A simple and robust nanolithographic method that allows sub-100 nm chemical patterning on a range of oxide surfaces was developed in order to fabricate nanoarrays of plant light-harvesting LHCII complexes. The site-specific immobilization and the preserved functionality of the LHCII complexes were confirmed by fluorescence emission spectroscopy. Nanopatterned LHCII trimers could be reversibly switched between fluorescent and quenched states by controlling the detergent concentration in the imaging buffer. A 3-fold quenching of the average fluorescence intensity was accompanied by a decrease in the average (amplitude-weighted) fluorescence lifetime from approximately 2.24 ns to approximately 0.4 ns, attributed to the intrinsic ability of LHCII to switch between fluorescent and quenched states upon changes in its conformational state. The nanopatterning methodology was extended by immobilizing a second protein, the enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP), onto LHCII-free areas of the chemically patterned surfaces. This very simple surface chemistry, which allows simultaneous selective immobilization and therefore sorting of the two types of protein molecules on the surface, is a key underpinning step toward the integration of LHCII into switchable biohybrid antenna constructs.
A simple and robust nanolithographic method that allows sub-100 nm chemical patterning on a range of oxide surfaces was developed in order to fabricate nanoarrays of plant light-harvesting LHCII complexes. The site-specific immobilization and the preserved functionality of the LHCII complexes were confirmed by fluorescence emission spectroscopy. Nanopatterned LHCII trimers could be reversibly switched between fluorescent and quenched states by controlling the detergent concentration in the imaging buffer. A 3-fold quenching of the average fluorescence intensity was accompanied by a decrease in the average (amplitude-weighted) fluorescence lifetime from approximately 2.24 ns to approximately 0.4 ns, attributed to the intrinsic ability of LHCII to switch between fluorescent and quenched states upon changes in its conformational state. The nanopatterning methodology was extended by immobilizing a second protein, the enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP), onto LHCII-free areas of the chemically patterned surfaces. This very simple surface chemistry, which allows simultaneous selective immobilization and therefore sorting of the two types of protein molecules on the surface, is a key underpinning step toward the integration of LHCII into switchable biohybrid antenna constructs.
All photosynthetic
systems in living organisms contain light-harvesting
pigment–protein complexes (LHCs) that enhance photosynthetic
efficiency by capturing and concentrating light energy for the reaction
center complexes (RCs), where the primary conversion of light energy
into electrochemical potential takes place. There have been several
recent examples of immobilization of RCs on various artificial support
materials in order to study their ability to generate electric current
in the substrate in response to light.[1−4] Several reports also demonstrate that is
possible to immobilize LHCs onto artificial surfaces, where they retain
their functional properties.[5−7] The advent of new lithographic
techniques, such as those based on light[8] or nanoimprinting,[9−11] have opened up the possibilities of controlling the
surface arrangements of groups of LHC molecules in order to examine
their collective properties for energy propagation.[12] The major target for such nanopatterning work has been
the light-harvesting 2 (LH2) complex from the photosynthetic bacterium Rhodobacter sphaeroides, both as the normal, wild-type
complex and in the form of site-directed mutants with genetically
introduced tags such as cysteine residues that allow coupling to gold
and other substrates.[13,14] An understanding of how we can
manipulate the functional properties of nanoscale arrays of LHCs immobilized
on surfaces is the first step toward generating effective artificial
systems that convert light energy into usable electrical current.The major trimeric chlorophyll a/b-binding light-harvesting complex of plants (LHCII), which serves
both photosystem I (PSI) and photosystem II (PSII) and is probably
the most abundant membrane protein on earth,[15−17] is an excellent
test case for construction of nanoscale arrays. LHCII absorbs light
over much of the visible spectral range and is able to transfer excitation
energy rapidly (within a few picoseconds) and at high quantum efficiency
to neighboring light-harvesting complexes and then toward the PSII
or PSI RCs. Single-molecule and time-resolved fluorescence studies
on LHCII have shown that the complex can be readily and reversibly
switched between two conformational states, one (highly fluorescent)
with a long fluorescence lifetime of ∼4 ns and the other (weakly
fluorescent) with a much shorter lifetime of ∼0.3 ns, by controlling
the environmental conditions such as detergent and pH.[18−25] These experiments reflect the intrinsic ability of LHCII to switch
between highly and weakly fluorescent states, which is believed to
play an important photoprotective role in controlling energy input
into the RCs by nonphotochemical quenching of chlorophyll fluorescence
(NPQ).[26−30] The fact that this property of LHCII can be triggered in vitro by
altering the environment of this membrane protein makes the LHCII
complex, or an engineered variant, a possible candidate as a component
in future biohybrid optoelectronic devices. The fabrication of nanoarrays
of LHCII is therefore a key underpinning step toward the integration
of LHCII into biohybrid antenna constructs.Nanoimprint lithography
(NIL)[31−35] is one of the most widely used technologies for high-throughput
nanofabrication and nanoscale patterning and has the capability to
produce sub-100 nm features,[36,37] in particular, linear
patterns of functional LH2 molecules.[12] The NIL process, however, requires high temperature and high pressure
during the replication step as well as a reactive ion-etching (breakthrough
etch) step. For nanoscale patterning, especially for direct patterning
of functional surfaces, it is often desirable to operate at a lower
temperature and with reduced pressure, ideally under ambient conditions.
