| Literature DB >> 28406172 |
Bokai Zhang1, Xi Feng1, Hang Yin1, Zhenpeng Ge1, Yanhuan Wang1, Zhiqin Chu1, Helena Raabova2,3, Jan Vavra2,3, Petr Cigler2, Renbao Liu1,4, Yi Wang1, Quan Li1,4.
Abstract
Nanoparticle-cell interactions begin with the cellular uptake of the nanoparticles, a process that eventually determines their cellular fate. In the present work, we show that the morphological features of nanodiamonds (NDs) affect both the anchoring and internalization stages of their endocytosis. While a prickly ND (with sharp edges/corners) has no trouble of anchoring onto the plasma membrane, it suffers from difficult internalization afterwards. In comparison, the internalization of a round ND (obtained by selective etching of the prickly ND) is not limited by its lower anchoring amount and presents a much higher endocytosis amount. Molecular dynamics simulation and continuum modelling results suggest that the observed difference in the anchoring of round and prickly NDs likely results from the reduced contact surface area with the cell membrane of the former, while the energy penalty associated with membrane curvature generation, which is lower for a round ND, may explain its higher probability of the subsequent internalization.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28406172 PMCID: PMC5390292 DOI: 10.1038/srep46462
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Characterization of prickly and round NDs.
TEM images of (a) prickly NDs and (b) round NDs. (c) FTIR spectra of prickly and round NDs, showing that they had similar surface functional group. (Peak intensity of each individual functional group varies from one sample to another. (Peaks at 3400 and 1630 were O-H bending of carboxylic acid, peak at 1780 was belonged to bond of carboxylic acid, peaks between 1450–100 were belonged to the ether like groups). (d) Zeta potential of prickly and round NDs (−41.9033 ± 1.6671 for prickly NDs and −41.5567 ± 6.93695 for round NDs. Error bar represents SD, p = 0.937, indicating that there was no significant difference in zeta potential between the two NDs, n = 3).
Figure 2N-SIM images of prickly (a) and round NDs (b) respectively incubated with HepG2 cells at 4 °C for 6 hrs. (Green: stained cytoplasm; blue: nucleus; red: fluorescence signal of ND; Scale bar is 20 μm). (c) Time dependent quantitative results comparing the amount of surface anchored prickly and round NDs (Error bar represents SD. Inserted numbers are p values for the comparison at each time point, n = 4).
Figure 3Cellular uptake of prickly NDs and round NDs at normal physiological conditions. Typical N-SIM images of prickly (a) and round NDs (b) incubated with HepG2 cells at 37 °C for 10 hrs. (Green: stained cytoplasm; blue: nucleus; red: fluorescence signal of ND; Scale bar is 20 μm). (c) Time dependent quantitative results comparing the total amount (including both surface anchored and internalized) of prickly and round NDs, the amount of the internalized round NDs was ~4 times higher than that of the prickly NDs (Error bar represents SD. Inserted numbers are p values for the comparison at each time point, n = 4).
Figure 4Modelling irregular polygons with rounded corners (a–b) and the phase diagram of wrapping the tip of a nanodiamond (c). (a) Randomly generated irregular polygons with rounded corners. (b) The average relative surface area of irregular polygons with 4, 6, 8, or 10 vertices as a function of the rounding radius Rr. The two parameters controlling irregularity (dr and dalpha) are both set to 0.3 (see SI). (c) Phase diagram of wrapping a ND tip (wrapping: Gtot < 0; no wrapping: Gtot > 0). The dashed line indicates the kb = 20 kBT and kad = −2 kcal/(mol nm2) case.