Maxim Belkin1, Aleksei Aksimentiev1. 1. Department of Physics, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign , Champaign, Illinois 61820, United States.
Abstract
The integration of local heat sources with solid-state nanopores offers new means for controlling the transmembrane transport of charged biomacromolecules. In the case of electrophoretic transport of DNA, recent experimental studies revealed unexpected temperature dependences of the DNA capture rate, the DNA translocation velocity, and the ionic current blockades produced by the presence of DNA in the nanopore. Here, we report the results of all-atom molecular dynamics simulations that elucidated the effect of temperature on the key microscopic processes governing electric field-driven transport of DNA through nanopores. Mimicking the experimental setup, we simulated the capture and subsequent translocation of short DNA duplexes through a locally heated nanopore at several temperatures and electrolyte conditions. The temperature dependence of ion mobility at the DNA surface was found to cause the dependence of the relative conductance blockades on temperature. To the first order, the effective force on DNA in the nanopore was found to be independent of temperature, despite a considerable reduction of solution viscosity. The temperature dependence of the solution viscosity was found to make DNA translocations faster for a uniformly heated system but not in the case of local heating that does not affect viscosity of solution surrounding the untranslocated part of the molecule. Increasing solution temperature was also found to reduce the lifetime of bonds formed between cations and DNA. Using a flow suppression algorithm, we were able to separate the effects of electro-osmotic flow and direct ion binding, finding the reduced durations of DNA-ion bonds to increase, albeit weakly, the effective force experienced by DNA in an electric field. Unexpectedly, our simulations revealed a considerable temperature dependence of solvent velocity at the DNA surface-slip velocity, an effect that can alter hydrodynamic coupling between the motion of DNA and the surrounding fluid.
The integration of local heat sources with solid-state nanopores offers new means for controlling the transmembrane transport of charged biomacromolecules. In the case of electrophoretic transport of DNA, recent experimental studies revealed unexpected temperature dependences of the DNA capture rate, the DNA translocation velocity, and the ionic current blockades produced by the presence of DNA in the nanopore. Here, we report the results of all-atom molecular dynamics simulations that elucidated the effect of temperature on the key microscopic processes governing electric field-driven transport of DNA through nanopores. Mimicking the experimental setup, we simulated the capture and subsequent translocation of short DNA duplexes through a locally heated nanopore at several temperatures and electrolyte conditions. The temperature dependence of ion mobility at the DNA surface was found to cause the dependence of the relative conductance blockades on temperature. To the first order, the effective force on DNA in the nanopore was found to be independent of temperature, despite a considerable reduction of solution viscosity. The temperature dependence of the solution viscosity was found to make DNA translocations faster for a uniformly heated system but not in the case of local heating that does not affect viscosity of solution surrounding the untranslocated part of the molecule. Increasing solution temperature was also found to reduce the lifetime of bonds formed between cations and DNA. Using a flow suppression algorithm, we were able to separate the effects of electro-osmotic flow and direct ion binding, finding the reduced durations of DNA-ion bonds to increase, albeit weakly, the effective force experienced by DNA in an electric field. Unexpectedly, our simulations revealed a considerable temperature dependence of solvent velocity at the DNA surface-slip velocity, an effect that can alter hydrodynamic coupling between the motion of DNA and the surrounding fluid.
Electrophoretic transport of biomolecules
through a nanopore in
a thin solid-state membrane is a process that has many potential applications
in bionanotechnology.[1−4] Ionic current signatures produced by translocating biomolecules
have been used for single molecule sensing and analysis,[5−8] including efforts directed toward realizing nanopore sequencing
of DNA.[9−11] Incorporation of “active” components,
such as as electrodes[12−15] or light-responsive elements,[16−19] offers new routes for controlling the nanopore translocation
process and new means for detection and identification of the passing
biomolecules.Recently, laser-induced plasmon heating emerged
as a novel approach
to affecting the nanopore transport. In a typical experimental setup,
small metallic nanoparticles are placed in the vicinity of a nanopore.
Illumination of the particles with a laser beam rapidly (in tens of
nanoseconds or less) heats up the nanopore volume; switching the laser
off rapidly cools the nanopore volume back to the ambient temperature.
Such plasmon-induced local heating has already been used for modulation
of local temperature in a biological nanopore alpha-hemolysin,[20] subdiffraction limit profiling of optical field
intensity,[21] control over nanopore electrical
resistance,[22] stretching of DNA in a nanopore,[23] inducing defects in lipid bilayer membranes,[24] and parallel fabrication of nanopores in graphene.[25] Local heating may also play a role in application
of plasmonic nanopores to DNA sequencing, whereby the optical field
produced by the plasmonic nanostructure is used to both control the
translocation of DNA and read out the DNA sequence by means of Raman
scattering.[26]Plasmonic nanopores.
(a) Schematic illustration of the experimental
setup used for the measurements of the effect of plasmonic heating
on DNA and ion transport through a solid-state nanopore. Two gold
triangular prisms (yellow) rest on top of a solid-state membrane (gray)
in a bow tie arrangement. In the geometrical center of the bow tie
structure, a nanopore in the membrane connects the two solution-filled
compartments. A transmembrane bias is induced across the membrane,
driving the passage of charged solutes (ions and DNA) from one compartment
to the other, through the nanopore. The translocation of DNA through
the nanopore is detected as a transient reduction of the nanopore
ionic current. The temperature of the bow tie is controlled by a laser-induced
plasmon excitations (not shown). The background image shows the distribution
of temperature within the symmetry plane of the bow tie indicated
by a dashed line in the inset. The temperature map was obtained using
the COMSOL Multiphysics software as described in ref (27); the temperature of the
bow tie was set to 395 K. The dashed rectangle indicates the approximate
location of the all-atom system used for MD simulations. (Inset) Top
view of the plasmonic nanopore system detailing the arrangement of
the bow tie near the nanopore. (b) Cut-away view of the all-atom model
featuring a SiO2 membrane (gray) with an hourglass nanopore
in it (3.5 nm in diameter in the middle, 5 nm at the pore entrances),
a gold bow tie nanoantenna (yellow), a 20-bp piece of a double-stranded
DNA (teal and blue), and electrolyte solution (small spheres). The
DNA is initially placed ∼10 nm above the pore entrance and
oriented along the z axis, the axis of the nanopore.
