This paper describes how changes in the refractive index of single hydrogel nanoparticles (HNPs) detected with near-infrared surface plasmon resonance microscopy (SPRM) can be used to monitor the uptake of therapeutic compounds for potential drug delivery applications. As a first example, SPRM is used to measure the specific uptake of the bioactive peptide melittin into N-isopropylacrylamide (NIPAm)-based HNPs. Point diffraction patterns in sequential real-time SPRM differential reflectivity images are counted to create digital adsorption binding curves of single 220 nm HNPs from picomolar nanoparticle solutions onto hydrophobic alkanethiol-modified gold surfaces. For each digital adsorption binding curve, the average single nanoparticle SPRM reflectivity response, ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, was measured. The value of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ increased linearly from 1.04 ± 0.04 to 2.10 ± 0.10% when the melittin concentration in the HNP solution varied from zero to 2.5 μM. No change in the average HNP size in the presence of melittin is observed with dynamic light scattering measurements, and no increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ is observed in the presence of either FLAG octapeptide or bovine serum albumin. Additional bulk fluorescence measurements of melittin uptake into HNPs are used to estimate that a 1% increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ observed in SPRM corresponds to the incorporation of approximately 65000 molecules into each 220 nm HNP, corresponding to roughly 4% of its volume. The lowest detected amount of melittin loading into the 220 nm HNPs was an increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ of 0.15%, corresponding to the absorption of 10000 molecules.
This paper describes how changes in the refractive index of single hydrogel nanoparticles (HNPs) detected with near-infrared surface plasmon resonance microscopy (SPRM) can be used to monitor the uptake of therapeutic compounds for potential drug delivery applications. As a first example, SPRM is used to measure the specific uptake of the bioactive peptide melittin into N-isopropylacrylamide (NIPAm)-based HNPs. Point diffraction patterns in sequential real-time SPRM differential reflectivity images are counted to create digital adsorption binding curves of single 220 nm HNPs from picomolar nanoparticle solutions onto hydrophobic alkanethiol-modified gold surfaces. For each digital adsorption binding curve, the average single nanoparticle SPRM reflectivity response, ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, was measured. The value of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ increased linearly from 1.04 ± 0.04 to 2.10 ± 0.10% when the melittin concentration in the HNP solution varied from zero to 2.5 μM. No change in the average HNP size in the presence of melittin is observed with dynamic light scattering measurements, and no increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ is observed in the presence of either FLAG octapeptide or bovineserum albumin. Additional bulk fluorescence measurements of melittin uptake into HNPs are used to estimate that a 1% increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ observed in SPRM corresponds to the incorporation of approximately 65000 molecules into each 220 nm HNP, corresponding to roughly 4% of its volume. The lowest detected amount of melittin loading into the 220 nm HNPs was an increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ of 0.15%, corresponding to the absorption of 10000 molecules.
Among the
numerous nanoscale
drug delivery systems that are currently being developed, hydrogel
nanoparticles (HNPs) have become an increasingly popular vehicle for
the controlled uptake, localization, and release of bioactive compounds.[1−6] These polymeric nanoparticles can be engineered to respond to external
stimuli by switching their physical properties, making them ideal
candidates for the targeted delivery of therapeutics. For example,
small changes in solvent pH, ionic strength, temperature, or light
can drastically change an HNP’s physical or chemical properties,
and these changes can be used for the uptake and release of drugs,
genes, peptides, or proteins.[7−11]In addition to engineering HNPs to be sensitive to environmental
changes, the polymer makeup of the nanoparticles can be tailored to
uptake specific target compounds. Previously, temperature responsive
HNPs were shown to reversibly switch affinity to a host of target
compounds including short peptides, proteins, and drug molecules such
as doxorubicin.[12−16] The affinity of HNPs to specific compounds can be controlled by
reacting N-isopropylacrylamide (NIPAm) with polymers
containing complimentary functional groups. Figure 1a depicts NIPAm-based HNPs that incorporate hydrophobic groups
(N-tert-butylacrylamide, TBAm),
negatively charged groups (acrylic acid, AAc), and cross-linkers (N,N′-methylenebisacrylamide, BIS).
These HNPs were designed to have a high uptake affinity for melittin,
the principal component of bee venom and a molecule that has shown
promise in the treatment of HIV infections and epilepsy.[17,18] Melittin is a short peptide composed of 26 amino acids (GIGAVLKVLT-TGLPALISWIKRKRQQ)
with mostly nonpolar or positively charged residues (illustrated in
Figure 2b) and, thus, is expected to specifically
absorb into the HNPs via hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions.