To address mask–sample alignment problems caused by the mismatch
in thermal expansion coefficients, a reverse-nanoimprint lithography
(RNIL) process was developed[38] that operates
at lower temperature and pressure compared to NIL but still requires
temperatures of the order of 100 °C (the glass transition temperature
of the resist polymer film). It has been shown that this approach
works for several thermoplastic materials such as polystyrene (PS)
and can produce good topographical patterns with features down to
350 nm.[38]In this paper we present
an alternative method that combines the
nanoimprinting approach with a wet lift-off and transfer of a thin
polymer film replica, together with self-assembly of functional organosilane
molecules in vapor phase[39] on a range of
oxide surfaces (glass or silicon oxide). This nanolithographic method
allows sub-100 nm chemical patterns to be achieved for the immobilization
of functional biomolecules. The effectiveness of this lithography
approach was demonstrated by fabrication of single LHCII nanolines
and double LHCII/enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) structures
on glass substrates; in situ measurements of fluorescence emission
spectra and lifetimes show that the LHCII complexes had retained their
functional properties.
Experimental Section
Protein
Expression and Purification
LHCII
Trimeric LHCII from spinach
was isolated as previously
described by Ruban et al.[40] Xanthophyll/chlorophyll
composition was determined as previously reported for violaxanthin-enriched
LHCII complexes in Kruger et al.[41]
SATP-Modified
EGFP
Introducing the combined F64L, S65T,
V68L, S72A, M153T, V163A, S175G, and A206 K mutations into the gene
sequence of yellow fluorescent protein (YFP) [amplified by polymerase
chain reaction (PCR) from pCS2-Venus vector] resulted in enhanced
green fluorescent protein (EGFP) gene.[42] The resulting NdeI/BamHI fragment
was cloned into a pET14b expression vector (Novagen). EGFP proteins
were produced by heterologous expression in Escherichia
coli (BL21); cells were grown to an OD680 of 0.6 at 37 °C and then induced by use of isopropyl β-d-1-thiogalactoside (IPTG; 0.4 mM) for 12 h at 25 °C. Pelleted
cells (19000g for 20 min) were lysed by sonication,
and the resulting lysate was clarified by a further spin (33000g for 30 min). The EGFP protein was purified to homogeneity
from clarified lysate on a chelating Sepharose Fast Flow nickel–nitrilotriacetic
acid (Ni–NTA) gravity flow column (GE Healthcare) as detailed
in the manufacturer’s instructions. Protein purity was assessed
by sodium dodecyl sulfate–polyacrylamide gel electrophoresis
(SDS–PAGE). In order to introduce sulfhydryl groups into the
EGFP molecule, 1 mL of protein solution [concentration 5 μM
in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS), pH 7.4] was reacted with 10 μL
of 50 mM N-succinimidyl S-acetylthiopropionate
(SATP, ThermoFisher Scientific) stock solution in dimethyl sulfoxide
(DMSO) for 40 min at room temperature leading to the coupling of protected
(acetylated) sulfhydryl groups to the primary amines exposed on the
surface of the EGFP molecule. The SATP-modified EGFP was separated
from unreacted SATP on a PG10 desalting column equilibrated with PBS,
pH 7.4, and was stored at −20 °C for further use. Immediately
prior to immobilization onto the patterned surfaces, the sulfhydryl
groups were deacetylated by mixing 1 mL of SATP-EGFP with 100 μL
of deacetylation solution [500 mM hydroxylamine and 25 mM ethylenediaminetetraacetic
acid (EDTA) in PBS, pH 7.4], and the reaction was left to proceed
for 2 h at room temperature. Then the sulfhydryl-modified EGFP was
purified from the deacetylation solution on a PG10 desalting column
equilibrated with PBS, pH 7.4, and immediately used for surface immobilization.
Si Master Template Fabrication
The master templates
were fabricated by electron beam lithography (EBL) by using a two-step
masking process: first, a NEB-31A resist was spin-coated onto a ∼1
mm thick Si wafer at 3000 rpm, resulting in ∼300 nm resist
layer. The EBL exposure dose ranged from 200 μC·cm–2 (for larger structures) to 1700 μC·cm–2 for the narrower lines. Then, the resist was developed
with n-amyl acetate. Next, a 20 nm thickness of Al
was deposited in an electron beam thermal deposition system and used
as an etch mask for the Si wafer. The final etching of the template
into the Si wafer was performed in a plasma-assisted etcher in CF4/Ar atmosphere with the plasma power set to 100 W. The process
was optimized to obtain an etch depth of 80–100 nm. The final
process step is a soak in piranha solution to remove the aluminum
etch mask.
Chemical Patterning of Surfaces
Polystyrene (PS) (Mw = 234 kDa, Polymer
Source) was dissolved in
toluene (HPLC-grade, Fisher Scientific) to a concentration of 55 mg·mL–1. The master template with the lithographically formed
ridges was cleaned in piranha solution, washed copiously with ultrapure
deionized (DI) water, and blown dry with a nitrogen stream. Then it
was spin-coated with the polystyrene solution at 2000 rpm for 30 s,
resulting in a layer of polystyrene approximately 180 nm thick [the
thickness was measured by atomic force microscopy (AFM) over a scratch
in the PS film, data not shown]. The thickness of the PS layer was
controlled by the spinning speed and solution concentration, and it
is important that the PS film is thick enough to completely cover
the features on the master mold. Then, after the PS layer was carefully
scratched off the edges of the master template, the coated surface
was immersed into a clean Petri dish filled with approximately 40
mL of ultrapure DI water at a shallow angle (10°–15°),
letting the water wet the hydrophilic master mold surface and lift
the hydrophobic PS film onto the water surface by means of the surface
tension forces. The result is a free-standing PS film, the topography
of which is a negative replica of the master mold surface. At this
point the free-standing PS film can be picked up with a wire loop,
inverted, and deposited onto a flat Si substrate for inspection. Subsequently,
the free-standing PS film can be transferred (floated on) to a clean
flat substrate (either a piranha-cleaned glass coverslip or Si substrate)
in the same orientation as it was released from the master mold. In
doing so, the relief of the polymer film would make contact with the
flat substrate only with its protruding parts. After the edges of
the PS film were trimmed (in order to ensure that the channels formed
between the PS film relief and the substrate are open to the atmosphere),
the substrate with the masking polymer layer was dried under vacuum
for 16 h in order to remove any residual water trapped between the
substrate and the PS film. During the next step, an organosilane self-assembled
monolayer (SAM) was created by a chemical vapor deposition (CVD) process.
