Anna E P Schibel1, Eric N Ervin. 1. Electronic BioSciences, 421 Wakara Way, Suite 203, Salt Lake City, Utah 84108, United States.
Abstract
Ion current rectification (ICR), defined as an increase in ion conduction at a given polarity and a decrease in ion conduction for the same voltage at the opposite polarity, i.e., a deviation from a linear ohmic response, occurs in conical shaped pores due to the voltage dependent solution conductivity within the aperture. The degree to which the ionic current rectifies is a function of the size and surface charge of the nanopore, with smaller and more highly charged pores exhibiting greater degrees of rectification. The ICR phenomenon has previously been exploited for biosensing applications, where the level of ICR for a nanopore functionalized with an analyte-specific binding molecule (e.g., an antibody, biotin, etc.) changes upon binding its target analyte (e.g., an antigen, streptavidin, etc.) due to a resulting change in the size and/or charge of the aperture. While this type of detection measurement is typically qualitative, for the first time, we demonstrate that the rate at which the nanopore ICR response changes is dependent on the concentration of the target analyte introduced. Utilizing a glass nanopore membrane (GNM) internally coated with a monoclonal antibody specific to the cleaved form of synaptosomal-associated protein 25 (cSNAP-25), creating the antibody-modified glass nanopore membrane (AMGNM), we demonstrate a correlation between the rate of ICR change and the concentration of introduced cSNAP-25, over a range of 500 nM-100 μM. The methodology presented here significantly expands the applications of nanopore ICR biosensing measurements and demonstrates that these measurements can be quantitative in nature.
Ion current rectification (ICR), defined as an increase in ion conduction at a given polarity and a decrease in ion conduction for the same voltage at the opposite polarity, i.e., a deviation from a linear ohmic response, occurs in conical shaped pores due to the voltage dependent solution conductivity within the aperture. The degree to which the ionic current rectifies is a function of the size and surface charge of the nanopore, with smaller and more highly charged pores exhibiting greater degrees of rectification. The ICR phenomenon has previously been exploited for biosensing applications, where the level of ICR for a nanopore functionalized with an analyte-specific binding molecule (e.g., an antibody, biotin, etc.) changes upon binding its target analyte (e.g., an antigen, streptavidin, etc.) due to a resulting change in the size and/or charge of the aperture. While this type of detection measurement is typically qualitative, for the first time, we demonstrate that the rate at which the nanopore ICR response changes is dependent on the concentration of the target analyte introduced. Utilizing a glass nanopore membrane (GNM) internally coated with a monoclonal antibody specific to the cleaved form of synaptosomal-associated protein 25 (cSNAP-25), creating the antibody-modified glass nanopore membrane (AMGNM), we demonstrate a correlation between the rate of ICR change and the concentration of introduced cSNAP-25, over a range of 500 nM-100 μM. The methodology presented here significantly expands the applications of nanopore ICR biosensing measurements and demonstrates that these measurements can be quantitative in nature.
Ion current rectification
(ICR) is observed as an asymmetric current–voltage
response, defined by a larger current amplitude at one voltage polarity
relative to a reduced current amplitude for the same voltage bias
at the opposite polarity, and occurs in conical shaped pores due to
the voltage dependent solution conductivity within the aperture.[1] This asymmetric current response is influenced
by the size of the aperture, the surface charge, and the Debye length
(which is inversely proportional to the ionic strength of the electrolyte
solution within the aperture).[2−5] A conical pore with a charged surface will exhibit
current rectification based on the interaction of the surface charges
at the aperture with ions in solution,[1−7] resulting in ion selective transport. For example, in the case of
a negatively charged pore, when a positive voltage is applied (relative
to the nanopore interior), Na+ ions will freely migrate
from the pore exterior to the interior and Cl– ions
will migrate from the pore interior to the exterior. However, because
of electrostatic repulsion between the negatively charged aperture
and Cl– ions, Cl– transport is
hindered, resulting in the accumulation of Cl– ions
within the pore aperture and an increase in conductivity localized
at the nanopore aperture relative to the bulk solution. Conversely,
when a negative voltage is applied (relative to the nanopore interior),
Na+ ions freely migrate from the pore interior to the exterior
while Cl– ions are electrostatically impeded from
entering the pore, resulting in Cl– ion depletion
within the aperture and a decrease in conductivity relative to the
bulk solution. In the case of a positively charged pore, the opposite
ICR response would occur; Cl– ions would be free
migrate through the aperture while Na+ ion transport would
be hindered, causing Na+ ions to be depleted within the
aperture at positive voltages and accumulated at negative voltages,
as the voltage is applied relative to the nanopore interior. The work
reported herein describes how to use this ICR phenomenon for concentration
dependent analyte detection.The ICR response of a nanopore
can be used to detect a molecule
of interest using a strategy referred to here as an ICR biosensing
measurement. In this approach, a conical, solid-state nanopore is
coated with an analyte-specific binding molecule (e.g., antibodies,
biotin, etc.), and the characteristic ICR response of the nanopore
is measured before and after analyte molecules (e.g., antigen, streptavidin,
etc.) in solution bind to and coat the functionalized aperture,[8,9] with the change in response indicating the presence of the analyte
of interest. Because this ICR response is surface sensitive, it can
be used to detect any analyte of interest that changes the overall
size and/or charge of the aperture upon binding and for which there
is an analyte-specific binding molecule that can be attached to the
internal surface of the nanopore.In 2005, Siwy et al. first
demonstrated that a target analyte could
be detected by its influence on the ICR response of a pore functionalized
with a molecular-recognition agent.[8] In
their studies, a single conical-shaped Au-plated poly(ethylene terephthalate)
(PET) nanopore was functionalized with biotin, protein-G, or an antibody
specific to ricin, which in turn selectively bound streptavidin, immunoglobulin,
or ricin, respectively. The current as a function of voltage response
of their functionalized pore was then measured before and after introducing
the target analyte. The introduction of the target analyte produced
a measurable difference in ICR, and further, only the analyte to which
the binding molecule was specific induced an ICR change, indicating
that the target had indeed been bound by the nanopore and thus detected.
