Source abstract
Abstract
Controlling excitonic energy transfer at the molecular level is a key requirement for transitioning nanophotonics research to viable devices with the main inspiration coming from biological light-harvesting antennas that collect and direct light energy with near-unity efficiency using Förster resonance energy transfer (FRET). Among putative FRET processes, point-to-plane FRET between donors and acceptors arrayed in two-dimensional sheets is predicted to be particularly efficient with a theoretical 1/r4 energy transfer distance (r) dependency versus the 1/r6 dependency seen for a single donor–acceptor interaction. However, quantitative validation has been confounded by a lack of robust experimental approaches that can rigidly place dyes in the required nanoscale arrangements. To create such assemblies, we utilize a DNA brick scaffold, referred to as a DNA block, which incorporates up to five two-dimensional planes with each displaying from 1 to 12 copies of five different donor, acceptor, or intermediary relay dyes. Nanostructure characterization along with steady-state and time-resolved spectroscopic data were combined with molecular dynamics modeling and detailed numerical simulations to compare the energy transfer efficiencies observed in the experimental DNA block assemblies to theoretical expectations. Overall, we demonstrate clear signatures of sheet regime FRET, and from this we provide a better understanding of what is needed to realize the benefits of such energy transfer in artificial dye networks along with FRET-based sensing and imaging.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Affiliations
College of Science, George Mason University, Fairfax, Virginia 22030, United States
American Society for Engineering Education, Washington, D.C. 20001, United States
Wyss Institute for Biologically Inspired Engineering, Harvard University, Department of Systems Biology, Harvard Medical School, Boston, Massachusetts 02115, United States
Funding
U.S. Naval Research Laboratory · National Institute of Biomedical Imaging and Bioengineering · Office of Naval Research · Division of Chemical, Bioengineering, Environmental, and Transport Systems · American Society for Engineering Education · Laboratory University Collaboration Initiative · Institute for Nanoscience, U.S. Naval Research Laboratory · Office of the Undersecretary of Defense for Research and Engineering