Adam M Maley1, George J Lu2, Mikhail G Shapiro2, Robert M Corn1. 1. Department of Chemistry, University of California-Irvine , Irvine, California 92697, United States. 2. Division of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, California Institute of Technology , Pasadena, California 91125, United States.
Abstract
Near-infrared surface plasmon resonance imaging (SPRI) microscopy is used to detect and characterize the adsorption of single polymeric and protein nanoparticles (PPNPs) onto chemically modified gold thin films in real time. The single-nanoparticle SPRI responses, Δ%RNP, from several hundred adsorbed nanoparticles are collected in a single SPRI adsorption measurement. Analysis of Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms is used to provide information on the size, material content, and interparticle interactions of the PPNPs. Examples include the measurement of log-normal Δ%RNP distributions for mixtures of polystyrene nanoparticles, the quantitation of bioaffinity uptake into and aggregation of porous NIPAm-based (N-isopropylacrylamide) hydrogel nanoparticles specifically engineered to bind peptides and proteins, and the characterization of the negative single-nanoparticle SPRI response and log-normal Δ%RNP distributions obtained for three different types of genetically encoded gas-filled protein nanostructures derived from bacteria.
Near-infrared surface plasmon resonance imaging (SPRI) microscopy is used to detect and characterize the adsorption of single polymeric and protein nanoparticles (PPNPs) onto chemically modified gold thin films in real time. The single-nanoparticle SPRI responses, Δ%RNP, from several hundred adsorbed nanoparticles are collected in a single SPRI adsorption measurement. Analysis of Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms is used to provide information on the size, material content, and interparticle interactions of the PPNPs. Examples include the measurement of log-normal Δ%RNP distributions for mixtures of polystyrene nanoparticles, the quantitation of bioaffinity uptake into and aggregation of porous NIPAm-based (N-isopropylacrylamide) hydrogel nanoparticles specifically engineered to bind peptides and proteins, and the characterization of the negative single-nanoparticle SPRI response and log-normal Δ%RNP distributions obtained for three different types of genetically encoded gas-filled protein nanostructures derived from bacteria.
Entities:
Keywords:
NIPAm-based hydrogel nanoparticle; concanavalin A; gas vesicle; melittin; protein nanostructure; single-nanoparticle refractive index; surface plasmon polaritons
The rational design, synthesis,
and characterization of both polymeric and protein nanoparticles (PPNPs)
for applications in materials, catalysis, and biotechnology have become
a significant component of the current nanoscience revolution. PPNPs
have been constructed from a wide variety of polymeric materials including
single-chain or cross-linked polymers, dendrimers, synthetic polypeptides,
proteins, and polysaccharides.[1−6] PPNPS can be designed to form compact structures, porous hydrogels,
or other three-dimensional structures that can exhibit a wide variety
of rheological properties, display a large number of interfacial chemical
moieties with specific affinities or reactivities on the outside of
the nanoparticle, or incorporate internal chemical binding sites that
can be used to capture and release chemicals or smaller nanoparticles.[7−10] Examples include elastin-like polypeptide nanoparticles that are
biodegradable and thermally responsive,[11,12] polysaccharide-based
nanoparticles for medical diagnostics and therapies,[13] and cross-linked N-isopropylacrylamide
(NIPAm) hydrogel nanoparticles that incorporate a mixture of chemical
functional groups to create specific binding sites for bioaffinity
uptake.[14−16] Genetically coded protein nanostructures with acoustic
properties, such as gas vesicles (GVs), have been identified for use
as ultrasound and magnetic resonance imaging contrast agents.[17−20]The characterization of PPNPs at the single-nanoparticle level
is challenging. Unlike metallic or semiconductor particles, which
often exhibit a strong size-dependent optical response,[21−23] PPNPs typically do not possess any convenient spectroscopic markers.
Additionally, PPNPs often contain a significant amount of solvent,
and their size and composition may vary with external pH, temperature,
or pressure. A particularly important but difficult measurement is
the quantification of bioaffinity adsorption and uptake into single
PPNPs that have been designed for drug delivery or toxin neutralization
applications. PPNPs are typically characterized with a combination
of bulk dynamic light scattering (DLS) and multiangle light scattering
(MALS) measurements,[24−26] cryo-TEM,[27,28] and, if the PPNPs are
sufficiently rigid, scanning probe measurements.[29,30] In some studies, the incorporation of fluorophores into the nanoparticle
has been employed to facilitate single-nanoparticle detection and
to provide some limited characterization information.[31,32]The optical technique of single-nanoparticle surface plasmon
resonance
imaging (SPRI) microscopy has recently emerged as an excellent in situ refractive-index based method for the detection
and characterization of single PPNPs. As first identified in 2010
by Zybin and Tao,[33−35] an adsorbed nanoparticle can interact with traveling
surface plasmon polariton waves created on a gold thin film surface
to create a point diffraction pattern in the differential SPRI image.
Single metallic nanoparticles, polymer nanoparticles, liposomes, cells,
and viruses have been detected with SPRI microscopy.[36−46] The intensity of the diffraction pattern depends on the integrated
refractive index of the nanoparticle and, thus, varies with nanoparticle
size and material content. Real-time SPRI measurements have been used
previously for the digital biosensing of single-nanoparticle bioaffinity
adsorption events at chemically modified gold thin films.[41,47] In addition to nanoparticle-counting measurements, changes in the
intensity of the average single-nanoparticle SPRI response (⟨Δ%RNP⟩) have been used to quantitate the
bioaffinity uptake of polypeptides and proteins by hydrogel nanoparticles.[42,43]Determining the distribution of Δ%RNP values obtained during a single-nanoparticle SPRI adsorption
measurement in addition to the average response can provide much more
detailed information about a population of PPNPs. Since the Δ%RNP response depends on the integrated refractive
index of the nanoparticle, Δ%RNP frequency distributions will reflect variations in both nanoparticle
size and composition. An example of the latter would be changes in
a Δ%RNP distribution created by
variations in molecular uptake into a population of PPNPs designed
for drug delivery. While ensemble measurements such as DLS can provide
limited information on the moments of a PPNP nanoparticle distribution,
single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements can directly measure the detailed
frequency distribution histogram of a PPNP population.In this
paper, we provide three different examples of how to obtain
and use single PPNP Δ%RNP distributions
from real-time SPRI adsorption measurements. As a first case, we demonstrate
that Δ%RNP distributions can be
used to measure nanoparticle size distributions for mixtures of solid
polystyrene (PS) nanoparticles. In a second set of experiments, we
demonstrate how Δ%RNP distributions
obtained from porous NIPAm-based hydrogel nanoparticles (HNPs) can
be used to monitor changes in PPNP structure and aggregation due to
the bioaffinity uptake of peptides and proteins. In the final example,
we show that the adsorption of gas-filled protein nanostructures produces
an unusual negative single-nanoparticle SPRI response with a Δ%RNP distribution that depends on the shape and
size of the particle. The three examples presented in this paper have
been chosen to demonstrate that the single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements
can be applied to three very different classes of PPNPs: solid polymer
nanoparticles, highly porous, solvent-swollen polymer nanoparticles,
and protein nanostructures that enclose a gas volume.
