ↗
14. Mishin Y, Mehl MJ, Papaconstantopoulos DA. Embedded-atom potential for B2-NiAl. Phys Rev B Condens Matter Mater Phys. 2002;65(22):224114.10.1103/PhysRevB.65.224114 ↗
15. Mendelev MI, Han S, Srolovitz DJ, Ackland GJ, Sun DY, Asta M. Development of new interatomic potentials appropriate for crystalline and liquid iron. Philos Mag. 2003;83(35):3977–94.10.1080/14786430310001613264 ↗
16. Williams PL, Mishin Y, Hamilton JC. An embedded-atom potential for the Cu–Ag system. Model Simul Mater Sci. 2006;14(5):817–33.10.1088/0965-0393/14/5/002 ↗
17. Lee B-J, Baskes MI. Second nearest-neighbor modified embedded-atom-method potential. Phys Rev B Condens Matter Mater Phys. 2000;62(13):8564–7.10.1103/PhysRevB.62.8564 ↗
18. Lee B-J, Baskes MI, Kim H, Koo Cho Y. Second nearest-neighbor modified embedded atom method potentials for bcc transition metals. Phys Rev B Condens Matter Mater Phys. 2001;64(18):184102.10.1103/PhysRevB.64.184102 ↗
19. Jang H-S, Kim K-M, Lee B-J. Modified embedded-atom method interatomic potentials for pure Zn and Mg–Zn binary system. Calphad. 2018;60:200–7.10.1016/j.calphad.2018.01.003 ↗
20. Hao H, Lau D. Atomistic modeling of metallic thin films by modified embedded atom method. Appl Surf Sci. 2017;422:1139–46.10.1016/j.apsusc.2017.05.011 ↗
21. Elkhateeb MG, Shin YC. Molecular dynamics-based cohesive zone representation of Ti6Al4V/TiC composite interface. Mater Des. 2018;155:161–9.10.1016/j.matdes.2018.05.054 ↗
22. Choi W-M, Jo YH, Sohn SS, Lee S, Lee B-J. Understanding the physical metallurgy of the CoCrFeMnNi high-entropy alloy: an atomistic simulation study. npj Comput Mater. 2018;4(1):1.10.1038/s41524-017-0060-9 ↗
23. Zepeda-Ruiz LA, Stukowski A, Oppelstrup T, Bulatov VV. Probing the limits of metal plasticity with molecular dynamics simulations. Nature. 2017;550(7677):492–5.10.1038/nature23472 ↗
24. Shibuta Y, Sakane S, Miyoshi E, Okita S, Takaki T, Ohno M. Heterogeneity in homogeneous nucleation from billion-atom molecular dynamics simulation of solidification of pure metal. Nat Commun. 2017;8(1):10.10.1038/s41467-017-00017-5 ↗
25. Morrison KR, Cherukara MJ, Kim H, Strachan A. Role of grain size on the martensitic transformation and ultra-fast superelasticity in shape memory alloys. Acta Mater. 2015;95:37–43.10.1016/j.actamat.2015.05.015 ↗
26. Hao H, Lau D. Evolution of interfacial structure and stress induced by interfacial lattice mismatch in layered metallic nanocomposites. Adv Theory Simulat. 2018;1(8):1800047.10.1002/adts.201800047 ↗
27. Sebeck K, Shao C, Kieffer J. Alkane–metal interfacial structure and elastic properties by molecular dynamics simulation. ACS Appl Mater Interfaces. 2016;8(26):16885–96.10.1021/acsami.6b01665 ↗
28. Brandt EG, Lyubartsev AP. Molecular dynamics simulations of adsorption of amino acid side chain analogues and a titanium binding peptide on the TiO2(100) surface. J Phys Chem C. 2015;119(32):18126–39.10.1021/acs.jpcc.5b02670 ↗
29. Li S, Liu Y, Zheng Z, Liu X, Huang H, Han Z, et al. Biomimetic robust superhydrophobic stainless-steel surfaces with antimicrobial activity and molecular dynamics simulation. Chem Eng J. 2019;372:852–61.10.1016/j.cej.2019.04.200 ↗
30. Muruve NGG, Cheng YF, Feng Y, Liu T, Muruve DA, Hassett DJ, et al. Peptide-based biocoatings for corrosion protection of stainless steel biomaterial in a chloride solution. Mater Sci Eng C. 2016;68:695–700.10.1016/j.msec.2016.06.053 ↗
31. Chen J, Wang J, Zhu W. Zinc ion-induced conformational changes in new Delphi metallo-β-lactamase 1 probed by molecular dynamics simulations and umbrella sampling. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2017;19(4):3067–75.10.1039/C6CP08105C ↗