The substrate with the masking PS layer on top was placed into a 0.6
L desiccator and was purged with dry nitrogen for 10 min. Then 30
μL of 3-mercaptopropyltrimethoxysilane (MPTMS), placed in a
cap from a microcentrifuge tube, was introduced into the desiccator.
After the sample was purged with dry nitrogen for another 10 min,
the desiccator was sealed, pumped down to a pressure of approximately
20 mbar, and left under vacuum for 16 h to allow formation of a SAM
on the exposed parts of the substrate. After the organosilane deposition
was completed, the masking PS film was floated off the substrate as
described above and was reused for patterning of a fresh substrate.
The substrate with the patterned organosilane monolayer was inspected
by AFM and then was further converted to fully chemically patterned
surface by a second CVD step in order to assemble a contrasting 1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorooctyltriethoxysilane (fluorosilane) SAM on the newly exposed
(clean) parts of the substrate. Alternatively, the second deposition
step can be conducted in solution (e.g., 5 mM fluorosilane dissolved
in dry toluene) under protective nitrogen atmosphere.The chemically
patterned surfaces used for the simultaneous immobilization of two
proteins were prepared following the same procedure with two differences:
first, a master template with lithographically formed trenches was
used to produce the PS replica; second, during the first CVD step
a 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane (APTES) SAM was assembled onto the
exposed areas of a glass substrate followed by a second CVD step filling
in the gaps with a MPTMS contrasting monolayer.
Protein Immobilization
LHCII-Only
Nanoarrays
The MPTMS/fluorosilane nanopatterned
surfaces were incubated with 1 mM solution of sulfosuccinimidyl 4-(N-maleimidomethyl)cyclohexane-1-carboxylate (sulfo-SMCC)
in PBS, pH 7.4, for 40 min, leading to a coupling reaction between
the maleimide groups of the sulfo-SMCC and the sulfhydryl groups on
the patterned surfaces and leaving the active N-hydroxysuccinimide
ester (NHS ester) groups of the cross-linker molecule exposed. After
extensive washing with PBS buffer, the modified surfaces were incubated
with 85 nM solution of LHCII in nitrogen-sparged buffer [PBS, pH 7.4,
with 0.03% n-dodecyl β-d-maltoside
(β-DDM)] for 5 min at room temperature in the dark. After another
extensive wash step with nitrogen-sparged buffer, the samples were
mounted for either AFM or fluorescence microscopy imaging.
Mixed
LHCII/EGFP Nanoarrays
The APTES/MPTMS nanopatterned
surfaces were incubated with a 1 mM solution of sulfo-SMCC in PBS,
pH 7.4, for 40 min converting the sulfhydryl groups of the MPTMS regions
on the surface into active N-hydroxysuccinimide ester
(NHS ester) groups and, at the same time, converting the amine functional
groups of the APTES regions to maleimide groups. After a wash with
PBS buffer, the modified surfaces were incubated with mixed LHCII/EGFP
solution in nitrogen-sparged buffer (PBS, pH 7.4, with 0.03% β-DDM).
The total protein concentration was approximately 25 nM (LHCII:EGFP
ratio of 10:1) and the incubation time was 40 min at room temperature
in the dark. After an extensive wash with nitrogen-sparged buffer,
the samples were mounted for fluorescence microscopy imaging.
Atomic Force Microscopy Characterization
The AFM data
were collected on a Multimode 8 instrument equipped with a 15 μm
scanner (E-scanner) coupled to a NanoScope V controller (Bruker).
NanoScope software (v8.15, Bruker) was used for data collection, and
Gwyddion (v2.32, open source software covered by GNU general public
license, www.gwyddion.net) and OriginPro (v8.5.1, OriginLab
Corp.) software packages were used for data processing and analysis.
The measurements of the patterned SAMs were performed in tapping mode
in air at ambient conditions by use of AC160TS probes (Olympus) with
a nominal spring constant of approximately 40 N·m–1 and a nominal resonant frequency of around 300 kHz.The chemically
patterned surfaces with the immobilized protein molecules on them
were imaged in peak force tapping mode at nearly physiological conditions
in buffer (PBS, pH 7.4), at room temperature by use of BL-AC40TS probes
(Olympus). In this case, the Z-modulation amplitude
was adjusted to values in the range 20–24 nm, while the Z-modulation frequency was 2 kHz and the contact tip-sample
force was kept in the range 80–100 pN.