Results and Discussion
Single-Nanoparticle
SPRI Adsorption Measurements
The
detection and characterization of single polymer and protein nanoparticles
was achieved by using real-time SPRI microscopy measurements to detect
the irreversible adsorption of individual nanoparticles onto a chemically
modified gold thin film surface. The optical setup of the near-infrared
single-nanoparticle SPRI microscope used in these experiments is shown
in Figure a and has
been described in detail in a previous publication.[41] Briefly, an 814 nm laser was expanded, collimated, and
then polarized before being directed off-axis through the back of
a high numerical aperture microscope objective and onto the back of
a gold-coated microscope coverslip. The reflected image (56.5 μm
× 56.5 μm) was captured with a CMOS camera (see the Methods section for more details). For each SPRI
adsorption measurement, a 10 μL solution of nanoparticles was
exposed to the chemically modified gold surface, and then a series
of three-second SPRI reflectivity images (R, where n is the image number) were
collected for 10 min as nanoparticles adsorbed to the surface. Using
these images, a series of 200 frame-to-frame SPRI differential reflectivity
images (ΔR) were
obtained by sequentially subtracting each image from the previous
image (i.e., ΔR = R – R).
Figure 1
(a) Schematic diagram of the SPRI microscope. A gold-coated knife-edge
mirror was used to direct collimated p-polarized light off-axis through
the microscope objective and onto the back of the gold-coated glass
coverslip. The reflected image was captured with a CMOS camera. A
nanoparticle solution was exposed to the top of the gold-coated glass
coverslip immediately preceding the image acquisition process. (b)
A point diffraction pattern is observed in the SPRI differential reflectivity
image when a 170 nm polystyrene (PS) nanoparticle adsorbs to the chemically
modified gold surface. (c) Quantitative map displaying the Δ%R pixel intensities for the single-nanoparticle point diffraction
pattern in (b). A sharp spike in Δ%R intensity
is observed at the center of the diffraction pattern (the intersection
of the two white dotted lines). We define Δ%RNP as the average of the Δ%R values
for the nine pixels at and surrounding the pixel with the maximum
Δ%R intensity. (d) Δ%RNP frequency distribution histogram obtained from the
SPRI adsorption measurement of 170 nm PS nanoparticles. The average
Δ%RNP value for this experiment
was 2.19 ± 0.05% and is plotted in the figure as a black dotted
line. The Δ%RNP distribution is
also fit to a probability density function (PDF) with location (μ)
and scale (σ) parameters of 0.76 and 0.21, respectively.
(a) Schematic diagram of the SPRI microscope. A gold-coated knife-edge
mirror was used to direct collimated p-polarized light off-axis through
the microscope objective and onto the back of the gold-coated glass
coverslip. The reflected image was captured with a CMOS camera. A
nanoparticle solution was exposed to the top of the gold-coated glass
coverslip immediately preceding the image acquisition process. (b)
A point diffraction pattern is observed in the SPRI differential reflectivity
image when a 170 nm polystyrene (PS) nanoparticle adsorbs to the chemically
modified gold surface. (c) Quantitative map displaying the Δ%R pixel intensities for the single-nanoparticle point diffraction
pattern in (b). A sharp spike in Δ%R intensity
is observed at the center of the diffraction pattern (the intersection
of the two white dotted lines). We define Δ%RNP as the average of the Δ%R values
for the nine pixels at and surrounding the pixel with the maximum
Δ%R intensity. (d) Δ%RNP frequency distribution histogram obtained from the
SPRI adsorption measurement of 170 nm PS nanoparticles. The average
Δ%RNP value for this experiment
was 2.19 ± 0.05% and is plotted in the figure as a black dotted
line. The Δ%RNP distribution is
also fit to a probability density function (PDF) with location (μ)
and scale (σ) parameters of 0.76 and 0.21, respectively.The adsorption of a single nanoparticle
onto the chemically modified
gold thin film appears in the differential reflectivity images as
a point diffraction pattern. An example of a single-nanoparticle point
diffraction pattern from a 170 nm diameter PS nanoparticle is shown
in Figure b. These
diffraction patterns have been observed previously in SPRI differential
reflectivity images from the adsorption of metal, polymer, and lipid
nanoparticles. The diffraction patterns have been modeled using a
2D Helmholtz equation, where the integrated refractive index of the
adsorbed nanoparticle acts as a diffraction point for the planar surface
plasmon polariton waves traveling on the gold thin film.[48] Since we are using differential reflectivity
images, only nanoparticles that have adsorbed within the three-second
time frame of image ΔR are observed.The center of each nanoparticle diffraction
pattern has a sharp
Δ%R (change in percent reflectivity) maximum
that can be used to quantitate the intensity of the single-nanoparticle
SPRI response. Figure c shows a quantitative map of the Δ%R pixel
intensities for a typical single-nanoparticle SPRI diffraction pattern.