32. Savelyev A, MacKerell AD. Competition among Li+, Na+, K+, and Rb+ monovalent ions for DNA in molecular dynamics simulations using the additive CHARMM36 and drude polarizable force fields. J Phys Chem B. 2015;119(12):4428–40.10.1021/acs.jpcb.5b00683 ↗
33. MacKerell Jr AD, Banavali N, Foloppe N. Development and current status of the CHARMM force field for nucleic acids. Biopolymers. 2000;56(4):257–65.10.1002/1097-0282(2000)56:4<257::AID-BIP10029>3.0.CO;2-W ↗
34. Damm W, Frontera A, Tirado-Rives J, Jorgensen WL. OPLS all-atom force field for carbohydrates. J Comput Chem. 1997;18(16):1955–70.10.1002/(SICI)1096-987X(199712)18:16<1955::AID-JCC1>3.0.CO;2-L ↗
35. Shivakumar D, Williams J, Wu Y, Damm W, Shelley J, Sherman W. Prediction of absolute solvation free energies using molecular dynamics free energy perturbation and the OPLS force field. J Chem Theory Comput. 2010;6(5):1509–19.10.1021/ct900587b ↗
36. Wang J, Wolf RM, Caldwell JW, Kollman PA, Case DA. Development and testing of a general amber force field. J Comput Chem. 2004;25(9):1157–74.10.1002/jcc.20035 ↗
37. Pérez A, Marchán I, Svozil D, Sponer J, Cheatham TE, Laughton CA, et al. Refinement of the AMBER force field for nucleic acids: improving the description of α/γ conformers. Biophys J. 2007;92(11):3817–29.10.1529/biophysj.106.097782 ↗
38. Oostenbrink C, Villa A, Mark AE, Van Gunsteren WF. A biomolecular force field based on the free enthalpy of hydration and solvation: The GROMOS force-field parameter sets 53A5 and 53A6. J Comput Chem. 2004;25(13):1656–76.10.1002/jcc.20090 ↗
39. Zhang C, Lu C, Jing Z, Wu C, Piquemal J-P, Ponder JW, et al. AMOEBA polarizable atomic multipole force field for nucleic acids. J Chem Theory Comput. 2018;14(4):2084–108.10.1021/acs.jctc.7b01169 ↗
40. Cao L, Ren H, Miao J, Guo W, Li Y, Li G. Validation of polarizable force field parameters for nucleic acids by inter-molecular interactions. Front Chem Sci Eng. 2016;10(2):203–12.10.1007/s11705-016-1572-4 ↗
41. Henriques J, Cragnell C, Skepö M. Molecular dynamics simulations of intrinsically disordered proteins: force field evaluation and comparison with experiment. J Chem Theory Comput. 2015;11(7):3420–31.10.1021/ct501178z ↗
42. Horta BAC, Merz PT, Fuchs PFJ, Dolenc J, Riniker S, Hünenberger PH. A GROMOS-compatible force field for small organic molecules in the condensed phase: the 2016H66 parameter set. J Chem Theory Comput. 2016;12(8):3825–50.10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00187 ↗
43. Aytenfisu AH, Spasic A, Grossfield A, Stern HA, Mathews DH. Revised RNA dihedral parameters for the amber force field improve RNA molecular dynamics. J Chem Theory Comput. 2017;13(2):900–15.10.1021/acs.jctc.6b00870 ↗
44. McCammon JA, Gelin BR, Karplus M. Dynamics of folded proteins. Nature. 1977;267(5612):585–90.10.1038/267585a0 ↗
45. Tarakanova A, Huang W, Qin Z, Kaplan DL, Buehler MJ. Modeling and experiment reveal structure and nanomechanics across the inverse temperature transition in B. mori silk-elastin-like protein polymers. ACS Biomater Sci Eng. 2017;3(11):2889–99.10.1021/acsbiomaterials.6b00688 ↗
46. Tarakanova A, Yeo GC, Baldock C, Weiss AS, Buehler MJ. Tropoelastin is a flexible molecule that retains its canonical shape. Macromol Biosci. 2019;19(3):1800250.10.1002/mabi.201800250 ↗
47. Tarakanova A, Buehler MJ. Molecular modeling of protein materials: Case study of elastin. Model Simul Mater Sci. 2013;21(6):063001.10.1088/0965-0393/21/6/063001 ↗
48. Tarakanova A, Yeo GC, Baldock C, Weiss AS, Buehler MJ. Molecular model of human tropoelastin and implications of associated mutations. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2018;115(28):7338.10.1073/pnas.1801205115 ↗