During MD simulations, a set of constraints allows the molecule to
move along and rotate about the z axis. The temperature
of the bow tie Tbt is independently controlled
from the temperature of bulk solution (295 K). All simulations are
performed at a transmembrane bias Vt =
350 mV.Local heating of solid-state nanopores
was found to have perplexing
effects on nanopore transport of ions and DNA.[28] The local heating not only increased the ionic current
through an open pore in accord with the expectations, but also altered
the ratio of the blockade to open-pore currents. While having no effect
on the duration of the ionic current blockades, local heating considerably
affected the frequency of the blockade events, i.e., the process of
DNA capture. The capture rate dependence was sensitive to the electrolyte
conditions: as the temperature of the nanopore volume increased, the
capture rate decreased in KCl solution but increased in LiCl. The
susceptibillity to the electrolyte type was attributed to the differential
thermophoretic effect on DNA, which is positive in KCl but negative
in LiCl buffers.[28] Further experiments
elucidated the effects of global heating on DNA translocation.[29]Here, we report an all-atom, explicit
solvent molecular dynamics
(MD) study of the effect of temperature on DNA capture and translocation
processes. Reproducing experimental conditions, we investigate how
local or global modulations of temperature affect the ionic current
blockades, the DNA capture rate, and the effective force on DNA. We
show that changes in local ion mobility near DNA are responsible for
the observed dependence of relative blockade amplitude on temperature,
whereas a temperature dependence of ion binding to DNA alters its
effective charge. The results of our study provide further insights
into the behavior of DNA subject to local temperature gradients, which
is important for the development of biomedical applications that incorporate
local heating sources.[27,30]
Results and Discussion
The primary objective of this work was elucidation of temperature
effects on DNA translocation through plasmonic nanopores. Figure illustrates the
experimental system considered. The key element of the plasmonic nanopore
system is a gold bow tie structure placed on top of a solid-state
membrane.[21,28] A nanopore is drilled through the gap of
the bow tie structure, connecting the two solution-filled compartments
with a water-filled passage. A DNA molecule introduced at one side
of the nanopore can be electrophoretically driven through the nanopore.
The temperature of the system in the vicinity of the nanopore is modulated
by illuminating the bow tie structure with a laser beam; the higher
the power of the beam the higher the temperature of the bow tie and
the surrounding solution.
Figure 1
Plasmonic nanopores.
(a) Schematic illustration of the experimental
setup used for the measurements of the effect of plasmonic heating
on DNA and ion transport through a solid-state nanopore. Two gold
triangular prisms (yellow) rest on top of a solid-state membrane (gray)
in a bow tie arrangement. In the geometrical center of the bow tie
structure, a nanopore in the membrane connects the two solution-filled
compartments. A transmembrane bias is induced across the membrane,
driving the passage of charged solutes (ions and DNA) from one compartment
to the other, through the nanopore. The translocation of DNA through
the nanopore is detected as a transient reduction of the nanopore
ionic current. The temperature of the bow tie is controlled by a laser-induced
plasmon excitations (not shown). The background image shows the distribution
of temperature within the symmetry plane of the bow tie indicated
by a dashed line in the inset. The temperature map was obtained using
the COMSOL Multiphysics software as described in ref (27); the temperature of the
bow tie was set to 395 K. The dashed rectangle indicates the approximate
location of the all-atom system used for MD simulations. (Inset) Top
view of the plasmonic nanopore system detailing the arrangement of
the bow tie near the nanopore. (b) Cut-away view of the all-atom model
featuring a SiO2 membrane (gray) with an hourglass nanopore
in it (3.5 nm in diameter in the middle, 5 nm at the pore entrances),
a gold bow tie nanoantenna (yellow), a 20-bp piece of a double-stranded
DNA (teal and blue), and electrolyte solution (small spheres). The
DNA is initially placed ∼10 nm above the pore entrance and
oriented along the z axis, the axis of the nanopore.
During MD simulations, a set of constraints allows the molecule to
move along and rotate about the z axis. The temperature
of the bow tie Tbt is independently controlled
from the temperature of bulk solution (295 K). All simulations are
performed at a transmembrane bias Vt =
350 mV.
To determine the effect of temperature
on nanopore transport of
DNA, we built several atomic-scale models of the experimental plasmonic
nanopore system. Due to its relatively large size, only a part of
the bow tie structure immediately adjacent to the nanopore was explicitly
modeled, Figure b.
Even smaller systems were used to investigate the effect of temperature
on ion mobility and binding kinetics. In the remainder of our study,
we consider only the temperature effects on DNA transport through
plasmonic nanopores, neglecting the possibility of high-intensity
optical fields acting directly on DNA.[26,31] In doing so,
we limit our investigation to the cases where the outcome of the experimental
observations does not depend on the polarization of the incident laser
beam, which was the experimental situation realized thus far.[28] The possibility of direct optical trapping of
DNA in the absence of local heating effects has been investigated
in ref (26).
All-Atom MD
Simulations of DNA Capture and Translocation
To determine
the effect of local heating and electrolyte conditions
on electrophoretic transport of DNA through solid-state plasmonic
nanopores, we built several all-atom models containing the key elements
of the experimental system. Each model, Figure b, featured two tips of the gold bow tie,
a SiO2 membrane containing an hourglass nanopore, a 20-basepair
(bp) double-stranded (ds) DNA molecule, water, and ions. In this work,
we used a shell of amorphous SiO2 to model an oxidized
surface of a Si3N4 membrane;[32] the membrane and the gold bow tie were made hollow to reduce
the total number of atoms in the simulation system. Two systems containing
either 2 M KCl or 2 M LiCl were built. Each system was simulated either
at uniform room temperature (295 K) or under a local heating condition,
whereby the temperature of the bow tie was maintained at 395 K and
the temperature of the solution away from the bow tie was set to 295
K. The local heating was realized by the dual temperature control
method[27] as described in SI. Figure S1 shows a steady state
distribution of temperature in the simulations performed under the
local heating conditions.Molecular dynamics simulations of DNA capture
and translocation
through plasmonic nanopores. (a–d) The z-coordinate
of the DNA’s CoM (top) and the ionic current flowing through
the nanopore (bottom) in MD simulations of DNA capture. The outcomes
of four independent simulations (indicated by color) are shown for
each temperature and electrolyte condition. The z axis is defined in Figure b; dashed lines indicate the location of the top and bottom
membrane surfaces. The ionic current traces (bottom panels) were obtained
by applying a 1.9 ns moving average filter to 9.6 ps sampled instantaneous
currents. The DNA’s CoM coordinates were recorded every 9.6
ps. (e) The average capture rate versus the bow tie temperature for
two electrolyte conditions. For each trajectory, the capture rate
was computed as inverse of the time elapsed from the beginning of
the simulations to the first moment the molecule’s center of
mass passed through the nanopore entrance—the plane of the
top surface of the membrane. (f) The average translocation time versus
the bow tie temperature for two electrolyte conditions. For each trajectory,
the translocation time (shown as a color filled bar) was computed
as the time elapsed from the last moment the DNA’s CoM passed
through the nanopore entrance and the first moment the DNA reached
the nanopore exit—the plane of the bottom surface of the membrane.