In 2008, Wang et al. presented the ability to characterize the concentration
of the drug molecule Hoechst 33258 as it adsorbed to the surface of
a conical pore based on the absolute ICR change.[10] In this work a hydrophobic, negatively charged pore contained
in a Kapton membrane was exposed to the hydrophobic, cationic drug
molecule, Hoechst 33258. As the drug molecule nonspecifically adsorbed
to the surface, a difference in ICR was observed, where higher concentrations
of the drug molecule yielded larger amplitude differences in ICR.
This work demonstrated that the magnitude of the ICR change, i.e.,
how much the ICR changes before and after antigen binding, could be
correlated to the concentration of introduced antigen, although in
a highly nonspecific manner. In 2009, Vlassiouk et al. demonstrated
ICR-based detection of γ-d-glutamic acid (γDPGA)
using conical PET pores chemically functionalized with an antibody
specific to γDPGA.[9] Analyte-specific
detection via the ICR biosensing measurement has also been reported
by Umehara et al., where in 2009 they utilized quartz nanopipettes
coated with biotin and IgG antibodies (specific to cancer biomarker
proteins interleukin-10 (IL-10) and vascular endothelial growth factor
(VEGF)) to detect streptavidin, and IL-10 and VEFG, respectively.[11] In 2010, Ali et al. demonstrated biospecific
detection of streptavidin using biotin-functionalized polyimide pores[12] and also reported the ability functionalize
the channel with peptide nucleic acid probes to detect the binding
of complementary DNA strands.[13] In 2014,
Tawari et al. demonstrated concentration dependent detection cytochrome c through its specific interaction with a quartz nanopippette
coated with humanneuroglobin.[14] In all
of these studies, the authors demonstrated that a target molecule
binding to the aperture of a single nanopore, either specifically
or nonspecifically, resulted in a measurable change in ICR. In the
present work, we demonstrate the ability to correlate the concentration
of the target analyte to the rate at which the ICR changes upon the
binding of a target analyte.Here, a glass nanopore membrane
(GNM), which is a single conical-shaped
nanopore contained within a thin glass membrane and has been previously
thoroughly reported on,[15−21] was coated with a monoclonal antibody specific to the cleaved form
of synaptosomal-associated protein 25 (cSNAP-25), in order to generate
an antibody-modified GNM (AMGNM). The AMGNM is used to selectively
bind its target antigen based on the antigen–antibody binding
reaction rather than nonspecific surface interactions, under idealized
solution conditions (i.e., in aqueous buffered electrolyte). These
AMGNMs were used to detect various concentrations of cSNAP-25, ranging
from 500 nM to 100 μM, via the ICR biosensing measurement. In
these experiments, the initial ICR of the AMGNM in the absence of
the antigen was measured, after which the cSNAP-25 antigen was added
to solution and the change in ICR was characterized at regular time
intervals, until the rectification level stabilized and 100% AMGNM
Saturation was achieved, as depicted in Figure 1.
Figure 1
(A) Schematic drawing depicting the binding reaction of a target
antigen within the aperture of an antibody modified glass nanopore
membrane (AMGNM). (B) Schematic representation of the associated binding
curve for the time-dependent attachment of an antigen within the AMGNM
aperture.
(A) Schematic drawing depicting the binding reaction of a target
antigen within the aperture of an antibody modified glass nanopore
membrane (AMGNM). (B) Schematic representation of the associated binding
curve for the time-dependent attachment of an antigen within the AMGNM
aperture.The detection and quantification
of cSNAP-25, which is the cleavage
product of botulinum type A (BoNT/A),[22−25] is of particular interest in
the field of microbial toxins and neurophysiology due to a growing
number of medicinal and cosmetic (e.g., Botox) applications for BoNT/A.[24,26] BoNT/A is one of the most potent toxins known[26] and exists in a dichain state composed of a heavy chain
(HC), which is responsible for membrane binding and pore formation,
linked via a disulfide bond to a light chain (LC), which is responsible
for proteolytic activity.[23−25] In vivo, BoNT/A is internalized
into neuronal cells via endocytosis,[18] after
which it undergoes a conformational change where the LC is released
from the HC into the cytosol where it cleaves its proteolytic target,
the SNAP-25 SNARE protein, thus producing cSNAP-25. The cleavage of
SNAP-25 prohibits SNARE complex formation at the neural junction,[24−26] thus preventing acetylcholine release/neurotransmission and subsequent
muscle contraction. Methods for quantifying cSNAP-25, whether under
idealized conditions or in lysed cells, are thus in high demand in
order to assess the presence and activity of BoNT.[27,28]The cSNAP-25 used in these studies is a synthetic peptide
comprising
amino acids 184–197 of the actual SNAP-25 protein, in addition
to a N-terminal cysteine (Cys-Lys-Ala-Asp-Ser-Asn-Lys-Thr-Arg-Ile-Asp-Glu-Ala-Asn-Glu),
and exists as a water-soluble ∼1.6 kDa peptide with a net −1
charge at pH ∼ 7 due to four acidic residues (Asp and Glu)
relative to three basic residues (Arg and Lys). In order to specifically
bind and detect cSNAP-25, monoclonal antibodies specific to our cSNAP-25
fragment (from a murine host) were used to coat the nanopore aperture,
generating the anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM. Using these anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNMs,
we show that cSNAP-25 alters the ICR response of the AMGNM as it binds
to the pore aperture and demonstrate for the first time the ability
to use a time-dependent ICR biosensing measurement to correlate the
antigen detection rate to the antigen concentration.