49. Yeo GC, Tarakanova A, Baldock C, Wise SG, Buehler MJ, Weiss AS. Subtle balance of tropoelastin molecular shape and flexibility regulates dynamics and hierarchical assembly. Sci Adv. 2016;2(2):e1501145.10.1126/sciadv.1501145 ↗
50. Li N, Jang H, Yuan M, Li W, Yun X, Lee J, et al. Graphite-templated amyloid nanostructures formed by a potential pentapeptide inhibitor for Alzheimer’s disease: a combined study of real-time atomic force microscopy and molecular dynamics simulations. Langmuir. 2017;33(27):6647–56.10.1021/acs.langmuir.7b00414 ↗
51. Laghaei R, Evans DG, Coalson RD. Metal binding sites of human H-chain ferritin and iron transport mechanism to the ferroxidase sites: a molecular dynamics simulation study. Proteins Struct Funct Bioinformat. 2013;81(6):1042–50.10.1002/prot.24251 ↗
52. Yu Z, Lau D. Molecular dynamics study on stiffness and ductility in chitin-protein composite. J Mater Sci. 2015;50(21):7149–57.10.1007/s10853-015-9271-y ↗
53. Yu Z, Xu Z, Lau D. Effect of acidity on chitin-protein interface: a molecular dynamics study. BioNanoScience. 2014;4(3):207–15.10.1007/s12668-014-0138-5 ↗
54. Wang Y, Qin Z, Buehler MJ, Xu Z. Intercalated water layers promote thermal dissipation at bio–nano interfaces. Nat Commun. 2016;7(1):12854.10.1038/ncomms12854 ↗
55. Chin SL, Lu Q, Dane EL, Dominguez L, McKnight CJ, Straub JE, et al. Combined molecular dynamics simulations and experimental studies of the structure and dynamics of poly-amido-saccharides. J Am Chem Soc. 2016;138(20):6532–40.10.1021/jacs.6b01837 ↗
56. Kmiecik S, Gront D, Kolinski M, Wieteska L, Dawid AE, Kolinski A. Coarse-grained protein models and their applications. Chem Rev. 2016;116(14):7898–936.10.1021/acs.chemrev.6b00163 ↗
57. Yeo J, Jung G, Tarakanova A, Martín-Martínez FJ, Qin Z, Cheng Y, et al. Multiscale modeling of keratin, collagen, elastin and related human diseases: perspectives from atomistic to coarse-grained molecular dynamics simulations. Extreme Mech Lett. 2018;20:112–24.10.1016/j.eml.2018.01.009 ↗
58. Yu Z, Lau D. Development of a coarse-grained α-chitin model on the basis of MARTINI forcefield. J Mol Model. 2015;21(5):128.10.1007/s00894-015-2670-9 ↗
59. Monticelli L, Kandasamy SK, Periole X, Larson RG, Tieleman DP, Marrink SJ. The MARTINI coarse-grained force field: extension to proteins. J Chem Theory Comput. 2008;4:819.10.1021/ct700324x ↗
60. Tarakanova A, Ozsvar J, Weiss AS, Buehler MJ. Coarse-grained model of tropoelastin self-assembly into nascent fibrils. Mater Today Bio. 2019;3:100016.10.1016/j.mtbio.2019.100016 ↗
61. Orekhov PS, Kholina EG, Bozdaganyan ME, Nesterenko AM, Kovalenko IB, Strakhovskaya MG. Molecular mechanism of uptake of cationic photoantimicrobial phthalocyanine across bacterial membranes revealed by molecular dynamics simulations. J Phys Chem B. 2018;122(14):3711–22.10.1021/acs.jpcb.7b11707 ↗
62. Deng S, Gao E, Wang Y, Sen S, Sreenivasan ST, Behura S, et al. Confined, oriented, and electrically anisotropic graphene wrinkles on bacteria. ACS Nano. 2016;10(9):8403–12.10.1021/acsnano.6b03214 ↗
63. Plattner N, Doerr S, De Fabritiis G, Noé F. Complete protein–protein association kinetics in atomic detail revealed by molecular dynamics simulations and Markov modelling. Nat Chem. 2017;9(10):1005–11.10.1038/nchem.2785 ↗
64. Maple JR, Dinur U, Hagler AT. Derivation of force fields for molecular mechanics and dynamics from ab initio energy surfaces. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 1988;85(15):5350–4.10.1073/pnas.85.15.5350 ↗