Open bars with a dashed-line outline show the DNA translocation times
computed as a product of the simulated translocation time at 295 K
and the ratio of the solvent viscosity at 332 K (average temperature
in the nanopore in our simulations) and 295 K, η332 K,
C/η295 K, C, Figure g, where C denotes either KCl or LiCl. Open
bars with a solid-line outline show the DNA translocation times computed
as a product of the DNA translocation time at 295 K in 2 M KCl and
(η/η295 K, 2 M KCl) (F295 K, 2 M KCl/F), where F and η are the simulated effective
force, Figure b, and
viscosity for the specified solvent and temperature condition. (g,
h) The absolute, Δ = (Ib – I0)/Vt, and relative, Δ/G = (Ib – I0)/I0, conductance
blockades produced by the translocation of a 20-bp DNA. The open-pore, I0, ionic current was computed by averaging the
ionic current prior to DNA capture. The blockade current, Ib, was chosen as the minimum value of the 1.9
ns-averaged ionic current traces, panels a–d, during the DNA
translocation. In panels e–h, each data point indicates an
average of the four independent simulations performed at the same
temperature and electrolyte conditions; the error bars show the standard
error of the mean.
Figure 4
Measurements of the effective
force on DNA in a plasmonic nanopore.
(a) Cut-away view of the simulation system. A 77-bp double-stranded
DNA molecule is threaded through a 3.5 nm diameter nanopore in a solid-state
membrane. The DNA’s phosphorus atoms are harmonically restrained
to their initial coordinates. Displacement of the DNA from the initial
coordinates in electric field E reports on the effective
force.[39] The temperature of the gold bow
tie nanoantenna, Tbt, is maintained independently
from the temperature of the solution using a dual thermostat method.[27] The solid-state membrane and the gold bow tie
have the same dimensions as in the simulations of the DNA capture, Figure b. (b, c) Absolute
(panel b) and relative (panel c) conductance blockades produced by
the double-stranded DNA molecule in plasmonic nanopores for two temperatures
of the bow tie nanoantenna, Tbt, and several
electrolyte solutions (2 M KCl, 2 M LiCl, and 1 M KCl). (d) The effective
force experienced by the DNA
molecule in a plasmonic nanopore at 2 M KCl, 2 M LiCl, or 1 M KCl
electrolyte solutions at two bow tie temperatures. (e) The average
flux of water flowing through the plasmonic nanopore blocked by DNA
(filled bars). The flux is computed through the middle plane of the
membrane perpendicular to the nanopore axis. The dashed lines show
the water flux at Tbt = 395 K computed
by multiplying the water flux values at 295 K and the ratio of solution
viscosities at 295 and 332 K, the latter being the average temperature
of the nanopore volume. (f) Setup of the all-atom MD simulations for
measuring the relative solution viscosity. A single water molecule
is pulled through a solution with a constant velocity vpull = 10 nm/ns. The average force required to maintain
the constant velocity of the molecule is directly proportional to
the solution viscosity. (g) Temperature dependence of electrolyte
solutions’ viscosities normalized by the viscosity of 2 M KCl
solution at 295 K. The procedure for obtaining the normalized viscosities
is described in the text and is schematically shown in panel f. The
vertical dashed line indicates the average temperature inside the
nanopore at bow tie temperature of 395 K.
Each simulation of the
electrophoretic transport began having the
DNA molecule aligned with the nanopore axis (z-axis);
the DNA’s center of mass (CoM) was located ∼9 nm away
from the nanopore entrance, Figure b. Prior to the application of the electric field,
each system was equilibrated for 1 ns having the DNA molecule restrained
to its initial location. A uniform external electric field was then
applied to produce a transmembrane bias of 350 mV;[33,34] the polarity of the bias was chosen to produce translocation of
negatively charged DNA through the nanopore. To increase our chances
of observing spontaneous capture of DNA by the nanopore, we used custom
restraints to limit the translational and rotational degrees of freedom
of the DNA molecules to translation along the pore axis and rotation
about the pore axis. Doing so also considerably reduced the number
of conformations that a DNA molecule could adopt in the nanopore,
which increased the accuracy of the ionic current blockade determination.
Although the DNA capture rates obtained from such simulations could
not be directly compared to experimental capture rates, the simulations,
nevertheless, allowed for comparative study of nanopore transport
under different electrolyte and temperature conditions.Figure a–d
shows the outcome of 16 DNA transport simulations: four independent
simulations for each of the four electrolyte and temperature conditions.
To characterize the translocation process, we plot in the top panels
of Figure a–d
the location of the DNA’s CoM. Starting from the same initial
condition, the molecules first undergo stochastic displacement along
the pore axis driven by random forces from the solution. As the molecules
approach the nanopore entrance, the electrophoretic force on the DNA
increases, making the molecule’s motion more deterministic
and unidirectional. Inside the nanopore, the electrophoretic force
dominates over random forces from the environement, producing rapid
DNA translocation and exit from the nanopore. As DNA molecules translocate
through the nanopore, the nanopore ionic current exhibits transient
reductions, bottom panels of Figure a–d. In fact, the simulated ionic current traces
are remarkably similar to experimental ionic current traces obtained
for longer DNA molecules.[35]
Figure 2
Molecular dynamics simulations of DNA capture
and translocation
through plasmonic nanopores. (a–d) The z-coordinate
of the DNA’s CoM (top) and the ionic current flowing through
the nanopore (bottom) in MD simulations of DNA capture. The outcomes
of four independent simulations (indicated by color) are shown for
each temperature and electrolyte condition. The z axis is defined in Figure b; dashed lines indicate the location of the top and bottom
membrane surfaces. The ionic current traces (bottom panels) were obtained
by applying a 1.9 ns moving average filter to 9.6 ps sampled instantaneous
currents. The DNA’s CoM coordinates were recorded every 9.6
ps. (e) The average capture rate versus the bow tie temperature for
two electrolyte conditions. For each trajectory, the capture rate
was computed as inverse of the time elapsed from the beginning of
the simulations to the first moment the molecule’s center of
mass passed through the nanopore entrance—the plane of the
top surface of the membrane. (f) The average translocation time versus
the bow tie temperature for two electrolyte conditions. For each trajectory,
the translocation time (shown as a color filled bar) was computed
as the time elapsed from the last moment the DNA’s CoM passed
through the nanopore entrance and the first moment the DNA reached
the nanopore exit—the plane of the bottom surface of the membrane.
