Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are a class of modular, crystalline, and porous materials that hold promise for storage and transport of chemical cargoes. Though MOFs have been studied in bulk forms, ways of deliberately manipulating the external surface functionality of MOF nanoparticles are less developed. A generalizable approach to modify their surfaces would allow one to impart chemical functionality onto the particle surface that is independent of the bulk MOF structure. Moreover, the use of a chemically programmable ligand, such as DNA, would allow for the manipulation of interparticle interactions. Herein, we report a coordination chemistry-based strategy for the surface functionalization of the external metal nodes of MOF nanoparticles with terminal phosphate-modified oligonucleotides. The external surfaces of nine distinct archetypical MOF particles containing four different metal species (Zr, Cr, Fe, and Al) were successfully functionalized with oligonucleotides, illustrating the generality of this strategy. By taking advantage of the programmable and specific interactions of DNA, 11 distinct MOF particle-inorganic particle core-satellite clusters were synthesized. In these hybrid nanoclusters, the relative stoichiometry, size, shape, and composition of the building blocks can all be independently controlled. This work provides access to a new set of nucleic acid-nanoparticle conjugates, which may be useful as programmable material building blocks and as probes for measuring and manipulating intracellular processes.
Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are a class of modular, crystalline, and porous materials that hold promise for storage and transport of chemical cargoes. Though MOFs have been studied in bulk forms, ways of deliberately manipulating the external surface functionality of MOF nanoparticles are less developed. A generalizable approach to modify their surfaces would allow one to impart chemical functionality onto the particle surface that is independent of the bulk MOF structure. Moreover, the use of a chemically programmable ligand, such as DNA, would allow for the manipulation of interparticle interactions. Herein, we report a coordination chemistry-based strategy for the surface functionalization of the externalmetal nodes of MOF nanoparticles with terminalphosphate-modified oligonucleotides. The external surfaces of nine distinct archetypicalMOF particles containing four different metal species (Zr, Cr, Fe, and Al) were successfully functionalized with oligonucleotides, illustrating the generality of this strategy. By taking advantage of the programmable and specific interactions of DNA, 11 distinct MOF particle-inorganic particle core-satellite clusters were synthesized. In these hybrid nanoclusters, the relative stoichiometry, size, shape, and composition of the building blocks can all be independently controlled. This work provides access to a new set of nucleic acid-nanoparticle conjugates, which may be useful as programmable material building blocks and as probes for measuring and manipulating intracellular processes.
It is known
DNA is a versatile
and powerful ligand for modifying nanomaterials, by virtue of its
programmable and sequence-specific interactions.[1−3] For example,
by densely functionalizing DNA onto spherical nanoparticles (NPs),
one can orient the oligonucleotides (3′-5′ or 5′-3′)
and generate spherical nucleic acid–nanoparticle conjugates
(SNAs),[4] which exhibit unusual biological
properties that have enabled a variety of applications in research
and medicine. Indeed, many biodiagnostic systems and therapeutic lead
compounds for gene regulation are now based upon SNAs.[5,6] In addition, they have become the central building blocks for crystal
engineering approaches based upon the concept of DNA-programmable
assembly.[7−9] Thus far, several approaches have been developed
for modifying noble metal,[1,2,10] oxide,[11] quantum dot nanoparticles with
DNA.[12] However, there are no general ways
for directly modifying MOF nanoparticles with oligonucleotides in
a preferential end-on manner. Indeed, all previous approaches have
utilized either nonspecific interactions such as electrostatic adsorption
and van der Waals interactions,[13,14] or required a coupling
agent that is necessarily immobilized on the particle surface prior
to functionalization with DNA,[15,16] rendering less control
and generality.Herein, we describe a general strategy for functionalizing
MOF
nanoparticles with oligonucleotides at high density. Using terminalphosphate-modified oligonucleotides, we can chemically address the
dense coordinatively unsaturated metal sites (CUS) on a MOF nanoparticle
surface.[17−21] Solid-state nuclear magnetic resonance (SSNMR) spectroscopy and
powder X-ray diffraction (PXRD) confirm that the DNA-functionalization
of MOFs occurs by metal–phosphate coordination and that the
structural integrity and porosity of the MOF architecture are preserved
postmodification (Scheme ). As proof-of-concept of generality, this approach was extended
to a series of nine different MOFs, featuring four metal nodes (Zr,
Fe, Cr, Al) and four different organic linkers.
Scheme 1
(a) Schematic Representation
of Solvothermal Synthesis of UiO-66
MOF Nanoparticles; (b) DNA Modification
of MOFs, Utilizing Terminal Phosphate-Modified DNA and Subsequent
Sequence-Specific Assembly of MOF-NP Core–Satellite Hybrid
architectures
Inset: Zr6O4(OH)4 secondary building
units (SBU).