Experimental Section
Chemicals and Materials
NaCl (Sigma),
HEPES (Sigma),
EDTA (Sigma), CaCl2 (Sigma), NaCN (Sigma), NaOH (Sigma),
H2SO4 (Acros Organics), 2-mercaptoethylamine-HCl
(2-MEA, Thermo Scientific), sulfosuccinimidyl 4-[N-maleimidomethyl]cyclohexane-1-carboxylate (sulfo-SMCC, Thermo Scientific),
BupH Phosphate Buffered Saline Packs (Fisher Scientific), 3-cyanopropyldimethylchlorosilane
(Gelest), and 3-aminopropyldimethylethoxysilane (Gelest) were used
as received. Acetonitrile (Sigma) was stored over a 3 Å molecular
sieve. Cleaved SNAP-25 (cSNAP-25, Antibodies-Online) was received
as a lyophilized powder, diluted to 1 mg/mL in H2O, and
stored at −20 °C when not in use. Monoclonal antibody
(IgG) specific to the cleaved form of SNAP-25 (anti-cSNAP-25, Antibodies-Online)
from a murine host was received as a cell supernatant, stored at −20
°C when not in use, and purified (Antibody Clean-up Kit, Pierce)
prior to use. Interferent species (used for control experiments) include
TCEP (Sigma) and monoclonal antibody specific to BoNT/A LC (R&D
Antibodies), which were used as received, and uncleaved SNAP-25 (Creative
BioMart), BoNT/A LC (List Laboratories), and BoNT/A (Metabiologics)
were filtered via centrifugation prior to use. All aqueous solutions
were prepared using H2O (18 MΩ·cm) from a Barnstead
E-pure water purification system.
The complete AMGNM
fabrication process, starting with the Pt nanodisk
electrode, is depicted in Figure 2. The fabrication
of the AMGNM starts in a similar fashion to that of a GNM, which has
been previously been described in detail.[15−21] In addition, optical microscopy and AFM images of the GNM can be
found in the Zhang et al. reference.[15] Initially,
an ∼2 cm length of 25 μm diameter Pt wire (Alfa Aesar)
was connected to a tungsten rod (FHC Corp.) using silver conductive
paste (Alfa Aesar). The free end of the Pt wire was then electrochemically
sharpened to a fine point in 6 M NaCN/0.1 M NaOH using a 3.6 VPP sine wave at 100 Hz from an Agilent 33220A function/arbitrary
generator, as described by Melmed et al. and Zhang et al.[15,29,30] This fine point was then further
sharpened via a second electrochemical etch in 0.1 M H2SO4 using a 15 V (4 kHz) 16 μs pulse waveform and
−1.1 V potential, for 1 and 10 s, respectively, as described
by Zhang et al. and Libioulle et al.[15,31] The sharpened
Pt wire was then inserted into a soda lime glass capillary (0.75 mm
i.d. and 1.65 mm o.d., Dagan Corp.), leaving ∼3 mm between
the tip and the end of the capillary. Then end of the capillary was
then heated using a H2 flame. As the glass melted, it produced
a glass bulb encasing the sharpened Pt wire, which was sealed to a
depth of ∼50 μm, as determined via an optical microscope
using the diameter of the Pt wire as a visual reference. The bulk
of this glass bulb was then manually removed by polishing on 1200
grit sandpaper (Buehler), followed by further polishing down to the
sharpened Pt tip using 0.05 μm alumina powder (Buehler) on a
polishing cloth (Microcloth from Buehler), in order to create a Pt
nanodisk electrode.
Figure 2
Schematic drawing of the steps associated with fabricating
the
anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM, starting from a glass nanodisk electrode. The
internal aminosilane coating (3-aminopropyldimethylethoxysilane),
heterobifunctional cross-linker (sulfo-SMCC), and antibodies (monoclonal
antibody specific to cSNAP-25) are depicted in green, while the nonreactive
cyanosilane (3-cyanopropyldimethylchlorosilane) layer is depicted
in red.