Figure 1
(a) Hydrogel
nanoparticles (HNPs) were composed of N-isopropylacrylamide
(NIPAm), N-tert-butylacrylamide
(TBAm), acrylic acid (AAc), and N,N′-methylenebisacrylamide (BIS) in a molar
ratio of NIPAm/TBAm/AAc/BIS: 53:40:5:2. (b) Illustration of melittin
with nonpolar side chains in orange, polar side chains in green, and
positively charged side chains in blue. Melittin is bound by HNPs
via hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions (melittin structure
obtained from the Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics).
Figure 2
(a) A 58.5 μm × 58.5 μm Fourier filtered SPRM
three second differential reflectivity image showing the adsorption
of two individual 220 nm diameter HNPs onto a C11-functionalized gold
thin film from a 30 pM HNP PBS solution. (b) Three 2-D cumulative
adsorption maps tracking the locations of adsorbed HNPs after 30,
120, and 600 s in the same imaging area. Each red point corresponds
to the adsorption of a single HNP. The total cumulative number of
adsorbed HNPs after 30, 120, and 600 s is 152, 448, and 1051 nanoparticles,
respectively.
(a) Hydrogel
nanoparticles (HNPs) were composed of N-isopropylacrylamide
(NIPAm), N-tert-butylacrylamide
(TBAm), acrylic acid (AAc), and N,N′-methylenebisacrylamide (BIS) in a molar
ratio of NIPAm/TBAm/AAc/BIS: 53:40:5:2. (b) Illustration of melittin
with nonpolar side chains in orange, polar side chains in green, and
positively charged side chains in blue. Melittin is bound by HNPs
via hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions (melittin structure
obtained from the Research Collaboratory for Structural Bioinformatics).The characterization of HNPs can
be challenging given their pliable
and solvent swollen internal structure. Cryo-transmission electron
microscopy (cryo-TEM) can be used to examine hydrogel size and morphology,[19,20] but the in situ measurement of the uptake of small organic molecules
or peptides into individual nanoparticles poses greater challenges.
Dynamic light scattering (DLS) can be used to determine mean hydrodynamic
diameters of HNPs,[21] but the effect of
the uptake of molecules into nanoparticles on the DLS is difficult
to quantify. Multiangle light scattering (MALS) measurements have
been used to estimate molecular weight changes upon protein loading
by hydrogels,[22] but both DLS and MALS provide
only average results for any change upon HNP loading. In addition,
HNP affinity to proteins have been estimated by size exclusion chromatography,[23] but the interpretation of elution data is nontrivial.Single nanoparticle surface plasmon resonance microscopy (SPRM)
is a relatively new technique that uses surface plasmon polariton
(SPP) point diffraction patterns to monitor in real-time the adsorption
of single nanoparticles onto a gold surface.[24−26] In addition
to single nanoparticles, SPRM has been employed to study a variety
of nanostructures, membrane proteins, intracellular processes, cell–substrate
interactions, and viruses.[27−34] In a recent paper, we showed that near-infrared (NIR, 814 nm) SPRM
is highly sensitive and can be used to track the adsorption of individual
gold and polystyrene nanoparticles onto chemically modified gold thin
film surfaces in real time.[35] Upon adsorption
of a nanoparticle, a large SPP point diffraction pattern on the order
of 102 μm2 is generated; the magnitude
of the response depends on the size and composition of the nanoparticle
and has been observed for both gold nanoparticles as small as 20 nm
and polystyrene nanoparticles as small as 85 nm.In this paper,
the uptake of the bioactive peptide melittin into
NIPAm-based HNPs is directly measured with NIR SPRM. As noted above,
the NIPAm-based HNPs contain a mixture of hydrophobic and negatively
charged side chains that provide a specific affinity for the peptide
melittin. The adsorption of single 220 nm HNPs from picomolar nanoparticle
solutions onto a hydrophobic alkanethiol-modified gold surface is
detected in real-time from the appearance of point diffraction patterns
in sequential SPR differential reflectivity images; these point diffraction
patterns are counted to create a digital adsorption binding curve.
The intensities of the point diffraction patterns observed in the
sequential SPR differential reflectivity images used to create this
digital adsorption binding curve are quantitated, and the average
of these intensity values, denoted as ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, is obtained. When melittin is mixed at micromolar
concentrations with the HNPs, the value of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ is found to increase linearly with
melittin concentration. This increase is attributed to an increase
in the refractive index of the HNPs due to the incorporation of melittin
into the hydrogel nanoparticle. DLS measurements confirm that no change
in mean HNP hydrodynamic diameter is observed in the presence of melittin
over this entire concentration range, indicating that the increase
of the SPRM response is not from a volume increase. The specific uptake
affinity of melittin for these HNPs is confirmed as no increase in
⟨Δ%RNP⟩ is observed
in the presence of micromolar solutions of either FLAG octapeptide
or bovineserum albumin (BSA). Additional bulk fluorescence measurements
that measure the loss of melittin in solution when mixed with HNPs
are used to estimate that a 1% increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ corresponds to the uptake of approximately
65000 molecules into the 220 nm HNP, corresponding to roughly 4% of
its volume.