Fluorescence Measurements
The glass substrate (coverslip)
with the protein nanoarray was mounted on a standard microscope slide,
nanopatterned side facing the slide, with a droplet (20 μL)
of nitrogen-sparged buffer (PBS, pH 7.4, with or without 0.03% β-DDM)
and was sealed with DPX mountant (Sigma–Aldrich).Fluorescence
emission properties of the LHCII nanoarays were measured on a home-built
inverted optical microscope (based on AxioObserverA1m, Zeiss) equipped
with a spectrometer (Acton 150, Princeton Instruments) and an electron-multiplying
charge-coupled device (EMCCD) camera (ProEM 512, Princeton Instruments).
Excitation source was from a collimated light-emitting diode (LED)
light source (M470L2,Thorlabs), and the resulting fluorescence emission
was detected through the spectrometer onto the EMCCD camera.During fluorescence imaging and spectral measurements, the excitation
light was filtered by a 470/40 nm bandpass filter, then reflected
by either 605 or 488 nm dichroic beamsplitter to the sample, and the
fluorescence emission from the sample was filtered by either 593 or
500 nm long-pass filters. The spectra were captured with a slit width
of 800 μm and a 150 line·mm–1 grating
at a central wavelength of either 680 or 540 nm in the spectrometer.
Each fluorescence image and the spectra were average of 10 frames
with 0.1 s exposure time with an electron multiplication gain of 90.Time-lapsed fluorescence measurements were conducted in a home-built
flow cell (with a volume of approximately 100 μL) made of commercial
optical adhesive (NOA 81, Norland Corp.), which was mounted on a standard
microscope slide. The glass coverslip with linear LHCII nanopatterns
was attached and sealed within the flow cell by using DPX microscopy
resin (Sigma–Aldrich). Initially, the flow cell was flushed
with imaging buffer supplied with 0.03% β-DDM, and the data
acquisition started at a rate of approximately 0.2 image·s–1 (each image was an average of 8 frames with 0.08
s exposure). Then the flow cell was flushed with approximately 500
μL of imaging buffer without detergent at a flow rate of 1.5
mL·min–1. Finally, another 500 μL of
imaging buffer with detergent was injected into the flow cell while
data were continuously acquired. The average fluorescence intensity
of the LHCII complexes for each image was calculated as an average
from 10 pixels (each pixel belonging to a line of LHCII). The intensity
of the same set of pixels was measured for each one of 12 images acquired
in a time sequence, and the variation of the average fluorescence
intensity was plotted against the time (or consecutive frame number).
Time-Resolved
Measurements
For time-resolved measurements,
a supercontinuum white light laser, (SC 480-10, Fianium) with a repetition
rate of 80 MHz was used as a light source and the excitation light
was cleaned up by additional 470/40 nm band-pass filter. The laser
beam was focused on the sample surface illuminating a diffraction
limited spot. The modulation of the laser was synchronized with a
time-correlated single-photon counting (TCSPC) module (SPC-150, Becker
& Hickl) for fluorescence lifetime measurements. Fluorescence
lifetimes were recorded by parking the focused laser spot over one
of the LHCII nanolines and selecting a central wavelength by use of
the monochromator. Then the signal from the illuminated spot on the
sample surface was sent to a photomultiplier tube (PMT) detector.
The secondary slit in front of the PMT allows further spectral narrowing
of the measured signal; typically we were able to select ±15
nm around the central wavelength of 680 nm selected by the monochromator.
SPCM software (Becker & Hickl) was used for data acquisition,
and OriginPro was used for data analysis and fitting. During the time-resolved
measurements, the pulse energy was approximately 0.05 pJ, resulting
in approximately 14 photons·pulse–1·trimer–1.
Time-Resolved Measurements on Homogeneous
LHCII Monolayers
Time-correlated single photon counting measurements
were performed
by use of a FluoTime 200 ps fluorometer (PicoQuant). Fluorescence
lifetime decay kinetics were measured on LHCII monolayers with excitation
provided by a 470 nm laser diode at a 10 MHz repetition rate. These
settings were carefully chosen to be far below the onset of singlet–singlet
exciton annihilation (<0.1 pJ). Fluorescence was detected at 680
nm (isolated LHCII) with a 1 nm slit width. The instrument response
function was ∼50 ps.
Results and Discussion
Nanolithography
and Self-Assembly of Organosilane Molecules
on Oxide Surfaces
The simple lithography process, schematically
represented in Figure 1, eliminates the need
for high temperature and high pressure during the replication step
as well as the residual-layer removal step (breakthrough reactive
ion etching) in order to expose the clean substrate under the masking
polymer layer (required steps in all NIL variants).[43−47] Two different types of master templates were used
in this work, one with protruding ridges and one with sunken trenches,
produced by a standard electron beam lithographic process onto silicon
wafers (see Experimental Section).
Figure 1
Schematic representation
of the lithographic process. The master
template (A) is spin-coated (B) with a thin layer of polystyrene (PS),
resulting in a sandwich structure where the PS layer replicates the
topography of the master (C). The PS layer is then lifted from the
master template in a water bath (D) and can be inverted for inspection
(E). Then the PS film can be deposited on a clean flat substrate of
glass or silicon (F, G), onto which an organosilane SAM is deposited
in vapor phase (H). Subsequently, the masking PS layer is lifted off
the substrate (I) and the sample is inspected by AFM (J), followed
by deposition of a second, contrasting organosilane SAM (K). The resulting
chemically nanopatterned surface (L) is used for selective immobilization
of light harvesting antenna complexes (M).