As described previously,[42] the average
of the nine Δ%R pixel intensities (a 3 ×
3 array) at and surrounding the maximum Δ%R is used to calculate the single-nanoparticle SPRI reflectivity response
that we denote as Δ%RNP. The single-nanoparticle
SPRI diffraction pattern has been described previously by several
researchers as the sum of a traveling plane wave and a spherical wave.[48] Using the average values of the 3 × 3 array
of nine pixels around the maximum is a simple, yet reliable method
of calculating a reproducible Δ%RNP value for this diffraction pattern; using larger pixel arrays was
also reliable, but gave lower Δ%RNP values. Fitting the entire diffraction pattern to the Helmholtz
equation solution has been successfully used to determine Δ%RNP[44] and has also
been recently employed as a method to improve the spatial resolution
of the nanoparticle location on the surface.[45] For each set of differential reflectivity images associated with
a 10 min SPRI adsorption measurement, several hundred point diffraction
patterns are observed and analyzed to calculate both an average Δ%RNP value, denoted ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, and a frequency distribution histogram of
Δ%RNP values.An example of
a Δ%RNP frequency
distribution histogram obtained from an in situ real-time
SPRI adsorption measurement of 170 nm PS nanoparticles onto a chemically
modified gold thin film is shown in Figure d (details of this experiment are given in
the next section). The ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ for this measurement is also plotted in Figure d as a black dotted line. It
is evident from the distribution that the Δ%RNP values are not symmetrically distributed about ⟨Δ%RNP⟩. Therefore, in order to more precisely
quantify this distribution, in addition to a standard deviation (s), we calculate a skewness (g) from the
set of Δ%RNP values, where the skewness
is proportional to the third central moment m3:[49]The skewness can be either
positive or negative, depending on which side of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ the distribution is skewed; for the
data in Figure d, g = 0.68.The Δ%RNP distribution of 170
nm PS nanoparticles is also fitted to a log-normal probability density
function (PDF), described as[50]where
μ and σ are the location
and scale parameters, respectively. This log-normal fit is plotted
in Figure d as a black
solid line, and it is apparent that a log-normal probability density
function gives an accurate fit of the data. Previous size measurements
on PS nanoparticles have also followed a log-normal distribution.[51] The values for ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, s, 95% confidence interval
(95% CI), g, μ, and σ for this experiment
on 170 nm PS nanoparticles are reported in Table .
Table 1
Hydrodynamic Size
Measurements from
DLS for Polystyrene and Hydrogel Nanoparticles and Statistics from
Single-Nanoparticle SPRI Measurements for Polystyrene and Hydrogel
Nanoparticles and Gas Vesicles
nanoparticle
diameter
(nm)
standard
deviation (nm)
⟨Δ%RNP⟩
standard
deviation (s)
95% CI
skewness
(g)
μa
σb
no. of NPs
PS (A)
85
25
0.34
0.10
0.01
0.59
–1.13
0.31
354
PS
(B)
170
40
2.19
0.48
0.05
0.68
0.76
0.21
365
HNP
271
55
1.67
0.43
0.05
0.60
0.48
0.27
324
HNP + 2
μM melittin
272
65
2.79
0.52
0.08
0.02
1.01
0.20
172
HNP
272
50
0.90
0.27
0.03
0.55
–0.15
0.31
289
HNP + 500
nM ConA
357
75
3.6
1.3
0.2
0.79
1.22
0.37
307
HNP + 500
nM ConA + 1 mM Man
338
65
2.04
0.60
0.07
0.05
0.66
0.36
270
HNP + 500
nM ConA + 10 mM Man
320
55
1.74
0.41
0.05
0.30
0.53
0.24
241
Mega
GV
–c
–
–0.49
0.26
0.03
–1.28
–0.84
0.52
274
Ana GV
–
–
–1.07
0.44
0.04
–1.53
–0.0083
0.38
395
Halo GV
–
–
–3.0
1.5
0.2
–0.74
0.95
0.58
345
Log-normal PDF location parameter.
Log-normal PDF scale parameter.
Size measurements for GVs are
reported
in Table .
Log-normal PDF location parameter.Log-normal PDF scale parameter.Size measurements for GVs are
reported
in Table .
Table 2
Size Measurements from TEM and Volume,
Molecular Weight, and Gas-to-Protein Ratio Calculations for Gas Vesicles
nanostructure
Mega GV
Ana GV
Halo GV
length (nm)
249
519
400
sL (nm)
99
160
113
95%
CI (nm)
25
31
20
diameter (nm)
73
136
251
sD (nm)
14
21
51
95% CI (nm)
4
4
9
volume (nm3)
7.4 × 105
6.4 × 106
6.6 × 106
sV (nm3)
0.8 × 105
0.4 × 106
0.4 × 106
95% CI (nm3)
2 × 104
8 × 104
7 × 104
# of GVs
61
107
125
estimated GV molecular
weight
(MDa)
72
320
282
estimated gas-to-protein
volume ratio
8
16
19
Mixtures of Polystyrene Nanoparticles
As a first demonstration
that single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements can provide useful information
on polydisperse polymer nanoparticle samples, a series of single-nanoparticle
SPRI adsorption measurements were performed on three solutions of
carboxyl-terminated PS nanoparticles: 85 nm diameter PS nanoparticles,
170 nm diameter PS nanoparticles, and a one-to-one mixture of 85 and
170 nm PS nanoparticles. For each SPRI adsorption measurement, PS
nanoparticle solutions were exposed to a gold surface modified with
an amine-terminated (11-mercaptoundecamine, MUAM) self-assembled monolayer.
SPRI reflectivity images were collected as the negatively charged
carboxyl-terminated PS nanoparticles electrostatically and irreversibly
adsorbed to the MUAM surface. An example SPRI differential reflectivity
image from the sample of mixed size PS nanoparticles is shown in Figure a. As seen in the
image, two PS nanoparticles irreversibly adsorbed onto the MUAM surface
within the three-second time frame. The larger, more intense point
diffraction pattern near the top of the image is attributed to the
adsorption of a 170 nm PS nanoparticle, whereas the smaller, less
intense point diffraction pattern near the bottom of the image is
attributed to the adsorption of an 85 nm PS nanoparticle. The intensity
of each nanoparticle point diffraction pattern is quantitated by calculating
a Δ%RNP value as described in the
previous section. For the two PS nanoparticles in this image, Δ%RNP was calculated to be 3.1% for the 170 nm
PS nanoparticle and 0.47% for the 85 nm PS nanoparticle.