Open bars with a dashed-line outline show the DNA translocation times
computed as a product of the simulated translocation time at 295 K
and the ratio of the solvent viscosity at 332 K (average temperature
in the nanopore in our simulations) and 295 K, η332 K,
C/η295 K, C, Figure g, where C denotes either KCl or LiCl. Open
bars with a solid-line outline show the DNA translocation times computed
as a product of the DNA translocation time at 295 K in 2 M KCl and
(η/η295 K, 2 M KCl) (F295 K, 2 M KCl/F), where F and η are the simulated effective
force, Figure b, and
viscosity for the specified solvent and temperature condition. (g,
h) The absolute, Δ = (Ib – I0)/Vt, and relative, Δ/G = (Ib – I0)/I0, conductance
blockades produced by the translocation of a 20-bp DNA. The open-pore, I0, ionic current was computed by averaging the
ionic current prior to DNA capture. The blockade current, Ib, was chosen as the minimum value of the 1.9
ns-averaged ionic current traces, panels a–d, during the DNA
translocation. In panels e–h, each data point indicates an
average of the four independent simulations performed at the same
temperature and electrolyte conditions; the error bars show the standard
error of the mean.
Analysis
of the simulation trajectories characterized the DNA transport
process in terms of the average capture rate, Figure e; the average translocation time, Figure f; and the absolute, Figure g, and relative, Figure h, conductance blockades.
For each simulation, we computed a capture rate as a multiplicative
inverse of the time elapsed from the beginning of the simulation and
the moment the DNA’s CoM passed through the nanopore entrance—the
plane of the top membrane surface. In the simulations performed under
identical heating and ionic solution conditions, the DNA capture time
varied considerably from one simulation to the other. Typically, capture
events were observed within 30 to 100 ns, which correspond to 10–33
capture events in 1 μs. Such very high capture rates were, of
course, a consequence of the simulations setup. Nevertheless, the
simulated capture events clearly exhibited the expected stochastic
features of the DNA capture process. Unfortunately, the high statistical
error in the determination of the average capture rate caused by the
limited number of independent MD runs did not allow us to determine
the effect of the electrolyte and temperature conditions.The
simulated movement of DNA molecules through the nanopore was
more deterministic than the DNA capture. Hence, the statistical error
in determining the average DNA translocation time was considerably
less than in determining the average capture rate. In our analysis,
we defined the translocation time as the time it took the DNA’s
CoM to pass from the top surface to the bottom surface of the membrane,
a distance of ∼10 nm. When simulated at uniform room temperature,
DNA translocation was about 2 times faster in KCl than in LiCl solution, Figure f. Heating reduced
the translocation time for both KCl and LiCl, but the reduction was
more pronounced for LiCl than for KCl. In experiment, local heating
had no measurable effect on DNA translocation time, whereas global
heating resulted in DNA moving faster through the pore.[28] The results of our simulations and experiment
could be reconciled assuming the DNA translocation time in experiment
is determined by the untranslocated part of the DNA molecule (DNA
blob), which was not modeled in our simulations. MD simulations of
the effective force in heated nanopores (described below) provide
further support to this hypothesis.The ionic current traces
shown in Figure a–d
were used to compute the conductance
blockades produced by the passage of the DNA molecules through the
nanopore. The instantaneous values of the ionic current were determined
by computing the ion displacements between consecutive frames of the
MD trajectories.[33,34] For each electrolyte and heating
condition, we determined an open-pore current value, I0, as the mean ionic current flowing through the nanopore
before the moment the DNA entered the nanopore. Previous MD studies[36] found the open-pore current to increase with
temperature at the rate prescribed by the bulk conductivity dependence
on temperature. In our simulations, the open-pore conductance increased
with the bow tie temperature less rapidly than the bulk electrolyte
conductivity with the bulk solution temperature, Figure S2, because the temperature of the electrolyte in the
nanopore volume was considerably smaller than the temperature of the
bow tie, Figure S1. Each ionic current
trace characterizing a single DNA translocation event was averaged
by applying a moving average filter with the 1.9 ns window; the minimum
value of the ionic current was chosen as the blockade current Ib. The absolute and relative conductance blockades
were obtained according to their definitions, i.e., as Δ = (Ib – I0)/Vt and Δ/G = (Ib – I0)/I0, correspondingly, where Vt = 350 mV was the transmembrane bias. The simulated conductance blockades
and their dependence on temperature are shown in Figure g–h. Despite the approximations
made during the setup of the simulations, the obtained conductance
blockades closely resemble experimentally reported ones.[28]Bulk electrolyte simulations of the temperature effect
on ionic
current blockade. (a) A typical simulation system containing a 22-bp
dsDNA molecule (teal and blue) submerged in an electrolyte solution
(semitransparent surface). The system is subject to a constant electric
field of 35 mV/nm. A set of harmonic
restraints prevents DNA from drifting in the electric field, reporting
on the value of the effective force. The temperature of the system
is uniformly set to a prescribed value. (b, c) The temperature dependence
of the absolute, Δ = (Ib – I0)/Vt, and relative, Δ/G = (Ib – I0)/I0, conductance
blockades. Here, I0 is obtained as the
bulk ionic current density j0 multiplied
by the cross-sectional area of
the simulation unit cell within the plane perpendicular to the molecule’s
axis; Ib is the actual current flowing
through the simulations system and Vt =
35 (mV/nm)·L (nm),
where L is the size
of the system along the z axis. (d, e) Normalized
mobility of ions as a function of the radial distance from the central
axis of the DNA helix. Each radial profile was normalized by the corresponding
average value of mobility in the bulk electrolyte region r > R*, where R* = 2.2 nm for all solutions and temperatures. Solid lines
are fit
to data of a smooth-step function , where the fitting parameters a and b characterize the location and the steepness,
respectively, of the smooth step. (f, g) Absolute (panel f) and relative
(panel g) conductance blockades computed using the normalized number
density and mobility of ions, eqs and 2 (see SI for details). As before, R* was set to 2.2 nm, and the value of R0 was set to 2.7 nm in order to compare the results to those shown
in panels b–c. Open symbols show the conductance blockades
computed using the number density and mobility dependences observed
in the MD simulations. Filled symbols indicate the conductance blockade
values that would be observed if the normalized ion mobility, μ(r)/μ∞, were independent of solution
temperature. Dashed and solid lines in both panels show linear fits
to the data.