Schematic representation
of the lithographic process. The master
template (A) is spin-coated (B) with a thin layer of polystyrene (PS),
resulting in a sandwich structure where the PS layer replicates the
topography of the master (C). The PS layer is then lifted from the
master template in a water bath (D) and can be inverted for inspection
(E). Then the PS film can be deposited on a clean flat substrate of
glass or silicon (F, G), onto which an organosilane SAM is deposited
in vapor phase (H). Subsequently, the masking PS layer is lifted off
the substrate (I) and the sample is inspected by AFM (J), followed
by deposition of a second, contrasting organosilane SAM (K). The resulting
chemically nanopatterned surface (L) is used for selective immobilization
of light harvesting antenna complexes (M).After spin-coating (Figure 1B) a thin
polystyrene
(PS) layer onto either of the master templates (shown in Figure 2A,B), the PS film was floated off in a water bath,
(Figure 1D), resulting in a free-standing polymer
film with a relief replica of the master template features.
Figure 2
AFM topographic
images of the two different master templates used
in this work: ridges with a width of approximately 80 nm (A) and approximately
350 nm wide trenches (B). The corresponding PS replicas for panels
A and B after being inverted for inspection by AFM are shown in panels
C and D, respectively. Scale bars in all panels represent 2 μm.
AFM topographic
images of the two different master templates used
in this work: ridges with a width of approximately 80 nm (A) and approximately
350 nm wide trenches (B). The corresponding PS replicas for panels
A and B after being inverted for inspection by AFM are shown in panels
C and D, respectively. Scale bars in all panels represent 2 μm.Inversion of this film (Figure 1E) exposes
the surface previously in contact with the master template for inspection
by atomic force microscopy (AFM) (Figure 2C,D).
The AFM images in Figure 2 show that the PS
films replicate the master template features, resulting in trenches
with an average width of 82 nm with a 4 μm period (Figure 2C) or 350 nm wide ridges with a 2 μm period
(Figure 2D) depending on the master templates
used. The high fidelity of the imprinting procedure replicates the
variable width of the channels together with some larger defects (Figure 2C). The free-standing PS film can be transferred
(floated on) to a clean flat substrate such as a piranha-cleaned glass
coverslip or a silicon (Si) wafer in the same orientation that was
released from the master template (Figure 1F). In making contact with the flat substrate (Figure 1G), without any additional steps (e.g., etching), the polymer
film leaves exposed regions of the substrate, onto which organosilane
self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) can be formed by a chemical vapor
deposition (CVD) process (Figure 1H). The sample
is placed into a desiccator together with 30 μL of 3-mercaptopropyltrimethoxysilane
(MPTMS) and left overnight to allow formation of a SAM on the exposed
parts of the substrate (Figure 1H). At this
point the masking PS film can be removed from the substrate, again
by floating it off, and can be reused for patterning of a fresh substrate
up to 5 times without any degradation of the pattern produced. The
use of a solventless CVD process is critical, as solvents used in
the conventional solution-based SAM deposition would dissolve the
masking PS thin film. It is worth noting that the AFM topographic
images of the PS replica would give a better representation of the
expected geometry of the patterned SAMs compared to the AFM topographic
images of the actual master templates. Due to the convolution between
the AFM probe shape and the steep walls of the relatively high-aspect
ratio template features, the AFM would overestimate the ridge width
and would underestimate the trench width at their bases.The
AFM images of the formed SAM patterns (Figure 3A,B) reveal well-defined lines of MPTMS molecules with a height
of 6.5 Å (Figure 3C,D), which is close
to the theoretical value of the length of the MPTMS molecule of 7.7
Å,[48] while the rest of the surface
remains clean, as shown by the random pattern of straight lines resulting
from the mechanical polishing of the Si wafer, seen in the backgrounds
of Figure 3A,B. The widths of 82 and 380 nm
of the SAM lines in Figure 3A,B correspond
very well to the width of the features on the PS replicas.
Figure 3
AFM topographic
images of patterned MPTMS monolayers on a Si substrate
formed with two different PS replica films: MPTMS monolayer with 380
nm gaps in it (A) and 82 nm wide lines of MPTMS (B). The corresponding
cross-section profiles along the dashed lines are shown in panels
C and D, respectively. Scale bars represent 2 μm.
AFM topographic
images of patterned MPTMS monolayers on a Si substrate
formed with two different PS replica films: MPTMS monolayer with 380
nm gaps in it (A) and 82 nm wide lines of MPTMS (B). The corresponding
cross-section profiles along the dashed lines are shown in panels
C and D, respectively. Scale bars represent 2 μm.The substrate can be further converted to a fully
chemically patterned
surface either in solution or again in a vapor phase (Figure 1K) by assembling a second, contrasting organosilane
SAM on the newly exposed (clean) parts of the substrate.
Immobilization
of Functional Photosynthetic Antenna Complexes
Photoactive
biological systems are typically studied by optical
techniques, making opaque substrates such as Si wafers problematic
because of their inability to transmit light and their tendency to
quench the fluorescence of the sample. Glass is a much more convenient
substrate for investigation of biological systems, and for that reason
we prepared chemically nanopatterned glass substrates using the method
described above. Figure 4A shows an AFM topographic
image of 70 nm wide lines of MPTMS formed onto a glass substrate with
a height of approximately 7 Å, corresponding to the thickness
of a monolayer. Next, a contrasting 1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorooctyltriethoxysilane
(fluorosilane) SAM was assembled in order to fill in the gaps between
the MPTMS nanolines. Then a small cross-linker molecule, sulfosuccinimidyl
4-(N-maleimidomethyl)cyclohexane-1-carboxylate (sulfo-SMCC),
was used to covalently link the lysine residues of LHCII, which are
particularly enriched on the N-terminal (chloroplast stroma-facing)
side of the complex, to the sulfhydryl groups of the linear nanopattern
(see Experimental Section).The resulting linear
protein nanoarrays of LHCII were characterized in situ by AFM and
by time-resolved fluorescence microscopy.