Experimental Considerations
Hydrogel Nanoparticle Materials
All chemicals were
obtained from commercial sources: N-isopropylacrylamide
(NIPAm) and ammonium persulfate (APS) were from Sigma-Aldrich, Inc.
(St. Louis, MO); acrylic acid (AAc) and sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS)
were from Aldrich Chemical Co.; N,N′-methylenebisacrylamide (BIS) was from Fluka; N-tert-butylacrylamide (TBAm) was from Acros Organics (Geel, Belgium).
Hydrogel Nanoparticle Synthesis
The procedure reported
by Debord and Lyon was adapted to synthesize HNPs.[36] AAc (5 mol %), TBAm (40 mol %), NIPAm (53 mol %), BIS (2
mol %), and SDS (2.5 mg) were dissolved in water (50 mL) and the resulting
solutions were filtered through a No. 2 Whatman filter paper. TBAm
was dissolved in ethanol (1 mL) before addition to the monomer solution.
The total monomer concentration was 65 mM. Nitrogen gas was bubbled
through the reaction mixtures for 30 min. Following the addition of
500 μL of aqueous solution containing 30 mg of APS, the prepolymerization
mixture was sealed under nitrogen gas. Polymerization was carried
out by inserting the round bottle flask containing prepolymerization
mixture in an oil bath preset to 60 °C for 3 h. The polymerized
solutions were purified by dialysis using a 12–14 kDa molecular
weight cut off (MWCO) membrane against an excess amount of pure water
(changed more than twice a day) for 4 days. The yield and concentration
of HNPs were determined by gravimetric analysis of lyophilized polymers.
Dynamic Light Scattering Measurements
The hydrodynamic
diameter of HNPs was determined in aqueous solutions (25 ± 0.1
°C) by a dynamic light scattering (DLS) instrument equipped with
Zetasizer Software Ver. 6.12 (Zetasizer Nano ZS, Malvern Instruments
Ltd., Worcestershire, U.K.). All the results of DLS data fitting met
the quality criteria set by Malvern (see Supporting
Information for DLS results).
dn/dc and MALS Measurements
The average molar mass
of the HNPs was determined by a combination
of dn/dc and multiangle light scattering
(MALS) measurements using Optilab rEX (Wyatt Technology Corporation,
Santa Barbara, CA) and DAWN HELEOS (Wyatt Technology Corporation),
respectively (see Supporting Information for details).
The SPR microscope setup was discussed in a recent
publication and
diagrammed in the Supporting Information.[35] Briefly, the microscope was built
into the frame of an IX51 inverted microscope (Olympus, Tokyo, Japan).
A 1 mW 814 nm diode laser (Melles Griot, Carlsbad, CA) was expanded
and collimated using a spatial filter (Newport Corp., Newport Beach,
CA). The beam was then polarized and focused with a lens (f = 200 mm) onto the back focal plane of a 100× 1.49
NA oil objective (Olympus). The focused beam was directed up to the
objective using a gold-coated knife-edge mirror (Thorlabs, Newton,
NJ). The reflected image was passed to an Andor Neo sCMOS (South Windsor,
CT). Images were acquired by accumulating 30 11-bit exposures.
Substrate
Preparation
Substrates were borosilicate
No. 1.5 coverslips (Fisherbrand, Pittsburgh, PA) coated with 1 nm
Cr adhesion layer and 45 nm Au by thermal evaporation. The Au surface
was functionalized by undecanethiol (C11) by overnight immersion of
the substrate in a 1 mM ethanolic solution of 1-undecanethiol (Sigma-Aldrich).
The imaging surface was partitioned using adhesive silicone isolation
wells (Electron Microscopy Sciences, Hatfield, PA).
SPRM Analysis
HNP solutions were prepared by a 50-fold
dilution in 1× PBS (11.9 mM phosphates, 137 mM sodium chloride,
2.7 mM potassium chloride, pH 7.4, Fisher). For SPRM measurements,
the HNPs were further diluted by 3/10 with 1× PBS and the appropriate
amount of 9 μM melittin (Sigma-Aldrich), FLAG peptide (DYKDDDDK,
Sigma-Aldrich), or bovineserum albumin (Sigma-Aldrich) in PBS, which
yielded a solution with a final HNP concentration of 30 pM. Images
were acquired after 5 min of mixing the HNP and melittin. A total
of 10 μL of HNP solution was pipetted into the isolation well
for imaging. In this work, the Δ%R from the
adsorption of a nanoparticle was calculated by multiplying the quotient
of the difference image and raw image by 30% (the incidence angle
was set to 30% reflectivity):[35]where p is the pixel intensity in frame i.