Schematic drawing of the steps associated with fabricating
the
anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM, starting from a glass nanodisk electrode. The
internal aminosilane coating (3-aminopropyldimethylethoxysilane),
heterobifunctional cross-linker (sulfo-SMCC), and antibodies (monoclonal
antibody specific to cSNAP-25) are depicted in green, while the nonreactive
cyanosilane (3-cyanopropyldimethylchlorosilane) layer is depicted
in red.Once the Pt nanodisk electrode
was created, the outer glass surface
surrounding the Pt disk was chemically protected with 3-cyanopropyldimethylchlorosilane
to limit nonspecific binding.[16] The nanodisk
electrode was cyanosilanized by submerging it in a 2% 3-cyanopropyldimethylchlorosilane
solution (in acetonitrile) overnight at room temperature. After the
outer glass surface was cyanosilanized, the Pt nanodisk electrode
was electrochemically etched to facilitate its removal, in a 1.2 M
CaCl2 solution using a 20 VPP sine wave at 100
Hz. This loosened the sealed Pt inside the glass so that it could
be mechanically removed, leaving a single conical-shaped nanopore
with a larger resistance tip opening relative to a less resistive
cone base, contained in a thin glass membrane at the end of a glass
capillary, whose outer surface is protected with a cyanosilane. The
geometry of the resulting GNM has been extensively characterized;
the resulting pore possesses a half-cone angle of ∼12°
and a length of 50–75 μM.[15−32] All references to the pore radius refer to the tip opening of the
pore.Antibody attachment to the pore aperture was achieved
using standard
thiol-based bioconjugate techniques.[33−36] Here, the pore interior was amino-functionalized
by filling it with a 2% solution of 3-aminopropyldimethylethoxysilane
(in acetonitrile) and letting it sit overnight at room temperature.
This aminosilane modification provides free amino sites on the pore
aperture that were then reacted under aqueous conditions with the
sulfo-SMCC heterobifunctional cross-linker. This cross-linker attaches
to the amino groups on the surface silanes via amino-reactive sulfosuccinimidyl
ester groups, leaving freely exposed sulfhydryl-reactive maleimide
groups for direct antibody attachment via a thioether bond. Sulfhydryl
groups were introduced to the monoclonal cSNAP-25 antibody by reducing
the disulfide bond in the hinge region of the antibody via 2-MEA under
aqueous conditions, after which the reduced antibody was purified
using a polyacrylamide desalting column (Thermo Scientific). The solution
fractions containing the reduced antibody were identified by measuring
the absorbance of each fraction at 280 nm using a UV–vis spectrophotometer
(UNICO), resulting in a net antibody concentration of ∼60 μg/mL.
The sulfhydryl groups of the reduced antibody were then attached to
the free maleimide groups of the cross-linker on the internal surface
of the nanopore under aqueous conditions to yield the anti-cSNAP-25
AMGNM. All aqueous reaction steps were performed using 150 mM NaCl,
100 mM sodium phosphate buffer (pH 7.2), and 10 mM EDTA at room temperature.
Fully fabricated anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNMs were stored dry at 4 °C.
Ion Current Rectification Measurements
All ICR measurements
reported herein were recorded at 20 ± 1 °C, using aqueous
buffered electrolyte solutions of 150 mM NaCl, 20 mM HEPES (pH 7.2),
and 1 mM EDTA or 150 mM NaCl, 150 mM sodium phosphate buffer (pH 7.2).
150 mM NaCl (Debye length ∼1 nm)[37] was utilized as it allows for the ICR response of the AMGNM to be
characterized and is relevant to biological conditions employed to
assess cSNAP-25 concentrations after exposure to BoNT/A.[38,39] Ag/AgCl electrodes were prepared by electroplating a thin layer
of AgCl on a 0.25 mm diameter Ag wire. This was done by applying a
constant 0.5 mA current between the silver wire (anode) and a Pt wire
(cathode) in a 1 M KCl solution until the Ag wire had a visually uniform
black-colored coating, i.e., a AgCl coating. The AMGNM was filled
with the buffered electrolyte solution, and the internal Ag/AgCl electrode
was placed inside the AMGNM capillary. The AMGNM was then inserted
into a custom-made polycarbonate experimental cell that contained
a second, external Ag/AgCl electrode and was filled with the same
buffered electrolyte used inside the AMGNM. Both the exterior and
internal AMGNM solutions were exposed to the atmosphere, eliminating
pressure differentials across the pore such that potential convection
is minimized. ICR measurements were performed using a custom-built
high impedance, low noise amplifier and associated instrumentation
to apply a voltage sweep across the nanopore, relative to the internal
electrode, and record the resulting current response. A voltage of ±1
V was used for all pore functionalization and antigen binding characterization
studies, and all current values were measured to two decimal places.
In all antigen characterization experiments, the ICR response of the
AMGNM was measured prior to introducing antigen to the experimental
cell to establish an initial baseline ICR level. After which, the
cSNAP-25 antigen was introduced to the experimental cell and ICR measurements
were made at 10–60 min intervals, determined from the apparent
binding rate, until a stable ICR level was reached. The voltage bias
was held at 0 mV between ICR measurements. After use, AMGNMs were
rinsed three to six times with experimental buffer and stored dry
at 4 °C. The applied voltage, experimental cell temperature,
and data acquisition were all controlled via an in-house written LabView
program, and data analysis was performed using Igor Pro 6 (WaveMetrics).
Results and Discussion
AMGNM Functionalization
The degree
to which the current
is rectified by a given nanopore can be quantified by its rectification
ratio (RRV),[10] which is calculated by dividing the current amplitude at a given
positive voltage by the current amplitude at the equal, but opposite
voltage (RRV = |i|/|i|). Prior to any antigen detection studies, the RRV was used to verify that the chemical functionalization
of the AMGNM had progressed as expected during AMGNM fabrication.