Figure 2
(a) Example
SPRI differential reflectivity image of a mixed sample
of PS nanoparticles. The larger, more intense point diffraction pattern
represents a 170 nm PS nanoparticle, and the smaller, less intense
point diffraction pattern represents an 85 nm PS nanoparticle. The
total image area is 58.5 μm × 58.5 μm. (b) Time-dependent
distribution of Δ%RNP values for
the mixture of 85 and 170 nm PS nanoparticles. Each blue circle represents
the Δ%RNP for a single PS nanoparticle
irreversibly adsorbing to the chemically modified surface. The two
red circles represent the Δ%RNP values
for the point diffraction patterns in the differential reflectivity
image (a) that adsorbed to the surface at the 225 s mark of the experiment
(black dotted line). Δ%RNP frequency
distribution histograms obtained from three different SPRI adsorption
measurements of (c) 85 nm PS nanoparticles, (d) 170 nm PS nanoparticles,
and (e) a one-to-one mixture of 85 and 170 nm PS nanoparticles. Average
Δ%RNP values for each size of PS
nanoparticle are plotted as a black dotted line. The average Δ%RNP values for 85 and 170 nm PS nanoparticles
are 0.34 ± 0.01% and 2.19 ± 0.05%, respectively.
(a) Example
SPRI differential reflectivity image of a mixed sample
of PS nanoparticles. The larger, more intense point diffraction pattern
represents a 170 nm PS nanoparticle, and the smaller, less intense
point diffraction pattern represents an 85 nm PS nanoparticle. The
total image area is 58.5 μm × 58.5 μm. (b) Time-dependent
distribution of Δ%RNP values for
the mixture of 85 and 170 nm PS nanoparticles. Each blue circle represents
the Δ%RNP for a single PS nanoparticle
irreversibly adsorbing to the chemically modified surface. The two
red circles represent the Δ%RNP values
for the point diffraction patterns in the differential reflectivity
image (a) that adsorbed to the surface at the 225 s mark of the experiment
(black dotted line). Δ%RNP frequency
distribution histograms obtained from three different SPRI adsorption
measurements of (c) 85 nm PS nanoparticles, (d) 170 nm PS nanoparticles,
and (e) a one-to-one mixture of 85 and 170 nm PS nanoparticles. Average
Δ%RNP values for each size of PS
nanoparticle are plotted as a black dotted line. The average Δ%RNP values for 85 and 170 nm PS nanoparticles
are 0.34 ± 0.01% and 2.19 ± 0.05%, respectively.All the Δ%RNP values calculated
from the series of differential reflectivity images obtained during
the SPRI adsorption measurement of the mixed size PS nanoparticles
are plotted in Figure b as a function of adsorption time. Each blue circle in Figure b represents a single
Δ%RNP value obtained for the adsorption
of a single PS nanoparticle; over 700 PS nanoparticle point diffraction
patterns were quantitated over the 10 min measurement. The two Δ%RNP values calculated for the two PS nanoparticles
in the differential reflectivity image shown in Figure a are identified in the time-dependent distribution
as two red circles. The data in Figure b clearly indicate there are two distinct ranges of
Δ%RNP values, which can be attributed
to the two sizes of PS nanoparticles.In addition to the time-dependent
distribution of Δ%RNP values, we
also generate a frequency distribution
histogram of Δ%RNP values from the
SPRI adsorption measurements. The Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms from SPRI adsorption measurements
for the three different PS nanoparticle solutions are also plotted
in Figure : 85 nm
PS nanoparticles (Figure c), 170 nm PS nanoparticles (Figure d), and a one-to-one mixture of 85 and 170
nm PS nanoparticles (Figure e). The black dotted lines in Figure c and d are the ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values obtained for each SPRI adsorption measurement;
⟨Δ%RNP⟩ = 0.34 ±
0.01% for 85 nm PS nanoparticles and ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ = 2.19 ± 0.05% for 170 nm PS nanoparticles.
Because the Δ%RNP values for PS
nanoparticles are log-normally distributed, we plot the distribution
histograms in logarithmically spaced bins in Figure for ease of comparison. Reported in Table are ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, s, 95% CI, g, μ, and σ for both the 85 and 170 nm PS nanoparticles.
Even though the average ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ is more than 6 times larger for the 170 nm PS nanoparticles
as compared to the 85 nm PS nanoparticles, the skewness and scale
parameters are relatively similar for the two distributions.It is apparent from the histogram in Figure e that the distribution obtained from the
mixed size PS nanoparticle sample is simply the sum of the two single-size
PS nanoparticle distributions. The ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values obtained for each size of PS nanoparticle
are plotted in Figure e and are the same values as those obtained from the experiments
in Figure c and d.
These results unequivocally demonstrate that the single-nanoparticle
SPRI measurements can be used to study polydisperse mixtures of nanoparticles.
Using the data presented in Figure , we estimate that we can differentiate two populations
of PS nanoparticles that have a difference in diameter greater than
40 nm.
Molecular Uptake into Hydrogel Nanoparticles and Aggregation
of Hydrogel Nanoparticles
In a second set of experiments,
we demonstrate that Δ%RNP frequency
distribution histograms from single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements
can be used to characterize the bioaffinity uptake of molecules into
porous PPNPs, such as NIPAm-based HNPs. HNPs are solvent-swollen nanoparticles
(up to ∼65% solvent by volume as estimated from MALS measurements[42]) that can be engineered to incorporate chemical
moieties with specific affinity for various biomolecules. We have
previously shown that ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values from single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements can be
used to study the uptake of the peptide melittin and the lectin concanavalin
A (ConA) into specifically designed HNPs.[42,43] In this paper, we demonstrate that the analysis of Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms can be
used to provide additional information on the uptake of these molecules
into HNPs.An example of a Δ%RNP frequency distribution histogram measurement of peptide uptake by
HNPs is shown in Figure . As depicted in Figure a, NIPAm-based HNPs (272 nm in diameter as measured by DLS)
were synthesized with specific affinity for melittin, a small peptide
composed of 26 amino acid residues.[52] Single-nanoparticle
SPRI measurements on these HNPs, in both the absence and presence
of melittin, were used to quantitate the Δ%RNP response. Plotted in Figure b are two Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms: the Δ%RNP distribution for HNPs alone (transparent blue bars)
and the Δ%RNP distribution for HNPs
in the presence of 2 μM melittin (solid red bars). The two distributions
in Figure b show that
there is an overall increase in the average single-nanoparticle Δ%RNP response due to the uptake of melittin into
the HNPs, which is an increase in the total integrated refractive
index of the HNPs. Reported in Table are the values for ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, s, 95% CI, g, μ, and σ obtained from the measurements. However, although
there is an increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, there are no significant increases observed in the size
or skewness of the Δ%RNP distributions
of HNPs in the presence of melittin. Specifically, the value for σ
decreases from 0.27 to 0.20 for HNPs in the presence of melittin,
and the relative standard deviation (s/⟨Δ%RNP⟩) also decreases (see Table ). These results suggest that
melittin uptake does not affect the structure of the HNPs, a conclusion
that is corroborated with DLS measurements that show no change in
the average hydrodynamic diameter for the hydrogels in the presence
of 2 μM melittin (data also reported in Table ).