65. Sun H, Mumby SJ, Maple JR, Hagler AT. An ab initio CFF93 all-atom force field for polycarbonates. J Am Chem Soc. 1994;116(7):2978–87.10.1021/ja00086a030 ↗
66. Mayo SL, Olafson BD, Goddard WA. DREIDING: a generic force field for molecular simulations. J Phys Chem. 1990;94(26):8897–909.10.1021/j100389a010 ↗
67. Sun H. COMPASS: An ab initio force-field optimized for condensed-phase applications overview with details on alkane and benzene compounds. J Phys Chem B. 1998;102(38):7338–64.10.1021/jp980939v ↗
68. Tam L-h, Lau D. A molecular dynamics investigation on the cross-linking and physical properties of epoxy-based materials. RSC Adv. 2014;4(62):33074–81.10.1039/C4RA04298K ↗
69. van Duin ACT, Dasgupta S, Lorant F, Goddard WA. ReaxFF: a reactive force field for hydrocarbons. J Phys Chem A. 2001;105(41):9396–409.10.1021/jp004368u ↗
70. Odegard GM, Jensen BD, Gowtham S, Wu J, He J, Zhang Z. Predicting mechanical response of crosslinked epoxy using ReaxFF. Chem Phys Lett. 2014;591:175–8.10.1016/j.cplett.2013.11.036 ↗
71. Vashisth A, Ashraf C, Bakis CE, van Duin ACT. Effect of chemical structure on thermo-mechanical properties of epoxy polymers: comparison of accelerated ReaxFF simulations and experiments. Polymer. 2018;158:354–63.10.1016/j.polymer.2018.11.005 ↗
72. Chowdhury SC, Elder RM, Sirk TW, Gillespie JW. Epoxy resin thermo-mechanics and failure modes: effects of cure and cross-linker length. Composites Part B. 2020;186:107814.10.1016/j.compositesb.2020.107814 ↗
73. Hao H, Chow CL, Lau D. Carbon monoxide release mechanism in cellulose combustion using reactive forcefield. Fuel. 2020;269:117422.10.1016/j.fuel.2020.117422 ↗
74. Nazarychev VM, Lyulin AV, Larin SV, Gurtovenko AA, Kenny JM, Lyulin SV. Molecular dynamics simulations of uniaxial deformation of thermoplastic polyimides. Soft Matter. 2016;12(17):3972–81.10.1039/C6SM00230G ↗
75. Wang X, Jian W, Lu H, Lau D, Fu Y-Q. Modeling strategy for enhanced recovery strength and a tailorable shape transition behavior in shape memory copolymers. Macromolecules. 2019;52(16):6045–54.10.1021/acs.macromol.9b00992 ↗
76. Ming L, Zhen C, Haibao L, Kai Y. Recent progress in shape memory polymer composites: methods, properties, applications and prospects. Nanotechnol Rev. 2019;8(1):327–51.10.1515/ntrev-2019-0031 ↗
77. Bobby S, Samad MA. Chapter 5 – Epoxy composites in biomedical engineering. In: Grumezescu V, Grumezescu AM, editors. Materials for Biomedical Engineering. Amsterdam: Elsevier; 2019.10.1016/B978-0-12-816874-5.00005-0 ↗
78. Meng Z, Bessa MA, Xia W, Kam Liu W, Keten S. Predicting the macroscopic fracture energy of epoxy resins from atomistic molecular simulations. Macromolecules. 2016;49(24):9474–83.10.1021/acs.macromol.6b01508 ↗
79. Sresht V, Pádua AAH, Blankschtein D. Liquid-phase exfoliation of phosphorene: design rules from molecular dynamics simulations. ACS Nano. 2015;9(8):8255–68.10.1021/acsnano.5b02683 ↗
80. Zhou A, Büyüköztürk O, Lau D. Debonding of concrete-epoxy interface under the coupled effect of moisture and sustained load. Cem Concr Compos. 2017;80:287–97.10.1016/j.cemconcomp.2017.03.019 ↗
81. Zhou A, Qiu Q, Chow CL, Lau D. Interfacial performance of aramid, basalt and carbon fiber reinforced polymer bonded concrete exposed to high temperature. Composites Part A. 2020;131:105802.10.1016/j.compositesa.2020.105802 ↗
82. Lau D, Broderick K, Buehler MJ, Büyüköztürk O. A robust nanoscale experimental quantification of fracture energy in a bilayer material system. Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2014;111(33):11990–5.10.1073/pnas.1402893111 ↗