The current as a function of voltage response of a 180 nm radius negatively
charged conical-shaped glass nanopore is shown in Figure 3 (blue trace). This is the response of the bare
glass pore, whose outer surface has been modified with the cyanosilane,
as described in the Experimental Section,
prior to any internal chemical modification. A bare glass surface
is composed of negatively charged silicon oxide molecules (pKa of 1–4),[2,40] which yield
a net negative charge to the pore aperture at pH ∼7.[2,41] This net negative charge results in a rectified current response
(RRV ≠ 1) as a negatively charged
aperture will electrostatically attract and preferentially transport
positively charged ions (e.g., Na+) while electrostatically
inhibiting the transport of negatively charged ions (e.g., Cl–). As described above, the associated current through
the pore at positive voltage (i = 118.78 nA) is increased due to Cl– accumulation within the aperture relative to the current at the
equal negative bias (i–1 V = −42.87 nA) where Cl– is depleted within
the aperture, yielding a RR1 V= 2.77. This result is in good agreement with Lan et al.,
who reported on 30–180 nm radius glass nanopores in 10 mM KCl
(pH ∼ 7)[42] that yielded a RR400 mV of 2–6, respectively. Differences
in our measured RR value
relative to Lan et al. are attributed to differences in electrolyte
strength (150 mM NaCl used here relative to 10 mM KCl used by Lan
et al.) and different voltages utilized to calculate RRV (±1 V used here relative to ±400 mV reported
by Lan et al.).
Figure 3
Representative current as a function of voltage traces
depicting
the ICR response of a 180 nm radius nanopore during the individual
surface modification steps associated with fabricating an anti-cSNAP-25
AMGNM. The response of the bare glass nanopore membrane is shown in
blue, the response of the nanopore after it is functionalized with
an amino-terminating silane is shown in red, and the response of the
anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM is shown in black.
Representative current as a function of voltage traces
depicting
the ICR response of a 180 nm radius nanopore during the individual
surface modification steps associated with fabricating an anti-cSNAP-25
AMGNM. The response of the bare glass nanopore membrane is shown in
blue, the response of the nanopore after it is functionalized with
an amino-terminating silane is shown in red, and the response of the
anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM is shown in black.The current as a function of voltage response of a 180 nm
radius
conical shaped glass nanopore whose internal surface is coated with
an aminosilane is shown in Figure 3 (red trace).
As described in the Experimental Section,
the first internal chemical modification step during AMGNM fabrication
is to covalently functionalize the internal surface of the cyano-protected
nanopore with an amino-terminating silane, coating the negatively
charged silicon oxide groups with positively charged amino groups
(pKa of 9–10)[43] at pH 7, resulting in a positively charged aperture. The
now positively charged aperture will preferentially transport Cl– ions over Na+ ions. At negative biases,
Na+ accumulates within the aperture and increases the conductance
(i–1 V = −141.36 nA)
relative to positive biases where Na+ is depleted within
the aperture and a decrease conductance (i+1 V = 100.79 nA) is observed, resulting in RR1 V = 0.71.Following amino functionalization, the nanopore interior
is then
reacted with the sulfo-SMCC heterobifunctional cross-linker to introduce
free maleimide groups on the glass surface. These maleimide groups
are used for antibody attachment in the subsequent modification step,
as they react with sulfhydryl groups on the reduced antibody for covalent
antibody attachment. Unfortunately, due to the susceptibility of the
maleimide group to hydrolysis,[44] the ICR
response for this functionalization step is difficult to measure,
and thus data for this step are not shown. However, because the exposed
maleimides have a pKa similar to the amino-terminating
silane (maleimide pKa ∼9.5),[45] they are expected to also yield a positively
charged pore surface, and thus a Cl– selective aperture,
and the ICR is not anticipated to significantly change between the
amino-coated pore and maleimide-coated pore.The current as
a function of voltage response for 180 nm radius
anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM is shown in Figure 3 (black
trace). After attachment of the sulfo-SMCC cross-linker to the pore
surface, the monoclonal antibody specific to cSNAP-25 is covalently
attached to the pore via free sulfhydryl groups on the antibody, as
described in the Experimental Section. While
the isoelectric point (pI) for this specific antibody has not been
characterized, it is expected that as an IgG antibody it will likely
have minimal net charge, resulting in a relatively neutral pore surface,
as most IgG antibodies have a pI of 7.7 ± 1.3.[46,47] The more neutral a surface, the less selective the ion transport,
resulting in less ICR and a more ohmic current response, i.e., RRV ∼ 1. Here, the current at positive
voltage (i+1 V = 104.26 nA) nearly
equals the current at negative voltage (i–1 V = −102.43 nA), resulting in a RR1 V = 1.02.
cSNAP-25 Detection via the AMGNM
In order to validate
the AMGNM methodology, the response of the anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM to
the presence of cSNAP-25 was characterized. As described above, the
AMGNM initially has a relatively neutral surface and yields a nearly
ohmic current as a function of voltage response, as shown in Figure 4A (black trace). As the slightly negatively charged
cSNAP-25 in solution begins to bind to and coat the internal aperture
of the anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM, the aperture becomes nominally smaller
(by 7% at the most, assuming the cSNAP-25 molecule resides is its
fully extended form, as estimated from the hydrodynamic radius of
each residue)[48] and gains an overall net
negative charge, increasing the measured RRV. The effect of cSNAP-25 binding on the ICR response is shown in
Figure 4A by the transition from the black
trace (the AMGNM in the absence of cSNAP-25) to the green trace (the
AMGNM in the presence of cSNAP-25). Prior to the addition of cSNAP-25,
the anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM has a RR1 V = 1.02. After the cSNAP-25 is introduced to the experimental cell
and the antibody binding of the cSNAP-25 to the surface reaches a
steady state, the anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM has a RR1 V= 1.35.