Microscopic Mechanism of Relative Conductance
Blockade Dependence
on Temperature
To elucidate the microscopic
processes that give rise to the observed
temperature effects, we built several additional all-atom models containing
a short fragment of a dsDNA (22-bp) in an evenly heated 2 M KCl or
LiCl electrolyte solution, Figure a. The use of uniform heating is justified by the fact
that, although the heating of a plasmonic nanopore device is local
at the length scale of the device, it is nearly uniform at the length
scale of a short DNA fragment confined to the constriction of the
nanopore.[26] Furthermore, because the electric
field across the membrane is highly inhomogeneous and is focused at
the pore constriction, modeling the constriction region of the nanopore
is expected to provide insights into the temperature dependence of
the ionic current blockade and the effective electrophoretic force
of a full-scale system. In our simulations of the bulk systems, the
DNA fragment was restrained to align with the z-axis
through a set of harmonic constraints that also reported on the effective
force applied to DNA by the electric field. An electric field corresponding
to a potential drop of 350 mV over 10 nm distance was applied parallel
to the DNA (z-axis). Each of the two systems (2 M
KCl or 2 M LiCl) was simulated at a uniform temperature of 295, 345,
and 395 K.
Figure 3
Bulk electrolyte simulations of the temperature effect
on ionic
current blockade. (a) A typical simulation system containing a 22-bp
dsDNA molecule (teal and blue) submerged in an electrolyte solution
(semitransparent surface). The system is subject to a constant electric
field of 35 mV/nm. A set of harmonic
restraints prevents DNA from drifting in the electric field, reporting
on the value of the effective force. The temperature of the system
is uniformly set to a prescribed value. (b, c) The temperature dependence
of the absolute, Δ = (Ib – I0)/Vt, and relative, Δ/G = (Ib – I0)/I0, conductance
blockades. Here, I0 is obtained as the
bulk ionic current density j0 multiplied
by the cross-sectional area of
the simulation unit cell within the plane perpendicular to the molecule’s
axis; Ib is the actual current flowing
through the simulations system and Vt =
35 (mV/nm)·L (nm),
where L is the size
of the system along the z axis. (d, e) Normalized
mobility of ions as a function of the radial distance from the central
axis of the DNA helix. Each radial profile was normalized by the corresponding
average value of mobility in the bulk electrolyte region r > R*, where R* = 2.2 nm for all solutions and temperatures. Solid lines
are fit
to data of a smooth-step function , where the fitting parameters a and b characterize the location and the steepness,
respectively, of the smooth step. (f, g) Absolute (panel f) and relative
(panel g) conductance blockades computed using the normalized number
density and mobility of ions, eqs and 2 (see SI for details). As before, R* was set to 2.2 nm, and the value of R0 was set to 2.7 nm in order to compare the results to those shown
in panels b–c. Open symbols show the conductance blockades
computed using the number density and mobility dependences observed
in the MD simulations. Filled symbols indicate the conductance blockade
values that would be observed if the normalized ion mobility, μ(r)/μ∞, were independent of solution
temperature. Dashed and solid lines in both panels show linear fits
to the data.
Flow of ions pass biomolecules in bulk electrolyte
solutions cannot be described via open-pore or blockade currents per se. Yet, one can quantify the suppression of the ionic
flow caused by the molecule in its vicinity. Previous MD simulations
have found the ion mobility near DNA to be suppressed in comparison
to the bulk value.[37,38] The distance (from the molecule)
at which the ions regain their bulk mobility can depend on various
factors, including temperature. The plots of the radial profiles of
ionic current density indicate that this distance in our simulations
is ∼1.2 nm from the DNA surface or R* = 2.2 nm from the DNA axis, Figure S3. Hereafter, we refer to the region farther than 2.2 nm from the
DNA axis as bulk solution.Knowing the average current density
in the bulk electrolyte region
and the cross-sectional area of the simulation system, we can estimate
the magnitude of the ionic current that would have flown in the absence
of the molecule, i.e., the open-pore current I0. The blockade current Ib can
be obtained directly form the simulations as the total current flowing
in the direction of the applied field. Figure b–c plots the absolute and relative
conductance blockades computed using the I0 and Ib values obtained from the simulations
of a DNA fragment in uniform solution. Interestingly, the absolute
conductance blockades have similar values to those observed in the
simulations of the DNA capture, Figure g,h. This resemblance supports the conclusion about
the major role of the ion mobility suppression in determining the
absolute conductance blockade.[38] Noticeable
differences in the values of relative conductance blockades can be
readily explained. First and foremost, the relative conductance blockade
depends on the open-pore conductance value, which is considerably
greater for the bulk electrolyte system, Figure a, in comparison to the plasmonic nanopore
system, Figure b.
Other factors that may contribute to the observed differences are
the reduction of ion mobility by the nanopore walls, the hourglass
shape of the nanopore, and the nonuniform distribution of temperature
(Figure S1) in the plasmonic nanopore system.
Overall, the dependence of the relative conductance blockades on the
solution temperature is, however, captured correctly: the relative
conductance blockade decreases in magnitude as temperature increases.To explain the observed changes of the conductance blockades, we
computed the radial profiles of ion mobility, μ(r), as a function of the distance from the DNA axis, r. The profiles of ion mobility were determined by first computing
the radial profiles of ion and water velocities, vion(r) and vwater(r), Figure S4. The local
ion mobility was then computed as μion(r) = (vion(r) – vwater(r))/E, where E was the magnitude of the applied electric
field. As expected, ion mobility increases with the distance from
the DNA and with the solution temperature, Figure S5. To quantitatively compare the changes in the ion mobility
profiles, we normalized the ion mobility profiles by the corresponding
bulk ion mobility values. The normalized mobility profiles, Figure d–e, clearly
show that, as the temperature of the electrolyte solutions increases,
the ion mobility reaches its bulk value (μ∞) faster. To highlight the change, we fitted the normalized mobility
dependences with a smooth-step function (solid lines) and marked the
level at which the ions gain 50% of their bulk mobility values (black
dashed lines), Figure d–e. Clearly, the intersection of the fit with the 50%-level
is closer to DNA at higher temperatures of the electrolyte solutions.To directly show that the change of the ion mobility with temperature
explains the dependence of the conductance blockades on temperature,
we express the absolute and relative conductance blockades as (see SI for details):Here, L is the dimension of the simulation system along the direction
of the applied electric field; q, n∞, and μ∞ are the charge,
the number density, and the ion mobility in the bulk electrolyte solution,
correspondingly; n*(r) (shown in Figure S6) and μ*(r) are
the normalized (by the corresponding values in the bulk electrolyte
region) profiles of the ion number density and ion mobility; r is the distance from the DNA axis; R* is the distance from the DNA axis at which ion mobility and
number density return to their bulk values; R0 is the radius of the pore to which the comparison is being
made (for the calculations of the relative conductance blockade).