Figure 4
AFM topographic images
of 70 nm wide linear patterns on a glass
substrate after MPTMS monolayer assembly (A) and after immobilization
of the LHCII complexes (B). The inset in panel B shows one of the
lines with immobilized LHCII complexes in greater detail. The corresponding
cross sections of the MPTMS lines (C) and a line with LHCII attached
(D) give heights of about 0.7 and 5.8 nm, respectively. The average
width of the lines in both cases is about 70 nm with a narrower part
with a width down to 58 nm. The scale bars represent 2 μm.
AFM topographic images
of 70 nm wide linear patterns on a glass
substrate after MPTMS monolayer assembly (A) and after immobilization
of the LHCII complexes (B). The inset in panel B shows one of the
lines with immobilized LHCII complexes in greater detail. The corresponding
cross sections of the MPTMS lines (C) and a line with LHCII attached
(D) give heights of about 0.7 and 5.8 nm, respectively. The average
width of the lines in both cases is about 70 nm with a narrower part
with a width down to 58 nm. The scale bars represent 2 μm.The AFM topographs revealed that
the LHCII proteins are immobilized
directly over the MPTMS monolayer with very little nonspecific attachment
to the fluorosilane areas of the surfaces. The average height of the
protein lines was approximately 5.8 nm, in good agreement with the
6 nm height of the LHCII trimers.[15,16] The average
width of the protein lines is approximately 70 nm with a line width
down to 58 nm at full width at half-maximum (fwhm) measured across
the straight defect-free parts of the linear pattern (Figure 4B,D). The AFM data also suggest very close packing
of the LHCII trimers in the linear arrays since the height of the
lines is very uniform with no observable gaps or interruptions.In order to confirm the localization and the preserved functionality
of the LHCII complexes attached along the nanopatterned lines, the
samples were characterized in a home-built fluorescence microscope
capable of spectral and time-resolved data acquisition. The ability
of LHCII to switch between highly and weakly fluorescent states allows
control of energy transfer to the RCs where photochemistry takes place.
It has been shown that this switching can be replicated with bulk
LHCII complexes in vitro by manipulating detergent concentration and
pH.[18−21] We were able to observe reversible changes in the fluorescent emission
of the immobilized LHCII complexes in real time by mounting the sample
with the nanopatterned LHCII in a home-built flow cell (see Experimental Section) and acquiring time-lapsed
fluorescence data, shown in Figure 5, while
varying the concentration of n-dodecyl β-d-maltoside (β-DDM) detergent in the imaging buffer (as
described in the Experimental Section). The
emission intensity of the LHCII nanolines in the presence of β-DDM
detergent (Figure 5D, maroon trace) is approximately
2.9 times higher compared to the emission intensity of the LHCII nanoline
in the absence of β-DDM (Figure 5D, green
trace). The fwhm of the peaks in both cases is approximately 265 nm
(diffraction-limited). Figure 5E shows the
variation of average intensity from the LHCII complexes depending
on the detergent concentration (with time) in the imaging buffer.
Figure 5
LHCII
linear nanopattern on a glass substrate imaged in the presence
of (A, C) 0.03% β-DDM and (B) in its absence. The corresponding
intensity profiles, in panel D, were obtained along the dashed lines
in panels A and B. The images were acquired at the same camera settings
and are represented with identical brightness and contrast settings.
(E) Average fluorescence intensity dependence on time while detergent
concentration was varied with time. The time intervals when detergent
was present (I and III) or absent (II) in the flow cell are shown
in green and pink, respectively. Error bars represent the standard
deviation from the average of 10 data points.
LHCII
linear nanopattern on a glass substrate imaged in the presence
of (A, C) 0.03% β-DDM and (B) in its absence. The corresponding
intensity profiles, in panel D, were obtained along the dashed lines
in panels A and B. The images were acquired at the same camera settings
and are represented with identical brightness and contrast settings.
(E) Average fluorescence intensity dependence on time while detergent
concentration was varied with time. The time intervals when detergent
was present (I and III) or absent (II) in the flow cell are shown
in green and pink, respectively. Error bars represent the standard
deviation from the average of 10 data points.When detergent-containing buffer was flushed out of the flow
cell
and replaced by detergent-free buffer, a significant, ∼3-fold
drop decrease (from 1300 to approximately 400 au) of the average fluorescence
intensity of the LHCII complexes was observed. When the detergent
concentration in the imaging buffer was restored, the average fluorescence
intensity increased to approximately 1200 au. It is worth noting that
the bright and dark regions along the lines of LHCII, clearly visible
in the fluorescence images, are the consequence of the nonuniform
width of the LHCII lines: the wider part of the lines appear brighter
due to the larger number of light-emitting LHCII molecules “per
unit length” of the nanoline.In order to further investigate
the transition between the highly
fluorescent and the weakly fluorescent state of the immobilized molecules,
we recorded the emission spectra and the fluorescence lifetime of
70 nm lines of LHCII complexes either in the presence of 0.03% β-DDM
detergent or in its absence. Figure 6A shows
fluorescence image acquired on a sample of LHCII immobilized on nanopatterned
glass substrate with line widths of approximately 70 nm. A region
of interest (ROI) on the sample was defined by closing the entrance
slit on the monochromator and binning the CCD detector rows accordingly
(Figure 6A). The signal was sent from the defined
ROI to a diffraction grating within the monochromator and spread around
a chosen central wavelength onto the CCD detector, thus allowing the
acquisition of an emission spectrum (Figure 6D).