Figure 4
(A) Current as a function
of voltage response of a 230 nm radius
anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM before introducing 5 μM cSNAP-25 (black
trace) and after binding cSNAP-25 to saturation (green trace). (B)
A representative binding curve for the % AMGNM saturation as a function
of time for a 75 nm radius AMGNM exposed to 5 μM cSNAP-25. Normalized
% AMGNM saturation values were fit to eq 2.
(A) Current as a function
of voltage response of a 230 nm radius
anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM before introducing 5 μM cSNAP-25 (black
trace) and after binding cSNAP-25 to saturation (green trace). (B)
A representative binding curve for the % AMGNM saturation as a function
of time for a 75 nm radius AMGNM exposed to 5 μM cSNAP-25. Normalized
% AMGNM saturation values were fit to eq 2.Figure 4B shows the % AMGNM saturation with
cSNAP-25 as a function of time for a 75 nM radius anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM
exposed to 5 μM cSNAP-25. The % AMGNM saturation is calculated
by the expressionwhere RRV is the RRV at any given time, RRV is the initial RRV measured before cSNAP-25
was introduced to the AMGNM, and RRVSS is the final steady-state RRV value reached upon the complete saturation
of the AMGNM with cSNAP-25. Among different AMGMNs tested over the
course of this work, the change in RRV, from RRV to RRVSS, was found to
typically vary anywhere from 0.2 to 0.5. Normalizing the data in this
manner allows for the rate of change of the rectification to be compared
across different AMGNMs irrespective of the actual rectification ratio
values. As is depicted in Figure 4B, the %
AMGNM saturation as a function of time plot results in a sigmoidal-shaped
curve that can be fit to a five-parameter nonlinear regression model:where A is the minimum
asymptote
or the initial level of rectification when no antigen is present (i.e.,
0%), B is the slope factor or steepness of the curve
indicating the rate of cSNAP-25 binding, C is the
inflection point of the sigmoidal curve, D is the
maximum asymptote or final level of rectification (i.e., 100%), E is the asymmetry factor, and t is time.
Both B and C provide information
on the kinetics or rate of the AMGNM binding reaction and are thus
dependent on the antigen concentration. B is a dimensionless
parameter that is directly proportional to the AMGNM binding rate
and the concentration of introduced antigen, where larger B values indicate a steeper curve, faster binding, and higher
concentration of cSNAP-25. C has the units of time
and is inversely proportional to the concentration of the antigen;
larger values indicate slower binding and thus lower concentrations
of cSNAP-25. Through our experience, B is easier
to compare between experiments than C, as it allows
for any variations in sample introduction (i.e., the reaction start
time) to be excluded from the analysis so samples with different sampling
time intervals and sample introduction techniques (i.e., variation
in mixing) can be directly related.The response of the AMGNM
was also tested against uncleaved SNAP-25,
BoNT/A LC, monoclonal antibody specific to the BoNT/A LC (i.e., antitoxin),
whole BoNT/A (HC and LC), and tris(2-carboxyethyl)phosphine (TCEP)—species
we anticipate encountering with further development and testing of
the AMGNM for botulinum studies. In response to these various potential
interferents, the AMGNM maintained a stable baseline (as shown in
the Supporting Information file), fluctuating
less than ±0.02 from RRV, when the
species was introduced to the AMGNM. As described above, the typical
ICR change of the anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM in response to cSNAP-25 ranges
from 0.2 to 0.5; thus, the introduction of these “interferent”
species yielded at most an ICR change that is less than 10% of the
expected AMGNM saturation level response to the cSNAP-25 target antigen.
While we recognize that more complex solution conditions and interferents
may indeed nonspecifically bind to the AMGNM, under the precise conditions
utilized here the AMGNM is specific to cSNAP-25.
Concentration-Dependent
Characterization
The characterization
of 2.5, 5.0, and 10.0 μM cSNAP-25 using the anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM
is shown in Figure 5, along with the baseline
AMGNM response in the absence of antigen (i.e., a blank control).
The AMGNM baseline is highly stable, maximum RRV variations of ±0.01 were measured in the absence of target
antigen over the course of multiple, 6 h, blank control experiments.
Similar to the analysis described above, RRV data for each concentration of cSNAP-25 were normalized, using eq 1, plotted as a function of time, and fit with the
five-parameter nonlinear regression model described by eq 2. The rate of cSNAP-25 binding to the AMGNM is concentration
dependent, with 10 μM binding proceeding at the fastest rate
(i.e., steepest slope and largest B value of the
three traces) and 2.5 μM proceeding at the slowest rate (i.e.,
shallowest slope and smallest B value of the three
traces). The steepness coefficient (B) of the best
fit for the representative 2.5, 5.0, and 10.0 μM cSNAP-25 data
shown in Figure 5 is 3, 7, and 8, respectively.