83. Zhou A, Tam L-h, Yu Z, Lau D. Effect of moisture on the mechanical properties of CFRP-wood composite: an experimental and atomistic investigation. Composited Part B. 2015;71:63–73.10.1016/j.compositesb.2014.10.051 ↗
84. Tam L-h, Zhou A, Yu Z, Qiu Q, Lau D. Understanding the effect of temperature on the interfacial behavior of CFRP-wood composite via molecular dynamics simulations. Composites Part B. 2017;109:227–37.10.1016/j.compositesb.2016.10.030 ↗
85. Jian W, Tam L-h, Lau D. Atomistic study of interfacial creep behavior in epoxy-silica bilayer system. Composites Part B. 2018;132:229–36.10.1016/j.compositesb.2017.09.006 ↗
86. Liu W, Luo X, Bao Y, Liu YP, Ning G-H, Abdelwahab I, et al. A two-dimensional conjugated aromatic polymer via C–C coupling reaction. Nat Chem. 2017;9(6):563–70.10.1038/nchem.2696 ↗
87. Lee B, Lee K, Panda S, Gonzales-Rojas R, Chong A, Bugay V, et al. Nanoparticle delivery of CRISPR into the brain rescues a mouse model of fragile X syndrome from exaggerated repetitive behaviours. Nat Biomed Eng. 2018;2(7):497–507.10.1038/s41551-018-0252-8 ↗
88. Hussain S, Joo J, Kang J, Kim B, Braun GB, She Z-G, et al. Antibiotic-loaded nanoparticles targeted to the site of infection enhance antibacterial efficacy. Nat Biomed Eng. 2018;2(2):95–103.10.1038/s41551-017-0187-5 ↗
89. Padmanabhan P, Kumar A, Kumar S, Chaudhary RK, Gulyás B. Nanoparticles in practice for molecular-imaging applications: an overview. Acta Biomater. 2016;41:1–16.10.1016/j.actbio.2016.06.003 ↗
90. Irena B, Janja S, Uroš M. NiCu magnetic nanoparticles: review of synthesis methods, surface functionalization approaches, and biomedical applications. Nanotechnol Rev. 2018;7(2):187–207.10.1515/ntrev-2017-0193 ↗
91. Ibrahim Y. Applications of magnetic nanoparticles in biomedical separation and purification. Nanotechnol Rev. 2016;5(3):331–40.
92. Wen Y-H, Huang R, Shao G-F, Sun S-G. Thermal stability of Co–Pt and Co–Au core–shell structured nanoparticles: insights from molecular dynamics simulations. J Phys Chem Lett. 2017;8(17):4273–8.10.1021/acs.jpclett.7b01880 ↗
93. Sridhar DB, Gupta R, Rai B. Effect of surface coverage and chemistry on self-assembly of monolayer protected gold nanoparticles: a molecular dynamics simulation study. Phys Chem Chem Phys. 2018;20(40):25883–91.10.1039/C8CP04044C ↗
94. Issa I, Amodeo J, Réthoré J, Joly-Pottuz L, Esnouf C, Morthomas J, et al. In situ investigation of MgO nanocube deformation at room temperature. Acta Mater. 2015;86:295–304.10.1016/j.actamat.2014.12.001 ↗
95. Meena SK, Sulpizi M. From gold nanoseeds to nanorods: The microscopic origin of the anisotropic growth. Angew Chem Int Ed. 2016;55(39):11960–4.10.1002/anie.201604594 ↗
96. Atilhan M, Aparicio S. Molecular dynamics simulations of metal nanoparticles in deep eutectic solvents. J Phys Chem C. 2018;122(31):18029–39.10.1021/acs.jpcc.8b02582 ↗
97. Salorinne K, Malola S, Wong OA, Rithner CD, Chen X, Ackerson CJ, et al. Conformation and dynamics of the ligand shell of a water-soluble Au102 nanoparticle. Nat Commun. 2016;7(1):10401.10.1038/ncomms10401 ↗
98. Xie B, Buehler MJ, Xu Z. Directed self-assembly of end-functionalized nanofibers: from percolated networks to liquid crystal-like phases. Nanotechnology. 2015;26(20):205602.10.1088/0957-4484/26/20/205602 ↗
99. Elsabahy M, Wooley KL. Design of polymeric nanoparticles for biomedical delivery applications. Chem Soc Rev. 2012;41(7):2545–61.10.1039/c2cs15327k ↗
100. Kaufman JJ, Ottman R, Tao G, Shabahang S, Banaei E-H, Liang X, et al. In-fiber production of polymeric particles for biosensing and encapsulation. P Natl Acad Sci U S A. 2013;110(39):15549–54.10.1073/pnas.1310214110 ↗