Figure 6
LHCII linear nanopattern on a glass substrate, with an intensity
scale bar (A) and the in situ emission spectra acquired over two different
regions of interest; the emission spectrum for LHCII complexes in
solution is also included as a control (dashed line) (B). Fluorescence
lifetime decay curves were measured for nanopatterned LHCII complexes
(C), in the presence of detergent (orange data) and in its absence
(dark cyan data), and for a complete monolayer of LHCII (D), in the
presence of detergent (maroon data) and in its absence (cyan data),
respectively. The instrument response functions (IRF) are shown in
gray for both measurements.
LHCII linear nanopattern on a glass substrate, with an intensity
scale bar (A) and the in situ emission spectra acquired over two different
regions of interest; the emission spectrum for LHCII complexes in
solution is also included as a control (dashed line) (B). Fluorescence
lifetime decay curves were measured for nanopatterned LHCII complexes
(C), in the presence of detergent (orange data) and in its absence
(dark cyan data), and for a complete monolayer of LHCII (D), in the
presence of detergent (maroon data) and in its absence (cyan data),
respectively. The instrument response functions (IRF) are shown in
gray for both measurements.The spectrum acquired over one of the 70 nm lines has a maximum
at 682 nm and also displays a shoulder at around 730 nm, consistent
with the spectrum of LHCII in aqueous solution (shown for comparison
in Figure 6B). In addition, 470 nm excitation
light predominantly excites chlorophyll b and carotenoids
(chlorophyll a absorbance maximum is at 430 nm),
while the observed fluorescence emission maximum is at 682 nm (chlorophyll a emission), which is evidence for internal energy transfer
from chlorophyll b to chlorophyll a. This is a clear indicator that immobilizing LHCII complexes on
the substrate preserves their structural and functional integrity.
The emission spectrum of a control ROI, defined within the gap between
two LHCII lines, showed only the background baseline with no prominent
peaks.Figure 6C shows fluorescence lifetime
decays
recorded over one of the LHCII lines in imaging buffer supplied with
detergent (0.03% β-DDM; orange data), and in imaging buffer
without detergent (dark cyan data). The best fit of the decay curves
recorded in the presence of detergent identified two exponential components
with lifetimes of 3.2 ns (64%) and 0.52 ns (36%), giving an average
(amplitude-weighted) lifetime of approximately 2.24 ns. The absence
of detergent resulted in much faster fluorescence decay with an average
(amplitude-weighted) lifetime of approximately 0.4 ns (99% for the
0.38 ns component and 1.1% for the 2.1 ns component). This dramatic
reduction of the lifetime is consistent with previous studies, which
indicated that detergent removal shifts the equilibrium between the
number of strong and weak emitters, leading to a decrease in the fluorescence
emission and fluorescence lifetime of the population of LHCII complexes.[18−21] Monolayers of LHCII complexes, prepared by protein immobilization
onto nonpatterned MPTMS SAMs (on glass surfaces), were used for comparative
fluorescence lifetime measurements (again with and without detergent
present in the buffer) in a commercial instrument (Figure 6D). The best fit of the data gave average (amplitude-weighted)
lifetime values of approximately 2.23 ns in the presence of detergent
and 0.35 ns for the quenched state (no detergent present), which are
in very good agreement with the values obtained for the nanopatterned
LHCII samples. In summary, both the internal energy transfer from
chlorophyll b to chlorophyll a and
the capacity of the LHCII complex to reversibly switch between highly
and weakly fluorescent states have been retained following nanopatterning
and immobilization on the glass substrate. Given that the LHCII complexes
are covalently attached, and therefore immobilized, to the glass substrate,we
can discount the possibility that this switchable quenching behavior
is a consequence of altering the aggregation state of the complexes.
Simultaneous Immobilization of Two Photoactive Proteins
Integration of the LHCII into biohybrid light-harvesting constructs
requires retention of the ability of these antenna complexes to transfer
absorbed excitation energy to their neighbors and, most importantly,
to photochemical RCs. This, in turn, requires patterned multicomponent
LHC-RC nanoarrays.In order to demonstrate the versatility of
the nanopatterning method proposed here and its usefulness in sorting
and controlling the nanoscale positioning of two different proteins,
we simultaneously immobilized two different photoactive proteins,
LHCII and an enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP), onto a chemically
patterned glass surface. Only a few patterning methods, mainly based
on the click-chemistry approach, are suitable for the realization
of multicomponent patterns.[49−51]To fabricate the two-protein samples,
the nanopatterned glass surfaces were prepared in a slightly different
way: a PS replica with 350–380 nm wide trenches (Figure 2D), produced with the master template in Figure 2B, was used to pattern either fluorosilane or 3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane
(APTES) SAMs during the first functionalization step (Figure 1H). In the second CVD step (Figure 1K), these patterns were complemented with a MPTMS monolayer,
resulting in alternating linear arrays of either fluorinated (broad)
lines and sulfhydryl (narrow) lines or amine (broad) lines and sulfhydryl
(narrow) lines. Then the nanopatterned surfaces were incubated with
sulfosuccinimidyl 4-(N-maleimidomethyl)cyclohexane-1-carboxylate
(sulfo-SMCC) for 40 min at pH 7.4. This additional functionalization
step converts the sulfhydryl groups into active N-hydroxysuccinimide ester (NHS ester) groups and, on the second type
of sample, simultaneously converts the amine functional groups to
maleimide groups. Both maleimide–sulfhydryl and NHS ester–amine
reactions are well understood and have attractive characteristics
such as high selectivity, high yield, fast reaction in aqueous phase
at room temperature, and biocompatibility.[52] Moreover, the two reactions are highly orthogonal to each other
and can be carried out simultaneously with a minimum amount of nonspecific
immobilization. In the last step, the first type of nanopatterned
glass surface was incubated with LHCII solution (see Experimental Section) in order to produce LHCII-only nanopattern;
the second type of patterned surface was incubated with a mixed solution
of LHCII and N-succinimidyl S-acetylthiopropionate
(SATP) -functionalized EGFP (see Experimental Section) in order to produce a mixed LHCII/EGFP nanopattern.Fluorescence image of
LHCII-only linear pattern (A) and of mixed
LHCII (red)/EGFP (green) linear pattern (B). The emission spectra
(C), recorded over the two different regions of interest marked in
panel B, show predominantly LHCII emission for region 1 and EGFP emission
for region 2.Figure 7 panels A and B show fluorescence
images acquired on LHCII-only and mixed LHCII/EGFP samples, respectively.