(a) Schematic Representation
of Solvothermal Synthesis of UiO-66
MOF Nanoparticles; (b) DNA Modification
of MOFs, Utilizing Terminal Phosphate-Modified DNA and Subsequent
Sequence-Specific Assembly of MOF-NP Core–Satellite Hybrid
architectures
Inset: Zr6O4(OH)4 secondary building
units (SBU).For our initial study, UiO-66
was chosen due to its high stability
and extensively characterized structure.[22] UiO-66 was synthesized under solvothermal conditions, using acetic
acid to modulate crystallite size, resulting in 225 ± 35 nm (edge
length) octahedral nanoparticles. The crystallinity and crystallite
size of UiO-66 were determined by PXRD and scanning electron microscopy
(SEM), respectively (Figure a,d). Next, phosphate-modified nucleic acids were synthesized
on a DNA synthesizer employing chemically modified phosphoramidites
at either the 3′ or 5′ ends of the oligonucleotide.
In a typical DNA-MOF particle functionalization experiment, excess
oligonucleotide was added to a colloidal suspension of MOF nanoparticles,
and subsequently incubated overnight (see SI). A salt-aging procedure was used to screen the negatively charged
oligomers and achieve a high density of surface-immobilized oligonucleotides.
Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images and PXRD verified the
shapes and crystallinity of the particles were preserved post-DNA
modification (Figure b,d).
Figure 1
Characterization of DNA functionalized MOF nanoparticles: (a) SEM
of UiO-66 and (b) TEM images of DNA functionalized UiO-66. (c) 31P{1H} SSNMR spectra of phosphate functionalized
oligonucleotide. Inset: three phosphorus resonances corresponding
to unbound phosphodiester (blue), side on Zr bound phosphodiester
(gray) and Zr bound terminal phosphate (red). (d) PXRD of simulated
UiO-66 (black), 225 nm UiO-66 before (red) and after (blue) DNA functionalization.
(e) Melting transition of MOF and 50 nm gold nanoparticle aggregates
assembled with complementary DNA. Scale bar = 500 nm in panel a and
2 μm in panel b.
Characterization of DNA functionalized MOF nanoparticles: (a) SEM
of UiO-66 and (b) TEM images of DNA functionalized UiO-66. (c) 31P{1H} SSNMR spectra of phosphate functionalized
oligonucleotide. Inset: three phosphorus resonances corresponding
to unbound phosphodiester (blue), side on Zr bound phosphodiester
(gray) and Zr bound terminalphosphate (red). (d) PXRD of simulated
UiO-66 (black), 225 nm UiO-66 before (red) and after (blue) DNA functionalization.
(e) Melting transition of MOF and 50 nm gold nanoparticle aggregates
assembled with complementary DNA. Scale bar = 500 nm in panel a and
2 μm in panel b.To confirm the immobilization of nucleic acids on the MOF
nanoparticle
surface, the interaction between terminalphosphate-functionalized
DNA and Zr-based SBUs was probed using 31P{1H} magic angle spinning (MAS) solid-state NMR spectroscopy (Figure c). Oligo-T sequences,
synthesized with a chemical phosphorylation reagent (CPR), with lengths
of one base (“CPR-T1”), two bases (“CPR-T2”), and 20 bases (“CPR-T20”)
were synthesized and chemically adsorbed onto MOF nanoparticles. As
shown in Figure c,
narrow phosphorus resonances centered at −0.3 ppm correspond
to unbound phosphate in the free nucleic acid samples. In the CPR-T1@UiO-66 case, Zr–phosphate bond formation was verified
by a 4.8 ppm upfield shift in the phosphorus resonance from −0.3
to −5.1 ppm.[23] In the CPR-T2@UiO-66 case, three resonances were observed and assigned
to the P atom of the unbound phosphodiester (−0.2 ppm), the
Zr–O–P (phosphodiester, −2.8 ppm), and Zr–O–P
(terminalphosphate) resonance at −5.9 ppm (Figure c inset). The data suggest
immobilization can occur two ways: end on and/or side on where both
phosphates can bond with the Zr-rich surface. The significant peak
intensity difference between two Zr–O–P modes (terminalphosphate vs phosphodiester) is due to the increased affinity of the
terminalphosphate for the Zr centers as compared to that of the internal
phosphodiester; this difference is primarily due to the increased
steric hindrance felt by the internal phosphodiester and is in agreement
with previous reports studying Zr–phosphate interactions, but
not in the context of MOFs.[24] For CPR-dT20@UiO-66, significant chemical shift broadening upon surface
functionalization is observed. We attribute this change to the increased
ratio of backbone to terminalphosphates, a distinct chemical environment
for each backbone phosphate, and the greater degrees of freedom accessible
for the longer oligonucleotide strand. Together, these data support
the conclusion the terminalphosphate moiety of DNA coordinates to
the previously solvent-bound Zr sites on the external surface of the
MOF nanoparticles.The extent of DNA coverage on the MOF surface
was determined by
inductively coupled plasma atomic emission spectroscopy (ICP-AES)
and UV–visible spectroscopy (UV–vis). The surface area