Figure 3
(a) Hydrogel nanoparticles (HNPs) were composed
of N-isopropylacrylamide (NIPAm, 53 mol %), N-tert-butylacrylamide
(TBAm, 40 mol %), acrylic acid (AAc, 5 mol %), and N,N′-methylenebis(acrylamide) (BIS, 2 mol %)
and designed to uptake the peptide melittin by hydrophobic and electrostatic
interactions. (b) Δ%RNP frequency
distribution histograms obtained from the SPRI adsorption measurements
of HNPs alone (transparent blue bars) and HNPs in the presence of
2 μM melittin (solid red bars).
(a) Hydrogel nanoparticles (HNPs) were composed
of N-isopropylacrylamide (NIPAm, 53 mol %), N-tert-butylacrylamide
(TBAm, 40 mol %), acrylic acid (AAc, 5 mol %), and N,N′-methylenebis(acrylamide) (BIS, 2 mol %)
and designed to uptake the peptide melittin by hydrophobic and electrostatic
interactions. (b) Δ%RNP frequency
distribution histograms obtained from the SPRI adsorption measurements
of HNPs alone (transparent blue bars) and HNPs in the presence of
2 μM melittin (solid red bars).In comparison, large changes in the Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms were observed upon
the
uptake of the lectin ConA into HNPs modified with mannose. ConA is
a large protein (MW = 104 kDa) with four subunits and a high binding
specificity for mannose.[53] Single-nanoparticle
SPRI measurements were used to study the binding of ConA to mannose-modified
HNPs as shown schematically in Figure a. Plotted in Figure b are two Δ%RNP frequency
distribution histograms: mannose-modified HNPs only (transparent blue
bars) and mannose-modified HNPs in the presence of 500 nM ConA (solid
red bars). The ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, s, 95% CI, g, μ, and σ values
for these two distributions are reported in Table . As evident from the data, not only is there
an increase in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩
in the presence of ConA, but there is also a significant increase
in the width of the Δ%RNP distribution.
Specifically, there is 5-fold increase in the standard deviation of
the Δ%RNP distribution for mannose-modified
HNPs in the presence of ConA. Additionally, we observe an increase
in the skewness and scale parameter. Because ConA has the capability
to bind to multiple mannoses, ConA can induce aggregation of the mannose-modified
HNPs by cross-linking. We attribute the changes in the Δ%RNP distributions to the aggregation of the mannose-modified
HNPs induced by interparticle interactions of ConA that is bound to
the outer regions of the HNPs. These results are also confirmed with
DLS, which shows an increase in average hydrodynamic diameter of the
mannose-modified HNPs from 272 to 357 nm.
Figure 4
(a) Mannose-modified
HNPs were composed of NIPAm (63.5 mol %),
TBAm (28 mol %), AAc (5 mol %), BIS (2 mol %), and p-acrylamidophenyl-α-d-mannopyranoside (Man, 1.5 mol
%). The lectin concanavalin A (ConA, purple) binds specifically to
Man sugar units (green) in the mannose-modified HNPs. (b) Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms obtained
from the SPRI adsorption measurements of mannose-modified HNPs alone
(transparent blue bars) and mannose-modified HNPs in the presence
of 500 nM ConA (solid red bars). Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms are also plotted for additional
SPRI adsorption measurements of mixtures of mannose-modified HNPs
and 500 nM ConA in the presence of (c) 1 mM mannose (solid green bars)
and (d) 10 mM mannose (solid orange bars). The Δ%RNP frequency distribution histogram for mannose-modified
HNPs alone is replotted in (c) and (d) for comparison.
(a) Mannose-modified
HNPs were composed of NIPAm (63.5 mol %),
TBAm (28 mol %), AAc (5 mol %), BIS (2 mol %), and p-acrylamidophenyl-α-d-mannopyranoside (Man, 1.5 mol
%). The lectin concanavalin A (ConA, purple) binds specifically to
Mansugar units (green) in the mannose-modified HNPs. (b) Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms obtained
from the SPRI adsorption measurements of mannose-modified HNPs alone
(transparent blue bars) and mannose-modified HNPs in the presence
of 500 nM ConA (solid red bars). Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms are also plotted for additional
SPRI adsorption measurements of mixtures of mannose-modified HNPs
and 500 nM ConA in the presence of (c) 1 mM mannose (solid green bars)
and (d) 10 mM mannose (solid orange bars). The Δ%RNP frequency distribution histogram for mannose-modified
HNPs alone is replotted in (c) and (d) for comparison.To further study ConA binding to mannose-modified
HNPs, additional
single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements were made on the mixtures of
mannose-modified HNPs and 500 nM ConA in the presence of free mannose
in solution. By introducing free mannose into solution, we can induce
competition between ConA binding to free mannose and mannose-modified
HNPs and subsequently decrease the ConA-induced aggregation of mannose-modified
HNPs. The Δ%RNP frequency distribution
histograms for single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements of mannose-modified
HNPs and 500 nM ConA with the addition of 1 mM mannose (solid green
bars) and 10 mM mannose (solid orange bars) are shown in Figure c and d, respectively.
The ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, s, 95% CI, g, μ, and σ values
for these distributions are also reported in Table . As in Figure b, the Δ%RNP frequency distribution for mannose-modified HNPs without ConA is
also plotted in Figure c and d for comparison (transparent blue bars). The distributions
plotted in Figure c and d clearly show increases in the both ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ and the width of the distributions,
compared to measurements of mannose-modified HNPs without ConA; however,
these increases in ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ and the width of the distributions are less compared to
measurements of mannose-modified HNPs and 500 nM ConA but without
free mannose in solution (Figure b). This observation can also be seen quantitatively
from the values listed in Table . For example, the standard deviation for mannose-modified
HNPs increases by 480%, 220%, and 150% in the presence of 500 nM ConA
and 0, 1, and 10 mM mannose, respectively. The Kd for ConA binding to monovalent mannose is on the order of
10–4–10–3 M.[54] The observation that 10 mM monovalent mannose
did not eliminate ConA interactions with the mannose-modified HNPs
implies that there is a strong binding affinity between ConA and mannose-modified
HNPs. It is well reported that the strength of interactions between
sugars and lectins can be enhanced via multivalent
binding,[55] and various two- and three-dimensional
sugar–polymer networks enhance the potency of the sugar–lectin
interactions.[56] It has been previously
demonstrated that mannose-modified HNPs have Kd values in the micromolar to nanomolar range.[57]
Gas Vesicle Protein Nanostructures
As a final example
of the utility of single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements of PPNPs,
we demonstrate the use of single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements to
characterize gas vesicle protein nanostructures. GVs are hollow gas-filled
bacterial protein nanostructures composed of a ∼2 nm protein
shell that excludes water but allows gas to diffuse in and out of
the particle.[58,59] In this work, we characterized
three genotypes of GVs encoded by the bacteria Bacillus megaterium (Mega GVs), Anabaena flos-aquae (Ana GVs), and Halobacterium salinarum (Halo GVs). TEM images of the three
varieties of GVs are displayed in Figure a, and a schematic illustration of an Ana
GV is shown in Figure b. The preparation of these GVs has been reported previously.[17,19,20,60] Ana GVs and Mega GVs are cone-tipped cylindrical nanostructures
with lengths of 519 ± 160 nm and 249 ± 99 nm, respectively,
and diameters of 136 ± 21 nm and 73 ± 14 nm, respectively;
Halo GVs are spindle-shaped nanostructures with lengths of 400 ±
113 nm and diameters of 251 ± 51 nm. TEM measurements of GV lengths
and diameters are reported in Table , along with an estimate
of the total volume, the molecular weight, and the gas-to-protein
volume ratios for the three types of GVs.[60]
Figure 5
(a)
TEM images of the three genotypes of gas vesicle (GV) nanostructures:
Halo GVs (left), Ana GVs (middle), and Mega GVs (right). (b) GVs are
composed of a ∼2 nm protein shell that excludes water but allows
gas to flow in and out of the particle. (c) A negative point diffraction
pattern is observed in the SPRI differential reflectivity images when
a GV electrostatically adsorbs to the chemically modified gold surface.
(d) Quantitative map displaying the Δ%R pixel
intensities for the single-GV point diffraction pattern. A sharp,
negative spike in Δ%R intensity is observed
at the center of the diffraction pattern (the intersection of the
two black dotted lines). We observe negative point diffractions for
GV adsorption events due to the decrease in interfacial refractive
index from water to air (GV).
(a)
TEM images of the three genotypes of gas vesicle (GV) nanostructures:
Halo GVs (left), Ana GVs (middle), and Mega GVs (right). (b) GVs are
composed of a ∼2 nm protein shell that excludes water but allows
gas to flow in and out of the particle. (c) A negative point diffraction
pattern is observed in the SPRI differential reflectivity images when
a GV electrostatically adsorbs to the chemically modified gold surface.
(d) Quantitative map displaying the Δ%R pixel
intensities for the single-GV point diffraction pattern. A sharp,
negative spike in Δ%R intensity is observed
at the center of the diffraction pattern (the intersection of the
two black dotted lines). We observe negative point diffractions for
GV adsorption events due to the decrease in interfacial refractive
index from water to air (GV).Single-nanoparticle SPRI adsorption measurements were
obtained
for the irreversible electrostatic adsorption of negatively charged
GVs onto a gold surface modified with a positively charged amino-terminated
monolayer. Figure c shows an example point diffraction pattern from a differential
reflectivity image that was obtained for the adsorption of a single
Ana GV. This diffraction pattern is similar to the diffraction pattern
observed for the adsorption of a PS nanoparticle, but the signal is
inverted. This can be seen most dramatically in Figure d, which quantifies a sharp negative spike
in Δ%R that is observed at the center of the
point diffraction pattern (intersection of the two black dotted lines).
Calculation of Δ%RNP for an individual
GV results in a negative value. Because the volumes of GVs are primarily
composed of air, the displacement of water (nwater = 1.33, where n is the refractive index)
with the GV (nair = 1.0) causes a decrease
in the local refractive index at the location of the GV adsorption
and consequently yields a negative Δ%RNP value.We have previously observed both positive and
negative diffraction
patterns for PS, hydrogel, and other nanoparticles due to the transient
adsorption and subsequent desorption of nanoparticles for the case
where nanoparticles are not irreversibly adsorbed onto the chemically
modified gold thin film.[41] The observed
negative diffraction pattern due to desorption always occurred after
and at the same location as the previous positive diffraction pattern.
For the positively charged MUAM-modified gold thin film, the GVs are
irreversibly adsorbed, and the adsorption event always created a negative
diffraction pattern. Occasionally, we did observe positive diffraction
patterns, which we attribute to the desorption of GVs, but this occurred
less than 5% of the time.The Δ%RNP frequency distribution
histograms for single-nanoparticle SPRI adsorption measurements of
all three types of GVs are displayed in Figure : Mega GVs (Figure a), Ana GVs (Figure b), and Halo GVs (Figure c). Similar to the PS nanoparticles, the
absolute Δ%RNP values for all three
types of GVs follow log-normal distributions. The values of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩, s, 95% CI, g, μ, and σ for the GVs are all reported in Table . All of the GVs have
larger relative standard deviations (s/⟨Δ%RNP⟩), skew factors (g), and log-normal scale factors (σ) as compared to PS nanoparticles
(Table ). We attribute
these larger log-normal distributions to the heterogeneous nature
of the GV biosynthesis. As expected, ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ values for the three types of GVs increase
as the total volume of the GV increases (in the order Halo GV >
Ana
GV > Mega GV). However, a quantitative relationship of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩ to GV volume is complex; the protein
component of the GV makes a positive contribution to Δ%RNP, while the gas volume makes a negative contribution.