Bulk Melittin Fluorescence Measurements
The intrinsic
fluorescence of melittin from its sole tryptophan residue[37] was measured for bulk uptake measurements. Duplicate
5 mL samples were prepared with and without HNPs in the same concentrations
as for SPRM analysis. All samples were ultracentrifuged (50000 rpm,
1 h) using a Beckman Coulter Optima LE-80K Ultracentrifuge (Beckman
Coulter, Inc., Brea, CA) with a NVT90 rotor (Beckman Coulter). The
supernatant was then removed for fluorescence measurements using a
JASCO FP-6300 Spectrofluorometer (JASCO Analytical Instruments, Easton,
MD). Fluorescence was measured for samples with and without melittin
to determine a percent loss of melittin upon mixing with HNPs. For
0.5 μM melittin samples, the supernatant was removed upon ultracentrifugation
and lyophilized using FreeZone 4.5 (Labconco, Kansas City, MO); these
samples were then dissolved in 1/10 of the original volume to obtain
10× concentrated samples. Fluorescence measurements are detailed
in the Supporting Information.
Results
and Discussion
Synthesis of 220 nm NIPAm-Based
HNPs for Melittin
Uptake
As depicted in Figure 1a, HNPs
were synthesized by the copolymerization of four monomers: N-isopropylacrylamide (NIPAm), N-tert-butylacrylamide (TBAm), acrylic acid (AAc), and N,N′-methylenebisacrylamide with
molar percentages of 53, 40, 5, and 2%, respectively. The mean hydrodynamic
diameter of these HNPs in phosphate buffered saline (PBS) solution
was determined by DLS measurements to be 220 nm. Additional dn/dc and multiangle light scattering measurements
were used to obtain an estimate of (1.24 ± 0.04) × 109 g/mol for the average molecular weight of the HNPs (see Supporting Information for the details of these
measurements). Using this average molecular weight and an approximate
dry polymer density of 1.1 g/mL (which is equivalent to the density
of NIPAm),[38] we estimate that the HNPs
contain approximately ∼65% solvent (in this case, PBS) by volume.
The high percentage TBAm incorporated into the HNPs makes them very
nonpolar, and the inclusion of AAc residues gives the HNPs a net negative
charge in PBS. These HNPs are expected to have a specific uptake affinity
for melittin, which has 16 nonpolar, 5 polar, and 5 charged amino
acid residues with a net charge of +6 in PBS[39,40] via a combination of hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions.[12,13]
Irreversible Adsorption of Single 220 nm HNPs
onto a Hydrophobic Surface
Because of their significant nonpolar
nature, the HNPs were found to irreversibly adsorb from PBS solutions
onto gold surfaces that had been previously modified with hydrophobic
undecanethiol (C11) monolayers. Real-time single nanoparticle SPRM
measurements were employed to monitor the adsorption of 220 nm HNPs
onto C11-functionalized gold surfaces. Specifically, 10 μL of
a 15, 30, or 60 pM HNP solution was pipetted onto a C11-functionalized
gold thin film, and SPRM reflectivity images were recorded every three
seconds for a total of 10 min. For each SPRM reflectivity image, the
SPRM reflectivity image from the immediately previous time frame was
subtracted in order to create a time course series of SPRM differential
reflectivity images. An example of one of these SPRM differential
reflectivity images for adsorption from a 30 pM HNP solution is shown
in Figure 2a.As reported previously
by a number of research groups,[24−26,35] the adsorption of single metal, semiconductor, and polymer nanoparticles
onto a gold thin film can appear in the SPRM differential reflectivity
image as point diffraction patterns of the surface plasmon polaritons
(SPPs) traveling across the surface. In Figure 2a, two point diffraction patterns are clearly visible due to the
adsorption of single HNPs. These diffraction patterns are very similar
to those we have seen previously with gold nanoparticles and polystyrene
nanoparticles, and are due to constructive and destructive interferences
created in the 814 nm traveling SPP waves by the change in local refractive
index due to the adsorption of a 220 nm nanoparticle. The total size
of the image in Figure 2a is 58.5 μm
× 58.5 μm, and remarkably, the signal created from one
low density 220 nm nanoparticle can span more than a 10 μm ×
10 μm area in this image. The two distinct diffraction patterns
in Figure 2a signify that two HNPs have adsorbed
onto the imaging area in this three second time frame. SPRM differential
reflectivity images have also been used to monitor the desorption
of nanoparticles from the surface, which appear as negative images
in these diffraction patterns.[35] However,
no desorption events were observed in the differential reflectivity
images for HNP adsorption onto C11-functionalized surfaces, indicating
that the hydrophobicity of the HNPs was sufficient to irreversibly
adsorb the nanoparticles over the time frame of 10 min.The
number and locations of adsorbed nanoparticles were recorded
for each SPRM differential reflectivity image in the time course series.