Figure 5
Representative
binding curves for the % AMGNM saturation as a function
of time for 2.5 μM cSNAP-25 (red circles), 5.0 μM cSNAP-25
(blue squares), and 10 μM cSNAP-25 (black triangles). The 0%
AMGNM saturation baseline value (i.e., the response of the AMGNM in
the absence of the antigen) is shown for comparison (green diamonds).
All four data sets where collected using 50–250 nm radius AMGNMs.
Representative
binding curves for the % AMGNM saturation as a function
of time for 2.5 μM cSNAP-25 (red circles), 5.0 μM cSNAP-25
(blue squares), and 10 μM cSNAP-25 (black triangles). The 0%
AMGNM saturation baseline value (i.e., the response of the AMGNM in
the absence of the antigen) is shown for comparison (green diamonds).
All four data sets where collected using 50–250 nm radius AMGNMs.The steepness coefficient (B) was further determined
for other introduced cSNAP-25 concentrations, ranging from 0.5 to
100 μM using the best fit of eq 2 for
the respective % AMGNM saturation as a function of time plots. The
resulting steepness coefficients (B) are shown as
a function of cSNAP-25 concentration in Figure 6. A log–log plot is used here for display purposes, allowing
the lower concentrations of cSNAP-25 characterized to be adequately
visualized and compared. The dashed line in Figure 6 represents the best fit of the data by a power law model:where y is the steepness
coefficient (B), A is the scaling
coefficient, x is the concentration of antigen, and m is the slope. A power model is used here to account for
the nonlinear trend in the steepness coefficient as a function of
cSNAP-25 concentration; i.e., the steepness coefficient exhibits greater
concentration dependence at lower concentrations relative to higher
concentrations. This behavior is likely a reflection of the dynamic
range of the measurement; i.e., higher concentrations are potentially
binding at a rate comparable to the utilized detection interval. The
data presented in Figure 6 demonstrate that
the rate of RRV change of the AMGNM is
strongly dependent on the concentration of its target antigen, cSNAP-25.
From a physical perspective, it is likely that when a high concentration
of cSNAP-25 is introduced outside of the AMGNM, it results in a larger
flux (via the Brownian motion) of the cSNAP-25 molecules to and through
the aperture of the AMGNM relative to lower cSNAP-25 concentrations.
This larger flux then results in a higher antigen concentration within
the aperture of the AMGNM, followed by more antigen/antibody binding
events per unit time, and thus a faster change in the net surface
properties of the AMGNM, a faster RRV change,
and steeper binding coefficient (B) relative to lower
antigen concentrations.
Figure 6
Plot of the steepness coefficient, B, as a function
of cSNAP-25 concentration, from 500 nM to 100 μM. These data
were fit using eq 3; error bars represent the
associated variation in B obtained from a minimum
of three trials from individual AMGNMs.
Plot of the steepness coefficient, B, as a function
of cSNAP-25 concentration, from 500 nM to 100 μM. These data
were fit using eq 3; error bars represent the
associated variation in B obtained from a minimum
of three trials from individual AMGNMs.It should be noted that the applied voltage across the AMGNM
is
set to zero between individual RR measurements and cSNAP-25 is only slightly charged. Electrophoretic
migration of cSNAP-25 is therefore unlikely to contribute significantly
to the molecular flux to and through the aperture of the AMGNM. Transport
into the nanopore, and to the antibody binding sites, should thus
be dominated by diffusion. Based on the assumption that the binding
process at the AMGNM is diffusion limited and that the AMGNM does
indeed reach a state of antigen saturation, the number of antigen
molecules required to reach saturation should be similar between experiments,
independent from the concentration of introduced antigen. The number
of antigen molecules needed to reach saturation can be approximated
from the molecular flux and the time required to reach saturation
(i.e., the average time it takes from sample introduction to reach
the maximum asymptote (see eq 2) or final level
of rectification) for a given concentration. The number of cSNAP-25
molecules entering the pore per second can be estimated from the diffusion-based
flux (J) into the aperture of the AMGNM:where J is the flux of the
antigen into the aperture, D is the bulk diffusion
coefficient of the antigen, r is the radius of the
AMGNM aperture, and C is the bulk concentration of
the antigen.[49,50] In implementing this equation,
we assume that the AMGNM aperture is a perfect sink, i.e., every antigen
molecule that reaches the opening aperture enters and stays within
the AMGNM, and that there is no antigen diffusion along the outer
surface of the AMGNM.[49,50] Here, we calculated the flux
of cSNAP-25 for each concentration characterized in Figure 6 by estimating the diffusion coefficient of cSNAP-25
to be 1 × 10–6 cm2/s,[51−53] and utilizing the intermediate radius size of the AMGNMs utilized
in this study of 150 nm. The resulting concentration-dependent flux
values were then multiplied by the respective time required to reach
saturation for each concentration to yield the number of cSNAP-25
molecules required for the AMGNM to reach a saturated state, which
is ∼2 × 109 cSNAP-25 molecules, over all concentrations
characterized. Complete calculations can be found in the Supporting Information.From a time-scale-based
perspective, the diffusion-limited process
limits the AMGNM ICR biosensing measurement to the detection of nanomolar–micromolar
analyte concentrations. For example, it takes >6 h to detect 2.5
μM
cSNAP-25 (see Figure 5). On the basis of the
number molecules needed to reach saturation, one can further estimate
how long it would take to reach saturation when examining lower concentrations.