As seen in Table ,
the gas volume dominates over the protein volume in all the GVs, which
is why we observe negative Δ%RNP values for all GVs. Moreover, the Ana and Mega GVs have a high length-to-width
aspect ratio, which could alter the single-nanoparticle SPRI response.
Because the GVs adsorbed to the surface from a quiescent 10 μL
solution, we do not expect that there are any preferential orientations
of the anisotropic GVs relative to the direction of the surface plasmon
polaritons. The future incorporation of a microfluidic flow system
for nanoparticle delivery to the gold surface could potentially be
used to create oriented adsorbed GV populations. Since near-infrared
surface plasmon polaritons have a decay length of approximately 200–300
nm perpendicular to the gold surface,[61] Ana and Mega GVs that adsorb with their length perpendicular to
the surface may fall outside the range of the surface plasmon polaritons
and produce a smaller than expected Δ%RNP.
Figure 6
Δ%RNP frequency distribution
histograms obtained from the SPRI adsorption measurements of (a) Mega
GVs, (b) Ana GVs, and (c) Halo GVs. The average Δ%RNP value for each experiment is plotted as a black dotted
line in each histogram. Average Δ%RNP values for Mega, Ana, and Halo GVs were respectively −0.49
± 0.03%, −1.07 ± 0.04%, and −3.0 ± 0.2%.
Δ%RNP frequency distribution
histograms obtained from the SPRI adsorption measurements of (a) Mega
GVs, (b) Ana GVs, and (c) Halo GVs. The average Δ%RNP value for each experiment is plotted as a black dotted
line in each histogram. Average Δ%RNP values for Mega, Ana, and Halo GVs were respectively −0.49
± 0.03%, −1.07 ± 0.04%, and −3.0 ± 0.2%.
Conclusions
In
summary, the experiments presented in this paper have demonstrated
that both the average single-nanoparticle response (⟨Δ%RNP⟩) and Δ%RNP frequency distribution measurements obtained from single-nanoparticle
SPRI adsorption measurements can provide detailed characterization
information for a variety of solid, porous, and gas-filled PPNPs.
The Δ%RNP frequency distribution
measurements of PS nanoparticles showed that Δ%RNP depends on nanoparticle volume for solid nanoparticles.
The changes of ⟨Δ%RNP⟩
observed upon uptake of melittin into porous HNPs demonstrate that
the single-nanoparticle SPRI measurements can also measure changes
in the total material content of a nanoparticle. The ConA binding
to mannose-modified HNPs indicates that both bioaffinity uptake and
nanoparticle aggregation can be studied through the Δ%RNP frequency distribution histograms. Finally,
the most striking evidence that single-nanoparticle SPRI experiments
measure changes in interfacial refractive index due to nanoparticle
adsorption is the negative point diffraction patterns and Δ%RNP values observed for the adsorption of gas
vesicles, a type of gas-filled protein nanostructure.An important
parameter to ascertain for these single-nanoparticle
SPRI measurements on PPNPs is how narrow of a Δ%RNP frequency distribution can be measured. Since every
PPNP Δ%RNP distribution determined
in this paper could be fit with a log-normal distribution, we can
use the scale parameter σ to define the normal distribution.
The lowest scale parameter observed in these experiments is ∼0.2,
and thus this number is our current experimental lower limit for what
we can measure for Δ%RNP log-normal
distributions. With additional theoretical modeling of the single-nanoparticle
SPRI response and the development of more accurate methods of determining
Δ%RNP, we expect that this lower
limit can be improved in the future.
Methods
Hydrogel
Nanoparticle Synthesis
N-Isopropylacrylamide
(NIPAm), acrylic acid (AAc), sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), V-501,
and ammonium persulfate (APS) were obtained from Sigma-Aldrich, Inc.
(St. Louis, MO, USA). N,N′-Methylenebis(acrylamide)
(BIS) was obtained from Fluka (St. Louis, MO, USA). N-tert-Butylacrylamide (TBAm) was obtained from Acros Organics (Geel, Belgium).
NIPAm was recrystallized from hexane before use. All other chemicals
were used as received.HNPs for melittin uptake experiments
were synthesized following the procedure detailed in Cho etal.[42] The monomers NIPAm
(53 mol %), TBAm (40 mol %), AAc (5 mol %), and BIS (2 mol %) were
dissolved in 50 mL of nanopure water in a round-bottom flask for a
total monomer concentration of 65 mM. TBAm was dissolved in 1 mL of
ethanol before addition to the monomer solution. The surfactant SDS
(1.7 mg) was also added to the monomer solution to control nanoparticle
size. Nitrogen gas was bubbled through the solution for 30 min. Following
the addition of a 500 μL aqueous solution containing 30 mg of
APS, the polymerization was carried out in an oil bath preset to 60 °C
for 3 h under a nitrogen atmosphere. The polymerized solutions were
purified by dialysis using 12–14 kDa molecular weight cut-off
dialysis membrane against an excess amount of nanopure water (changed
more than three times a day) for 4 days.Mannose-modified HNPs
for ConA uptake experiments were synthesized
following the procedure detailed in Maley etal. and using a similar procedure to that described for
HNP synthesis.[43] The sugar unit p-acrylamidophenyl-α-d-mannopyranoside (Man)
was synthesized using methods reported previously.[62,63] The monomer ratio for mannose-modified HNPs was NIPAm (63.5 mol
%), TBAm (28 mol %), AAc (5 mol %), BIS (2 mol %), and Man (1.5 mol
%) for a total monomer concentration of 65 mM. SDS (2.5 mg) was used
as a surfactant, and V-501 (131.3 μmol/0.5 mL of DMSO) was used
as the radical initiator. The polymerization was carried out in an
oil bath preset to 70 °C for 3 h under a nitrogen atmosphere.