In both equations, the summation is performed over all ion types present
in the solution (e.g., K+, Li+, Cl–). The conductance blockades computed using the above expressions, Figure f–g (open
symbols), reproduce the results of our previous calculations based
on direct determination of the ionic current, Figure b–c.Using eqs and 2, we can separate
the dependence of the conductance
blockades on bulk (μ∞) and normalized (μ*)
mobilities of the ions. Thus, we can model an imaginary situation
in which bulk mobilities retain their dependence on the temperature,
but normalized ones remain unchanged, μ*(r,T) = μ*(r, 295 K). The results of calculations for such a situation are shown in Figure f–g (filled
symbols): the temperature dependence of the relative conductance blockades
is vanished. A similar outcome (no temperature dependence of the relative
conductance blockade) could be expected from a model that does not
take the reduction of ion mobility near DNA into account. Thus, our
analysis indicates that the experimentally observed dependence of
the relative conductance on temperature originates from the temperature
dependence of ion mobility near DNA.Measurements of the effective
force on DNA in a plasmonic nanopore.
(a) Cut-away view of the simulation system. A 77-bp double-stranded
DNA molecule is threaded through a 3.5 nm diameter nanopore in a solid-state
membrane. The DNA’s phosphorus atoms are harmonically restrained
to their initial coordinates. Displacement of the DNA from the initial
coordinates in electric field E reports on the effective
force.[39] The temperature of the gold bow
tie nanoantenna, Tbt, is maintained independently
from the temperature of the solution using a dual thermostat method.[27] The solid-state membrane and the gold bow tie
have the same dimensions as in the simulations of the DNA capture, Figure b. (b, c) Absolute
(panel b) and relative (panel c) conductance blockades produced by
the double-stranded DNA molecule in plasmonic nanopores for two temperatures
of the bow tie nanoantenna, Tbt, and several
electrolyte solutions (2 M KCl, 2 M LiCl, and 1 M KCl). (d) The effective
force experienced by the DNA
molecule in a plasmonic nanopore at 2 M KCl, 2 M LiCl, or 1 M KClelectrolyte solutions at two bow tie temperatures. (e) The average
flux of water flowing through the plasmonic nanopore blocked by DNA
(filled bars). The flux is computed through the middle plane of the
membrane perpendicular to the nanopore axis. The dashed lines show
the water flux at Tbt = 395 K computed
by multiplying the water flux values at 295 K and the ratio of solution
viscosities at 295 and 332 K, the latter being the average temperature
of the nanopore volume. (f) Setup of the all-atom MD simulations for
measuring the relative solution viscosity. A single water molecule
is pulled through a solution with a constant velocity vpull = 10 nm/ns. The average force required to maintain
the constant velocity of the molecule is directly proportional to
the solution viscosity. (g) Temperature dependence of electrolyte
solutions’ viscosities normalized by the viscosity of 2 M KCl
solution at 295 K. The procedure for obtaining the normalized viscosities
is described in the text and is schematically shown in panel f. The
vertical dashed line indicates the average temperature inside the
nanopore at bow tie temperature of 395 K.
Temperature Dependence
of the Effective Force in a Nanopore
To understand the origin of the dwell time dependence on
local
and global heating, we measured the effective force of the electric
field on DNA in a plasmonic nanopore. For these simulations, we harmonically
restrained a 77-bp fragment of random sequence dsDNA in a plasmonic
nanopore. The DNA molecule was initially placed concentric with the
nanopore, along the z-axis, Figure a. The average displacement of the DNA under a transmembrane
bias of 350 mV reported on the effective force experienced by the
DNA.[39] The simulations of the effective
force were carried out for three electrolyte solutions (2 M KCl, 2
M LiCl, and 1 M KCl) and two heating conditions (Tbt = 295 or 395 K). All other simulation conditions and
protocols, including the dimensions of the nanopore and the bow tie
and the local heating protocol, were identical to those used in our
simulations of DNA capture, Figure b.In addition to measuring the effective force
(discussed in the next paragraph), the simulations provided a set
of independent measurements of the blockade ionic current. Using the
open-pore current data obtained from the DNA capture simulations,
we computed the dependence of the absolute and relative conductance
blockades on the bow tie temperature, Figure b–c (a separate open-pore simulation
was performed for 1 M KCl). Interestingly, the conductance blockades
measured for the 77-bp DNA fragment almost precisely matched the values
obtained from the DNA capture simulations with the only noticeable
deviation in the 2 M KCl solution at Tbt = 395 K.More importantly, however, we find that the force
experienced by
the DNA in the plasmonic nanopore does not depend on the bow tie temperature
within the accuracy of our measurement, Figure d, even though the same heating leads to
a significant increase of the water flux through the pore, Figure e (filled bars).
Whether local or global, heating reduces viscosity of the solvent
in the nanopore, which increases the electro-osmotic flow that opposes
the movement of the DNA in the electric field. To estimate the effect
of temperature on the solution viscosity, we simulated the pulling
of a single water molecule through a bulk electrolyte solution with
a constant velocity vpull = 10 nm/ns, Figure f. In such simulations,
viscosity of the solution is proportional to the quotient of the average
force F required to pull the molecule divided by
the target velocity, ηsolution ∼ F/vpull.[40]Figure g plots the simulated
temperature dependence of the electrolytes’ viscosity normalized
by the viscosity of a 2 M KCl solution at 295 K. Multiplication of
the room temperature water flux values with the inverse ratio of the
electrolyte viscosities at the average temperature of the nanopore
volume (Tpore = 332 K) yields theoretical
estimates (dashed lines in Figure e) that are only 56–62% of the flux values actually
observed in the MD simulations. Thus, the water flux increases more
strongly with temperature in our simulations than predicted by the
continuum hydrodynamics model,[41,42] which, as we show in
the next section, can be explained by the temperature dependence of
the slip velocity at the DNA surface.Previous experimental,[42−44] theoretical,[41,45,46] and computational[39,44,47,48] studies identified
three mechanisms for the effective screening of the DNA charge in
solid-state nanopores: direct binding of counterions to the molecule,[41,43,44,47] binding of the DNA to the nanopore surface,[48] and electro-osmotic screening due to the flow of solvent through
the nanopore.[39,41,42,45] Difficult to characterize experimentally,
direct binding of ions was estimated to reduce the bare charge of
DNA by ∼25% of its nominal value in 1 M KCl solution;[42] the reduction could also depend on the cation
type and concentration.[44] In the next section,
we evaluate the effect of temperature on the direct binding mechanism.