Figure 2b displays three 2-D cumulative adsorption
maps that plot with red points the locations of all of the 220 nm
HNPs that have been adsorbed in the imaging area from a 30 pM HNP
solution after 30, 120, and 600 s. These 2-D maps show that the adsorption
of the HNPs onto C11-functionalized surfaces is fairly uniform and
that there is no surface aggregation of the HNPs. At the concentrations
used in this work, we did not observe single nanoparticle point diffraction
patterns less than ∼2 μm (30 pixels) apart in any given
differential reflectivity image. We also did not observe any evidence
of HNP aggregation, which would lead to the appearance of significantly
larger point diffraction patterns. The total cumulative number of
nanoparticles adsorbed to the surface after 30, 120, and 600 s was
152, 448, and 1051 nanoparticles, respectively.By tallying
this total cumulative number of adsorbed nanoparticles
on a frame-by-frame basis, we are able to create “digital adsorption
curves” for the adsorption of HNPs onto C11-functionalized
surfaces. Figure 3 plots the cumulative number
of adsorbed 220 nm HNPs of 15, 30, and 60 pM concentrations over the
course of 10 min. As seen in the figure, the initial adsorption rate
(the slope at zero time of the adsorption curves) roughly doubles
as the solution concentration doubles, as expected.[35] Also shown in the figure is the digital adsorption curve
obtained after exposure of a polyethylene glycol (PEG)-functionalized
gold thin film to a 30 pM HNP solution. Almost no HNP adsorption (less
than 20 HNPs in 10 min) was observed onto this surface, verifying
that it is a hydrophobic interaction that drives the HNPs to the C11-functionalized
surface.
Figure 3
Real-time digital adsorption
curves of the cumulative number of
HNPs adsorbed onto a C11-functionalized gold surface over 10 min from
15, 30 and 60 pM HNP solutions (black, red and blue curves, respectively).
The initial adsorption rates (the slopes of these curves at zero time)
varied linearly with HNP concentration. Also shown in the figure is
a negative control, the adsorption of HNPs from a 30 pM solution onto
a PEG-functionalized gold surface (green curve) that resulted in a
cumulative adsorption of less than 20 HNPs in 10 min.
(a) A 58.5 μm × 58.5 μm Fourier filtered SPRM
three second differential reflectivity image showing the adsorption
of two individual 220 nm diameter HNPs onto a C11-functionalized gold
thin film from a 30 pM HNPPBS solution. (b) Three 2-D cumulative
adsorption maps tracking the locations of adsorbed HNPs after 30,
120, and 600 s in the same imaging area. Each red point corresponds
to the adsorption of a single HNP. The total cumulative number of
adsorbed HNPs after 30, 120, and 600 s is 152, 448, and 1051 nanoparticles,
respectively.Real-time digital adsorption
curves of the cumulative number of
HNPs adsorbed onto a C11-functionalized gold surface over 10 min from
15, 30 and 60 pM HNP solutions (black, red and blue curves, respectively).
The initial adsorption rates (the slopes of these curves at zero time)
varied linearly with HNP concentration. Also shown in the figure is
a negative control, the adsorption of HNPs from a 30 pM solution onto
a PEG-functionalized gold surface (green curve) that resulted in a
cumulative adsorption of less than 20 HNPs in 10 min.
Quantitation of the Average
Single Nanoparticle
SPRM Reflectivity Change (⟨Δ%RNP⟩) for HNPs
In addition to counting the number of
adsorbed HNPs with our digital binding curves, we are also able to
quantitate the average intensity of the point diffraction patterns
in the SPRM differential reflectivity images due to the adsorption
of single HNPs onto the C11-functionalized surface. A false colored
enlargement of one of these point diffraction images is shown in Figure 4. The signal is composed of an SPP diffraction pattern
of alternating bright and dark tails and an intense central spike
in the differential reflectivity (Δ%R) at the
intersection of the two white dotted lines. On the right-hand side
of Figure 4 is a blow up of this feature; we
define the “single nanoparticle SPRM reflectivity change”
(Δ%RNP) as the average of the Δ%R values for the nine pixels (a 3 × 3 array) in the
image at and around the pixel with the maximum Δ%R intensity.
Figure 4
Determination of the single nanoparticle SPRM reflectivity
change,
Δ%RNP, from an HNP point diffraction
pattern in the SPRM three second differential reflectivity image.