For example, dividing the number of cSNAP-25 molecules needed to reach
saturation by the flux of molecules entering the pore when characterizing
a 1 pM cSNAP-25 sample, it is estimated that it would take ∼107 h to reach AMGNM saturation, assuming enough molecules were
present to even reach saturation—an unreasonably long time.
However, we speculate that the associated analysis time could be decreased
by increasing the flux of the target antigen to and through the pore
via the use of a driving force (i.e., applied bias and or pressure
gradient). These studies, along with studies examining the use of
antigen/antibody pairs with differing on/off rates, are currently
underway and will be reported on in the future.Through the
course of our work, we have measured a 26% variation
in steepness coefficients when using different AMGNMs to detect the
same concentration of cSNAP-25 (n = 5). This large
deviation is likely due to the relatively large dispersion in AMGNM
aperture radii used during this investigation (50–250 nm in
radius), and an examination is currently underway to reduce this variation
by decreasing the disparity in AMGNM sizes utilized. These results
will also be reported on in the future.
AMGNM Reusability
The AMGNM exhibits a stable initial
current level, which changes only in response to the presence of cSNAP-25,
validating the specificity of the AMGNM ICR biosensing measurement
under the experimental conditions tested. Furthermore, the AMGNM can
be rinsed free of antigen and reused. Figure 7 shows a continuous trace of the % AMGNM saturation as a function
of time for an AMGNM that was utilized to perform two cycles of cSNAP-25
detection. The AMGNM was first exposed to 100 μM cSNAP-25. Once
the RRV had reached steady state conditions,
yielding 100% AMGNM saturation, 20 mL of experimental buffer was passed
through the 280 μL experimental cell, while applying a constant
500 mV across the AMGNM in an attempt to aid the dissociation of cSNAP-25
from its antibody via convective and electrophoretic forces,[54−56] on the negatively charged bound antigen. As is depicted, this rinsing
restored the 0% AMGNM saturation baseline RRV. Although the dissociation was not explicitly measured over
time (represented by the dashed lines in Figure 7), it takes upward of ∼20 min to regenerate the AMGNM baseline
with force-assisted antigen dissociation. Once this baseline was restored,
50 μM cSNAP-25 was introduced to the experimental cell and detected.
The experimental cell was rinsed again, as described above, again
reestablishing the 0% AMGNM saturation baseline RRV value. We found that an AMGNM could be reused for up
to 11 separate detection experiments before the 0% AMGNM saturation
baseline RRV level could no longer be
restored through rinsing, or cSNAP-25 exposure would no longer yield
an AMGNM response. This appears to be a result of the antibody and/or
silane coating detaching from the internal glass surface during the
AMGNM cleaning process, as indicated by an observed increase in the RRV (RR1 V >
2, data not shown) after cleaning, relative to the RRV of a newly fabricated anti-cSNAP-25 AMGNM (RR1 V ∼ 1).
Figure 7
% AMGNM saturation as a function of time
for a 50 nm radius anti-cSNAP-25
AMGNM exposed to 100 μM cSNAP-25, then rinsed clean and exposed
to 50 μM cSNAP-25, before being rinsed clean again.
% AMGNM saturation as a function of time
for a 50 nm radius anti-cSNAP-25
AMGNM exposed to 100 μM cSNAP-25, then rinsed clean and exposed
to 50 μM cSNAP-25, before being rinsed clean again.
Conclusion
The results presented
here detail the fabrication of antigen-specific
AMGNMs and the ability to use the AMGNM to detect the antigen of interest
based on the RRV of the AMGNM. While previous
ICR biosensing studies have demonstrated the ability to detect the
presence of a target analyte in a qualitative manner,[8−12] we demonstrate that the rate at which the ICR response changes in
response to the presence of the target analyte is proportional to
the concentration of that analyte through a simple power law model.
Specifically, we demonstrate the ability to fabricate AMGNMs coated
with the antibody to cSNAP-25 and correlate the rate of ICR change
with the concentration of introduced cSNAP-25, over a range of 500
nM to 100 μM, based on a diffusion-limited reaction. Furthermore,
we show that the AMGNM can be reused by flushing the antigen off of
the aperture, restoring its initial ICR baseline. The methodology
presented significantly expands the applications of nanopore ICR biosensing
measurements and demonstrates that these measurements can be used
quantitatively for antigen-specific detection and potentially as a
tool to probe the kinetics of antigen–antibody binding processes.
Authors: Zuzanna Siwy; Lacramioara Trofin; Punit Kohli; Lane A Baker; Christina Trautmann; Charles R Martin Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2005-04-13 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Kristien Bonroy; Filip Frederix; Gunter Reekmans; Ellen Dewolf; Randy De Palma; Gustaaf Borghs; Paul Declerck; Bruno Goddeeris Journal: J Immunol Methods Date: 2006-04-25 Impact factor: 2.303
Authors: Yuri L Bunimovich; Young Shik Shin; Woon-Seok Yeo; Michael Amori; Gabriel Kwong; James R Heath Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2006-12-20 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Daniel K Lathrop; Eric N Ervin; Geoffrey A Barrall; Michael G Keehan; Ryuji Kawano; Michael A Krupka; Henry S White; Andrew H Hibbs Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2010-02-17 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Ester Fernández-Salas; Joanne Wang; Yanira Molina; Jeremy B Nelson; Birgitte P S Jacky; K Roger Aoki Journal: PLoS One Date: 2012-11-21 Impact factor: 3.240