The polymerized solutions were purified by dialysis using 12–14
kDa molecular weight cut-off dialysis membrane against an excess amount
of nanopure water (changed more than three times a day) for 4 days.
Gas Vesicles
Ana and Halo GVs were expressed and purified
from their respective host bacteria, and Mega GVs were expressed and
purified from E. coli, as described previously.[60] Briefly, cells were cultured to confluency (and,
in the case of E. coli, induced to express GVs)
and lysed using hypertonic, hypotonic, or detergent lysis. GVs were
isolated using centrifugally assisted buoyancy purification, and their
concentration was measured using optical density at 500 nm. Mega GVs,
which are natively clustered after purification from bacteria, were
unclustered with a solution of 6 M urea and 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH = 8.0),
followed by two rounds of centrifugally assisted buoyancy purification
and overnight dialysis in 1× phosphate-buffered saline (PBS)
(11.9 mM phosphates, 137 mM sodium chloride, 2.7 mM potassium chloride,
pH 7.4, Fisher), before optical density quantification and use in
SPRI experiments. Transmission electron microscopy was performed on
a Philips Tecnai T12 LaB6 120 kV after GVs in HEPES buffer were deposited
on carbon/Formvar grids stained with 2% uranyl acetate.[60]
Optical Setup
The detailed description
of the construction
of the near-infrared single-nanoparticle SPRI microscope is described
in a previous publication.[41] 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, USA) was expanded and collimated using a spatial filter (Newport,
Corp., Newport Beach, CA, USA). The beam was then polarized and focused
with a lens (f = 200 mm) onto the back focal plane
of a 100× 1.49 numerical aperture oil microscope objective (Olympus).
The beam was directed upward near the edge of the objective by a gold-coated
knife-edge mirror (Thorlabs, Newton, NJ, USA) that was mounted on
an X–Y micrometer, in order to adjust the
incident angle on the sample. The reflected image was allowed to pass
out the other side of the objective and acquired by an Andor Neo sCMOS
camera (South Windsor, CT, USA) by accumulating 30 11-bit, 0.1 s exposures.
Substrate Preparation
Substrates for all SPRI experiments
were borosilicate No. 1.5 coverslips (Fisherbrand, Pittsburgh, PA,
USA) coated with a 1 nm Cr adhesion layer and 45 nm Au. For PS nanoparticles
and GV measurements, Au surfaces were immobilized with a positively
charged alkanethiol monolayer (11-mercaptoundecamine, Dojindo Molecular
Technologies, Inc., Gaithersburg, MD, USA) by immersing the Au substrate
in a 1 mM ethanolic MUAM solution for 12 h. For HNP measurements,
Au surfaces were immobilized with a hydrophobic 1-undecanethiol monolayer
(C11, Sigma-Aldrich) by immersing the Au substrate in a 1 mM ethanolic
C11 solution for 12 h. All Au surfaces were partitioned using adhesive
silicone isolation wells (Electron Microscopy Sciences, Hatfield,
PA, USA).
Polystyrene Particle SPRI Measurements
Carboxylate
polystyrene spheres with mean diameters of 85 and 170 nm were purchased
from Polysciences, Inc. (Warrington, PA, USA). Au slides chemically
modified with MUAM were prepared and isolation wells were filled with
10 μL of nanopure water to protect the MUAM layer. Solutions
of PS nanoparticles were diluted in nanopure water to concentrations
of ∼109 particles/mL for all measurements. For all
SPRI experiments, 10 μL of nanoparticle solution was pipetted
into the isolation well immediately preceding the image acquisition
process.
Hydrogel SPRI Measurements
Au slides for all hydrogel
nanoparticle SPRI measurements were chemically modified with C11,
and isolation wells were filled with 10 μL of 1× PBS to
protect the C11 layer. For melittin uptake measurements, melittin
(Sigma-Aldrich) was dissolved in 1× PBS and diluted to a concentration
of 18 μM. HNPs were diluted in 1× PBS to a final concentration
of 20 μg/mL, and 18 μM melittin was added with a final
concentration of 2 μM. The HNP and melittin mixture was allowed
to incubate at room temperature for 30 min before SPRI experiments.
For ConA uptake measurements, mannose-modified HNPs were diluted in
1× PBS to a final concentration of 20 μg/mL after mixing
with ConA (Sigma-Aldrich) at a final concentration of 500 nM. For
mannose-modified HNP experiments with free mannose, d-(+)-mannose
(Sigma-Aldrich) was also added to the solution at the specified concentration
from a more concentrated solution in 1× PBS. The mannose-modified
HNP and ConA mixtures were allowed to incubate at room temperature
for a minimum of 30 min before SPRI experiments.
Gas Vesicle
SPRI Measurements
Au slides for GV measurements
were chemically modified with MUAM, and isolation wells were filled
with 10 μL of 1× PBS to protect the MUAM layer. The optical
density at 500 nm was measured using a NanoDrop 2000 (Thermo Scientific).
All GVs were diluted in 1× PBS to the concentrations specified
for SPRI experiments: Mega GVs diluted to 1 nM, Ana GVs diluted to
10 pM, and Halo GVs diluted to 5 pM.
Dynamic Light Scattering
Measurements
The hydrodynamic
diameters of PS nanoparticles were measured in aqueous solutions at
25 °C, and the hydrodynamic diameters of hydrogel nanoparticles
were measured in 1× PBS at 25 °C by a DLS instrument equipped
with Zetasizer software (Zetasizer Nano ZS, Malvern Instruments Ltd.,
Worcestershire, U.K.).
Authors: M Mahadi Abdul Jamil; M C T Denyer; M Youseffi; S T Britland; S Liu; C W See; M G Somekh; J Zhang Journal: J Struct Biol Date: 2008-06-20 Impact factor: 2.867
Authors: George J Lu; Li-Dek Chou; Dina Malounda; Amit K Patel; Derek S Welsbie; Daniel L Chao; Tirunelveli Ramalingam; Mikhail G Shapiro Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2020-02-10 Impact factor: 15.881
Authors: Levi T Hogan; Erik H Horak; Jonathan M Ward; Kassandra A Knapper; Síle Nic Chormaic; Randall H Goldsmith Journal: ACS Nano Date: 2019-10-21 Impact factor: 15.881