A sharp central feature is observed in the image at the intersection
of the two white dashed lines; a blow up of that intersection is shown
on the right. We define Δ%RNP as
the average of the Δ%R values for the nine
pixels in the image at and around the pixel with the maximum Δ%R intensity.
Determination of the single nanoparticle SPRM reflectivity
change,
Δ%RNP, from an HNP point diffraction
pattern in the SPRM three second differential reflectivity image.
A sharp central feature is observed in the image at the intersection
of the two white dashed lines; a blow up of that intersection is shown
on the right. We define Δ%RNP as
the average of the Δ%R values for the nine
pixels in the image at and around the pixel with the maximum Δ%R intensity.To determine the average value of Δ%RNP during an HNP adsorption experiment, which we denote
as
⟨Δ%RNP⟩, we measured
the individual Δ%RNP values for
a large number of the adsorbed HNPs observed in the time course series
of SPRM three second differential reflectivity images. An example
of this data for the adsorption of HNPs onto a C11-functionalized
surface from a 30 pM HNP solution is plotted in Figure 5 along with the digital adsorption curve of the cumulative
number of adsorbed HNPs. For these experiments, we chose to work with
30 pM HNP solutions because the HNP adsorption rate at this concentration
produced many images with a small number of nonoverlapping diffraction
patterns. Each red dot in Figure 5 represents
a Δ%RNP value obtained from a single
HNP point diffraction pattern; we often obtained multiple Δ%RNP values from each differential reflectivity
image. After 10 min, we measured Δ%RNP for 422 nanoparticles to obtain a ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ of 1.04 ± 0.03%, where 0.03% is the value
of the 95% confidence interval (±2σ/(422)1/2) with a standard deviation σ = 0.3%. As discussed in a previous
paper,[35] the distribution in Δ%RNP values is the result of the combination of
the distribution of nanoparticle sizes and any instrumental noise
artifacts introduced by the SPR microscope. This measurement of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ was repeated three times, all of
which yielded ⟨Δ%RNP⟩
values within the confidence interval (1.04 ± 0.03%). This Δ%R is well within the range of Δ%R values that are regularly measured in standard SPR imaging measurements.[41−43]
Figure 5
Determination
of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ for the
adsorption of 220 nm HNPs onto a C11-functionalized
surface from a 30 pM HNP solution. Each red point in the plot is a
Δ%RNP for a single adsorbed HNP
obtained from one of the sequential SPRM differential reflectivity
images. For this experiment, a total of 422 Δ%RNP values were obtained over ten minutes. The black dashed
line is the value of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ obtained from this data, 1.04 ± 0.03%, where ±0.03%
is the 95% confidence interval. Also plotted in the figure is the
digital adsorption curve of the cumulative number of adsorbed HNPs
(solid blue line).
Determination
of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ for the
adsorption of 220 nm HNPs onto a C11-functionalized
surface from a 30 pM HNP solution. Each red point in the plot is a
Δ%RNP for a single adsorbed HNP
obtained from one of the sequential SPRM differential reflectivity
images. For this experiment, a total of 422 Δ%RNP values were obtained over ten minutes. The black dashed
line is the value of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ obtained from this data, 1.04 ± 0.03%, where ±0.03%
is the 95% confidence interval. Also plotted in the figure is the
digital adsorption curve of the cumulative number of adsorbed HNPs
(solid blue line).
Measurement
of Melittin Uptake into HNPs via
the Increase ⟨Δ%RNP⟩
The NIPAm-based HNPs used in the single nanoparticle SPRM measurements
have been specifically designed for the selective uptake of the bioactive
26-residue peptide melittin, and the affinity of melittin to these
HNPs has been documented previously.[44] We
show here that quantitative measurements of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ from single nanoparticle SPRM measurements
of HNPs can be used to (i) demonstrate the specificity of melittin
binding to these HNPs and (ii) quantify the amount of peptide uptake
into HNPs.Lower Panel: Average single nanoparticle SPRM reflectivity values,
⟨Δ%RNP⟩, obtained
from single nanoparticle SPRM measurements of the adsorption of 220
nm HNPs onto C11-functionalized gold surfaces in the presence of melittin
(red solid circles), FLAG peptide (blue open circles), and BSA (black
open diamonds). For all measurements, the HNP concentration was fixed
at 30 pM. Error bars are the 95% confidence intervals for the ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values. Upper Panel: Mean hydrodynamic
diameter (⟨dDLS⟩) obtained
from DLS measurements in the presence of melittin. The observation
of no change in ⟨dDLS⟩ in
the presence of melittin confirms that the increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ in the presence of melittin is the
result of an increase in the refractive index of the NIPAm-based HNPs
due to the specific uptake of peptide molecules.The lower panel of Figure 6 plots
the values
of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ obtained
from single nanoparticle SPRM measurements of the adsorption of 220
nm HNPs onto C11-functionalized gold surfaces in the presence of melittin
in solution (red solid circles). At least 300 Δ%RNP values were averaged for each point in the figure.