Electro-osmotic screening was found to be independent of the solution’s
viscosity but decrease with the pore diameter.[39,41,42] Although we have previously shown that DNA
binding to the pore walls can considerably reduce the effective force
experienced by the DNA in a nanopore,[48] we do not further consider this mechanism in this work as in all
our simulations DNA does not come in contact with the nanopore surface.It was previously suggested that the DNA translocation time τ
is directly proportional to the viscosity of the solution η
and inversely proportional to the effective force of the electric
field on the DNA molecule, Feff.[44−46] The simulated effective force on DNA did not show a temperature
dependence within the accuracy of the force measurement (10–20%
of the absolute values). In order to check if the relationship between
the DNA translocation time and the solution viscosity holds in our
DNA capture simulations, we first estimated the average viscosity
of the solution inside the nanopore. Multiplication of the viscosity
ratios at the average pore (332 K) and room (295 K) temperatures with
the average DNA translocation times obtained at 295 K yields the DNA
translocation times close to that obtained at Tbt = 395 K, Figure f. Thus, the simulated DNA translocation time is directly
proportional to the average nanopore solution viscosity.To
test the relationship between the effective force experienced
by the DNA in the nanopore and the DNA translocation time, we computed
the DNA translocation times based on the normalized viscosity values, Figure g, the effective
force experienced by the DNA in the pore, Figure d, and the DNA translocation time at 295
K in 2 M KCl as τ = (η/ηKCl, 295 K)(FKCl, 295 K/F)(τKCl, 295 K). The results of these predictive
calculations accurately reproduce the simulated dependence of the
DNA translocation times on the local heating of the bow tie within
the simulation error, see open bars with solid outlines in Figure f.The results
of our DNA capture simulations and the force–viscosity
scaling analysis indicate faster DNA translocations for locally heated
bow tie structures, which appears to disagree with experiment.[28] However, the key difference between our simulation
and experiments is the length of the DNA molecule: 20-bp molecules
were used in our DNA capture simulations whereas experiment was carried
out using lambda-DNA (48.5 kbp). For DNA molecules much longer than
the persistence length of DNA, the translocation velocity is determined
by the balance of the effective force applied to DNA in the nanopore
and the viscous drag of the polymer coil formed by the untranslocated
part of the molecule.[49] Our simulations
have found the effective force in the nanopore to be insensitive to
the changes in the nanopore temperature. Because the force of the
applied electric field is localized to the volume of the nanopore,
the above conclusion is valid for both global and local heating conditions.
As local heating alters neither the effective force nor the viscous
drag, it does not influence the translocation time of long DNA molecules.
The global heating, however, lowers the viscous drag, leading to faster
DNA translocations regardless of the length of the DNA molecule.Effect of temperature on ion binding and its relation
to the effective
force on the DNA. (a) The average number of ions bound to a DNA nucleotide
as a function of the minimum bond duration. Open and filled symbols
show the results of analysis applied to simulations performed with
and without the bulk flow suppression protocol, respectively. Lines
show n = n0 e– fits to the data,
where n0 is the instantaneous number of
ions (zero minimum bond duration) and t0 is the mean residence time. (b) Temperature dependence of the average
residence time of ions near the DNA molecule in 2 M KCl and 2 M LiCl
solutions. (c) Schematic illustration of the MD simulations of the
DNA molecule in the bulk electrolyte solution in which the flow of
water around the molecule is suppressed. Flow suppression forces applied
1.25 nm away from the DNA axis and thus do not affect ion binding
to DNA (see panels a and b). The space around the molecule is split
into 3 Å-wide cylindrical bins. Average velocity of water in
each bin is computed every 1 ps and is used to calculate the friction
forces that are applied to the water molecules in the direction opposite
to the flow. The applied forces were computed according to a proportional-integral-derivative
control mechanism, which is described in detail in SI. (d) Example profiles of water velocity near the DNA molecule
in 2 M KCl solution at 295 K before and after the flow suppression
is applied. Dashed line indicates the boundary (1.25 nm from the molecule’s
axis) at which the flow suppression is enabled. (e–f) Temperature
dependence of the average force acting on the 22-basepair DNA molecule
(panel e) and of the water slip velocity near the molecule (panel
f) in the electrolyte solution subject to a constant electric field
of 35 mV/nm when the water flows are suppressed. Water slip velocity
is defined as the mean water velocity in the region between 0.9 to
1.1 nm away from the molecule’s axis. Error bars show the standard
error of the mean. (g) The same force plotted in panel e as a function
of cation residence time near the molecule. Higher residence times
correspond to lower solution temperatures (see panel b).
Temperature Dependence of DNA Charge Neutralization by Ion Binding
and Slip Velocity
Transient binding of counterions to a DNA molecule
can lower its
effective charge and, thereby, the effective force that a DNA molecule
experiences in a nanopore under a transmembrane bias.[44,47] To elucidate the effect of temperature on DNA charge screening by
ion binding, we computed the mean residence time of ions forming direct
contacts with water molecules proximal to DNA atoms (ion binding to
DNA takes place through an intermediate water molecule[44,50]), Figure a–b.
For these calculations, we used 500 ns-long MD trajectories of the
bulk electrolyte DNA systems, Figure a; the method used to compute ion binding times is
described in ref (44) and summarized in the SI. The instantaneous
number of ions bound to DNA (i.e., at zero minimum bond duration)
is found to be independent of the ion type or temperature, Figure a. However, the number
of ions that stay bound to DNA exponentially decreases with the duration
of the bond. Consistent with our previous finding,[44] lithium ions are more likely to form longer lasting bonds
with DNA than potassium ions at the same temperature. To characterize
ion binding onto DNA quantitatively, we fitted the plots of the number
of bound ions versus their minimum bond duration by exponential functions,
thus, obtaining the average binding time for each ion type and temperature, Figure b. The average binding
time of cations is seen to decrease with temperature, the reduction
being more prominent for lithium ions than for potassium ions.