The results clearly show that the bifunctionalized nanopatterned surface
sorted the mixture of two proteins according to their functional groups:
the LHCII complexes with available lysine residues bound predominantly
to the NHS ester regions on the surface, while the SATP-functionalized
EGFP bound predominantly to the maleimide regions. The selectivity
of the surface immobilization was confirmed by fluorescence spectroscopy
(Figure 7C). Emission spectra recorded over
the LHCII and EGFP domains of the patterns confirmed the site specificity
of the immobilization process and show that this method for patterning
two types of protein has further potential. One application includes
fabricating combinations of antenna and RCs for investigating energy
migration and trapping in novel 2D arrangements not found in native
or engineered photosynthetic organisms.
Figure 7
Fluorescence image of
LHCII-only linear pattern (A) and of mixed
LHCII (red)/EGFP (green) linear pattern (B). The emission spectra
(C), recorded over the two different regions of interest marked in
panel B, show predominantly LHCII emission for region 1 and EGFP emission
for region 2.
Conclusion
In
conclusion, LHCII was successfully immobilized onto a chemically
patterned glass surface. Site-specific immobilization was confirmed
by fluorescence emission spectroscopy, and detergent-induced switching
between fluorescent and quenched states verified the functionality
of these immobilized antenna complexes. In addition a second protein,
EGFP, was immobilized onto LHCII-free areas of the chemically patterned
surfaces by very simple surface chemistry that allows simultaneous
selective immobilization and therefore sorting of the two types of
protein molecules on the surface. During the one-pot functionalization,
both surface groups recognized their respective functionalities on
the different protein molecules, and thus the surface was selectively
tagged by the proteins according to the predesigned chemical pattern.
Authors: Nicholas P Reynolds; Stefan Janusz; Maryana Escalante-Marun; John Timney; Robert E Ducker; John D Olsen; Cees Otto; Vinod Subramaniam; Graham J Leggett; C Neil Hunter Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2007-11-07 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Maryana Escalante; Pascale Maury; Christiaan M Bruinink; Kees van der Werf; John D Olsen; John A Timney; Jurriaan Huskens; C Neil Hunter; Vinod Subramaniam; Cees Otto Journal: Nanotechnology Date: 2007-12-06 Impact factor: 3.874
Authors: Stefan Bode; Claudia C Quentmeier; Pen-Nan Liao; Nour Hafi; Tiago Barros; Laura Wilk; Florian Bittner; Peter J Walla Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2009-07-15 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Yuliya Miloslavina; Antje Wehner; Petar H Lambrev; Emilie Wientjes; Michael Reus; Gyozo Garab; Roberta Croce; Alfred R Holzwarth Journal: FEBS Lett Date: 2008-10-01 Impact factor: 4.124
Authors: Samson Patole; Cvetelin Vasilev; Osama El-Zubir; Lin Wang; Matthew P Johnson; Ashley J Cadby; Graham J Leggett; C Neil Hunter Journal: Interface Focus Date: 2015-08-06 Impact factor: 3.906
Authors: Osama El Zubir; Sijing Xia; Robert E Ducker; Lin Wang; Nic Mullin; Michaël L Cartron; Ashley J Cadby; Jamie K Hobbs; C Neil Hunter; Graham J Leggett Journal: Langmuir Date: 2017-06-07 Impact factor: 3.882
Authors: David J K Swainsbury; Elizabeth C Martin; Cvetelin Vasilev; Pamela S Parkes-Loach; Paul A Loach; C Neil Hunter Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg Date: 2017-08-18 Impact factor: 3.991
Authors: Peter G Adams; Cvetelin Vasilev; C Neil Hunter; Matthew P Johnson Journal: Biochim Biophys Acta Bioenerg Date: 2018-06-19 Impact factor: 3.991
Authors: Sijing Xia; Michaël Cartron; James Morby; Donald A Bryant; C Neil Hunter; Graham J Leggett Journal: Langmuir Date: 2016-02-10 Impact factor: 3.882
Authors: Samuel F H Barnett; Andrew Hitchcock; Amit K Mandal; Cvetelin Vasilev; Jonathan M Yuen; James Morby; Amanda A Brindley; Dariusz M Niedzwiedzki; Donald A Bryant; Ashley J Cadby; Dewey Holten; C Neil Hunter Journal: Sci Rep Date: 2017-12-01 Impact factor: 4.379