The solution concentration of the HNPs was fixed at 30 pM for all
of these measurements, and the melittin concentration was varied from
zero to 2.5 μM. Above 3 μM, the NIPAm-based HNPs begin
to form aggregates, which have much larger SPRM responses (Δ%RNP > 4%). This aggregation is evident in
DLS
measurements[45] and also leads to large
standard deviations in the single nanoparticle Δ%RNP values (please see the Supporting
Information for more details). As seen in the figure, below
3 μM, the ⟨Δ%RNP⟩
values increase linearly with the concentration of melittin. The error
bars on the ⟨Δ%RNP⟩
values in Figure 6 are the 95% confidence intervals;
all of these ⟨Δ%RNP⟩
values, standard deviations, and confidence levels are listed in Table S-1 in the Supporting
Information.
Figure 6
Lower Panel: Average single nanoparticle SPRM reflectivity values,
⟨Δ%RNP⟩, obtained
from single nanoparticle SPRM measurements of the adsorption of 220
nm HNPs onto C11-functionalized gold surfaces in the presence of melittin
(red solid circles), FLAG peptide (blue open circles), and BSA (black
open diamonds). For all measurements, the HNP concentration was fixed
at 30 pM. Error bars are the 95% confidence intervals for the ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values. Upper Panel: Mean hydrodynamic
diameter (⟨dDLS⟩) obtained
from DLS measurements in the presence of melittin. The observation
of no change in ⟨dDLS⟩ in
the presence of melittin confirms that the increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ in the presence of melittin is the
result of an increase in the refractive index of the NIPAm-based HNPs
due to the specific uptake of peptide molecules.
Also plotted in the lower panel of Figure 6 are the values of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ obtained from single nanoparticle SPRM measurements
in the
presence of micromolar concentrations of FLAG octapeptide (blue open
circles) and BSA (black open diamonds). No change is observed in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ in the presence of either of these
molecules. The lack of interaction of the NIPAm-based HNPs with BSA
has been shown previously HNPs.[44] These
two additional measurements demonstrate the specificity of the melittin
uptake into these HNPs.The upper panel in Figure 6 plots the mean
hydrodynamic diameters (⟨dDLS⟩)
obtained from separate DLS measurements of the HNPs in micromolar
melittin solutions (same concentrations as those used in SPRM measurements).
It is clear from the figure that ⟨dDLS⟩ does not change in the presence of melittin. Using these
results, we conclude that the linear increase of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ with melittin concentration observed
for the HNPs in the single nanoparticle SPRM measurements is due to
an increase in the refractive index of NIPAm-based HNPs created by
the uptake of melittin peptides which replace the lower refractive
index PBS.
Quantitation of the Single
Nanoparticle SPRM
Response with Bulk Solution Loss Fluorescence Measurements
In order to estimate the sensitivity of the single nanoparticle SPRM
measurements toward melittin uptake into HNPs, we also performed a
set of “solution loss” measurements to roughly measure
the average number of melittin molecules absorbed per nanoparticle.
In these experiments, the total amount of melittin removed from solution
after mixing with HNPs is measured by the decrease in the intrinsic
fluorescence of the melittin in solution.[37] The same concentrations of HNPs and melittin that were used in SPRM
experiments were also used for these fluorescence experiments, but
in a greater total solution volume of 5.0 mL. These measurements require
ultracentrifugation to separate the HNPs from the supernatant; in
addition, lower concentrations of melittin required a lyophilization
and concentration step to detect a quantifiable fluorescence signal.
Nevertheless, in these solution loss experiments, a measureable decrease
in fluorescence signal was observed, and, from the calculated concentration
changes and the total solution volume, the number of moles of melittin
removed from the solution by absorption into the HNPs in the bulk
measurements could be estimated (please see Supporting
Information). Dividing this number by the number of moles of
HNPs in these solutions (30 pM × 5.0 mL = 150 fmol) yields an
approximate value for the average number of melittin molecules absorbed
per HNP. These values are plotted in Figure 7 (open blue circles) as a function of melittin concentration along
with the ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values
from the single nanoparticle SPRM measurements from Figure 6 (filled red circles). Both plots are linear with
melittin concentration from zero to 2.5 μM.
Figure 7
Average number of melittin
molecules absorbed per HNP, as determined
from solution loss fluorescence measurements (open blue circles) and
⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values from
single nanoparticle SPRM measurements (solid red circles) as a function
of melittin concentration in solution. The HNP concentration in these
measurements was fixed at 30 pM. Using these measurements, a 1% increase
in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ corresponds
to the loading of 65000 melittin molecules into each HNP. The lowest
detected amount of melittin loading with single nanoparticle SPRM
measurements was an increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ of 0.15% or approximately 10000 melittin molecules.