Figure 5
Effect of temperature on ion binding and its relation
to the effective
force on the DNA. (a) The average number of ions bound to a DNA nucleotide
as a function of the minimum bond duration. Open and filled symbols
show the results of analysis applied to simulations performed with
and without the bulk flow suppression protocol, respectively. Lines
show n = n0 e– fits to the data,
where n0 is the instantaneous number of
ions (zero minimum bond duration) and t0 is the mean residence time. (b) Temperature dependence of the average
residence time of ions near the DNA molecule in 2 M KCl and 2 M LiCl
solutions. (c) Schematic illustration of the MD simulations of the
DNA molecule in the bulk electrolyte solution in which the flow of
water around the molecule is suppressed. Flow suppression forces applied
1.25 nm away from the DNA axis and thus do not affect ion binding
to DNA (see panels a and b). The space around the molecule is split
into 3 Å-wide cylindrical bins. Average velocity of water in
each bin is computed every 1 ps and is used to calculate the friction
forces that are applied to the water molecules in the direction opposite
to the flow. The applied forces were computed according to a proportional-integral-derivative
control mechanism, which is described in detail in SI. (d) Example profiles of water velocity near the DNA molecule
in 2 M KCl solution at 295 K before and after the flow suppression
is applied. Dashed line indicates the boundary (1.25 nm from the molecule’s
axis) at which the flow suppression is enabled. (e–f) Temperature
dependence of the average force acting on the 22-basepair DNA molecule
(panel e) and of the water slip velocity near the molecule (panel
f) in the electrolyte solution subject to a constant electric field
of 35 mV/nm when the water flows are suppressed. Water slip velocity
is defined as the mean water velocity in the region between 0.9 to
1.1 nm away from the molecule’s axis. Error bars show the standard
error of the mean. (g) The same force plotted in panel e as a function
of cation residence time near the molecule. Higher residence times
correspond to lower solution temperatures (see panel b).
Using a theoretical model, we have previously shown that duration
of ion-DNA bonds can affect the effective force that a DNA molecule
experiences in an external electric field: longer lasting bonds produce
a smaller-magnitude effective force.[44] We
were, however, not able to directly assess the magnitude of the effect
in all-atom MD simulations because of the effect of the electro-osmotic
flow. Similarly, in our simulation of bulk DNA systems (Figure a), temperature was found to
not only change the ion binding time to DNA, Figure b, but also alter the profile of the solvent
flow, Figure S4c,f.To decouple the
ion binding and electro-osmotic screening mechanisms,
we carried out an additional set of MD simulations applying external
friction forces to suppress the electro-osmotic flow around DNA without
affecting ion binding to the molecule, Figure c. The flow suppression protocol employed
a proportional-integral-derivative control mechanism described in
detail in SI. Water molecules located within
1.25 nm from the DNA axis were not subject to the flow suppression
forces, leaving the kinetics of ion binding to DNA unaffected, Figure a,b. Figure d illustrates the effect of
the water flow suppression protocol: the electro-osmotic flow away
from the DNA is substantially reduced. Furthermore, water flow away
from the DNA was suppressed to the same degree at all temperature
and electrolyte conditions, Figure S7,
which allowed us to eliminate the effect of bulk electro-osmotic flow
in comparative study of the systems.Using the water suppression
simulation protocol, we could obtain
the dependence of the effective force on temperature for LiCl, NaCl,
and KCl electrolytes in the absence of the electro-osmotic effect, Figure e. The measured forces
were generally a factor of 2–3 higher than those obtained in
the presence of the electro-osmotic flow and moderately increased
with temperature. The forces remained considerably smaller than the
maximum theoretical force (235 pN for our simulation systems), which
we attribute to nonzero shear force of the water flow in immediate
proximity to DNA (within 1.25 nm of the DNA central axis). The average
velocity of water at the DNA surface—the water slip velocity, Figure f— is seen
to increase with temperature; the increase being independent of the
type of cations surrounding DNA. The observed increase of the slip
velocity with temperature can explain stronger than expected increase
of the water flux through a nanopore blocked by DNA, Figure e. The plot of the effective
force versus ion binding time, Figure g, reveals a weak yet systematic dependence of the
effective force on the lifetime of ion bond to DNA: the force decreases
as the lifetime increases. The dependence, however, is weak enough
to be concealed by the statistical error in our simulation of the
effective force, Figure d.
Conclusions
Using the all-atom MD approach, we have
systematically studied
the effect of temperature on the process of DNA translocation through
a solid-state nanopore. The results of our simulations have shown
that, in addition to affecting bulk properties of electrolyte solutions
such as viscosity and ionic conductivity, temperature can modify local
interactions of ions and water with DNA. The temperature dependence
of ion mobility near DNA surfaces causes the relative conductance
blockade to depend on temperature,[28] an
effect that can not be explained by the temperature dependence of
bulk ion conductivity alone. The temperature was also found to affect
ion binding to DNA and the solvent velocity at the DNA surface, both
of which can affect the effective force of an external electric field
on DNA.Although our simulations of DNA capture were designed
to produce
a substantial temperature gradient along the capture pathway, we did
not observe any prominent thermophoretic effects that could explain
the enhanced DNA capture in LiCl solutions reported in the experimental
studies.[28] The relatively high transmembrane
bias used in our DNA capture simulations along with the high statistical
uncertainty in determining the capture rate from all-atom MD simulations
might have concealed the effect. Also, our simulations did not explore
the possible effects of laser heating on the nanopore geometry and
the charge of the nanopore walls,[19] which
could also modulate the nanopore conductance and the electro-osmotic
flow. Our study highlights the unique capabilities of nanopore translocation
experiments and atomistic MD simulations in probing thermal process
in nanofluidic systems.
Authors: Michael P Cecchini; Aeneas Wiener; Vladimir A Turek; Hyangh Chon; Sangyeop Lee; Aleksandar P Ivanov; David W McComb; Jaebum Choo; Tim Albrecht; Stefan A Maier; Joshua B Edel Journal: Nano Lett Date: 2013-09-16 Impact factor: 11.189
Authors: F Traversi; C Raillon; S M Benameur; K Liu; S Khlybov; M Tosun; D Krasnozhon; A Kis; A Radenovic Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2013-11-17 Impact factor: 39.213