Average number of melittin
molecules absorbed per HNP, as determined
from solution loss fluorescence measurements (open blue circles) and
⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values from
single nanoparticle SPRM measurements (solid red circles) as a function
of melittin concentration in solution. The HNP concentration in these
measurements was fixed at 30 pM. Using these measurements, a 1% increase
in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ corresponds
to the loading of 65000 melittin molecules into each HNP. The lowest
detected amount of melittin loading with single nanoparticle SPRM
measurements was an increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ of 0.15% or approximately 10000 melittin molecules.Using the two sets of measurements
plotted in Figure 7, the sensitivity of the
single nanoparticle SPRM response
can be quantitated. A 1% increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ roughly corresponds to the maximum loading
of 65000 melittin molecules into each 220 nm HNP. If we estimate the
volume occupied by a melittin molecule to be 3.445 nm3,[46] then 65000 molecules is approximately 4% of
the total volume of the 220 nm diameter HNP. Using the molecular weight
of melittin (2846.5 g/mol) and the molecular weight of the HNPs estimated
from dn/dc and MALS measurements
(1.24 × 109 g/mol), the maximum mass ratio of melittin
to polymer observed in these 220 nm HNPs is 15%.The lowest
detected amount of melittin loading observed in the
single nanoparticle SPRM measurements is an increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ of 0.15% or approximately 10000 melittin
molecules per HNP. This corresponds to 0.6% of the volume of the 220
nm HNP and a melittin/polymer mass ratio of 2.0%. As mentioned above,
these bulk solution estimates assume that no melittin is lost to cell
walls during ultracentrifugation and lyophilization and that the ultracentrifugation
process does not alter the melittin uptake equilibrium. Despite these
caveats, the ability to detect the incorporation of 10000 melittin
molecules into a single 220 nm nanoparticle attests to the high sensitivity
of these unique SPRM measurements that only rely on the refractive
index of the analyte.
Conclusions and Future Directions
In this paper we have demonstrated that quantitative single nanoparticle
SPRM measurements can be used to measure in situ the uptake of the
bioactive peptide melittin into single HNPs. The average single nanoparticle
SPRM reflectivity change ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ is measured during the adsorption of 220 nm NIPAm-based
HNPs onto C11-functionalized gold surfaces from the quantitative analysis
of hundreds of single nanoparticle point diffraction patterns in sequential
SPRM differential reflectivity images that are collected in real-time
during the adsorption process. The value of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ increases linearly with melittin
concentrations up to 2.5 μM due to the uptake of peptide molecules
into the HNPs that results in an increased nanoparticle refractive
index. The SPRM response can be roughly calibrated using bulk fluorescence
solution loss measurements; the maximum loading into the 220 nm HNPs
that we observe with the single nanoparticle SPRM measurements corresponds
to the uptake of approximately 65000 melittin molecules or 4% of the
nanoparticle volume. The minimum change in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ that we detect corresponds to approximately
10000 melittin molecules or 0.6% of the nanoparticle volume.In the future, in addition to quantitating the specific uptake
of melittin into the HNPs, these digital SPRM measurements can also
be used to study the real-time adsorption of HNPs to bioactive surfaces,
and also potentially to monitor melittin release from adsorbed monolayers
of HNPs. As our SPRM measurements of single nanoparticle point diffraction
patterns improve, we will also begin to examine the single Δ%RNP values in order to obtain additional information
about the distribution characteristics of single HNPs. These single
nanoparticle SPRM measurements are a direct measure of peptide uptake
into the soft hydrogel nanoparticle via the refractive index of the
molecule and potentially can be applied to the uptake of other peptides,
proteins, and drug molecules into various porous nanoparticles and
mesoparticles, such as dendrimers, porous silica nanoparticles, and
liposomes.
Authors: Keiichi Yoshimatsu; Benjamin K Lesel; Yusuke Yonamine; John M Beierle; Yu Hoshino; Kenneth J Shea Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2012-01-27 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Tommy Cedervall; Iseult Lynch; Stina Lindman; Tord Berggård; Eva Thulin; Hanna Nilsson; Kenneth A Dawson; Sara Linse Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2007-01-31 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Rachit Agarwal; Vikramjit Singh; Patrick Jurney; Li Shi; S V Sreenivasan; Krishnendu Roy Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2012-03-02 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Aaron P Griset; Joseph Walpole; Rong Liu; Ann Gaffey; Yolonda L Colson; Mark W Grinstaff Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2009-02-25 Impact factor: 15.419