and Zr atoms per particle for UiO-66 were calculated based on a geometric
approximation of the crystallite size, shape, and structure (see SI). To quantify the DNA surface coverage, Tamra
dye-labeled DNA was used to modify UiO-66 particles. The absorption
of Tamra at 556 nm was measured to determine that the average DNA
loading on UiO-66 was 17 ± 6 pmol/cm2, which correlates
with the phosphorus and Zr concentrations measured by ICP-AES (see SI). The DNA surface coverage realized in this
study is about two times higher than a report using a ligand strut
modification approach.[15] The high DNA surface
coverage was also confirmed by a thermal melting analysis of aggregates
formed from DNA-functionalized UiO-66 nanoparticles and gold NPs (diameter
= 50 nm) with complementary DNA, a property that is characteristic
of particles with high DNA surface coverages.[1]To evaluate the generality of this approach, nine distinct
MOF
architectures containing different metals and organic linkers were
chosen, including UiO-66, UiO-67-bpy (2,2′-bipyridine-5′,5′-dicarboxylic
acid), UiO-68-N3/PCN-58, PCN-222/MOF-545, PCN-223, PCN-224,
MIL-101 (Al), MIL-101 (Fe), and MIL-101 (Cr), representing four distinct
metal nodes, four distinct organic linkers, and five different topologies
(Figure ). In addition
to their high chemical stability, these MOFs show promise in nanomedicine.[25,26] MOF nanoparticle synthesis, characterization, and surface functionalization
and quantification were carried out analogously to that described
(Figures S1–6), following literature
reports. In comparing these different MOFs, we tested how SBU density,
SBU coordination number, and metal–oxygen bond dissociation
energy affect surface functionalization.
Figure 2
Library of nine MOFs
synthesized and further functionalized with
DNA. To systematically investigate factors affecting DNA surface coverage,
(a) organic linker length, (b) metal node connectivity, and (c) type
of metal cluster were independently and deliberately varied and DNA
surface coverage was plotted against surface SBU density, SBU coordination
number, and M–O bond dissociation energy. Scale bar = 200 nm.
Library of nine MOFs
synthesized and further functionalized with
DNA. To systematically investigate factors affecting DNA surface coverage,
(a) organic linker length, (b) metal node connectivity, and (c) type
of metal cluster were independently and deliberately varied and DNA
surface coverage was plotted against surface SBU density, SBU coordination
number, and M–O bond dissociation energy. Scale bar = 200 nm.We hypothesized DNA surface coverage
would correlate with the density
of SBUs present on the nanoparticle surface. To test this, three isoreticular
Zr-based frameworks with the same underlying topology were synthesized,
namely UiO-66, UiO-67-bpy, and UiO-68-N3. Within this family,
the density of surface metal nodes decreases as a function of increasing
organic linker length, with the Zr oxide cluster SBU surface density
(assuming (100) facet is exposed) estimated to be 0.27, 0.16, and
0.11 nm–2 for UiO-66, UiO-67-bpy, and UiO-68-N3, respectively. As shown in Figure a, by plotting the DNA surface coverage as
a function of ZrSBU density on each MOF surface, a linear relationship
is observed, where the ratio of DNA to ZrSBU is essentially constant:
structures with more surface Zr have more DNA. This is the first demonstration
of a quantitative correlation between DNA functionalization and surface
SBU density on different MOFs, providing a way to select for MOF structures
with the appropriate DNA surface loading for an intended use. Higher
DNA loading density can significantly impact nanomaterial colloidal
stability and certain biological applications where high DNA-loading
is correlated with particle probe performance.To test that
MOFs with high SBU coordination numbers will result
in higher DNA functionalization densities (due to more solvent-bound
CUS on the nanoparticle surface), three Zr-based porphyrinic MOFs,
PCN-222, PCN-223, and PCN-224, were synthesized from an identical
tetracarboxyphenyl porphyrin linker (H2TCPP). This resulted
in structures that share different net topologies because of different
SBU connectivity (Figure b). Specifically, three different octahedralZr6 SBUs with coordination numbers of 8-, 12-, and 6- define each of
these frameworks, and yield comparable surface SBU densities of 0.28,
0.25, and 0.28 nm–2, respectively. As shown in Figure b, a trend is seen
where DNA surface coverage increases with SBU coordination number
for three MOFs with comparable surface SBU density. This is because
highly coordinated metal clusters expose higher degrees of surface
defects due to coordination unsaturation,[27] which favors subsequent phosphate–DNA adsorption.Next,
we tested the formation of stronger metal–phosphate
bonds will facilitate greater extents of DNA adsorption (SI Figure). Three isostructuralMIL-101 frameworks
were synthesized: MIL-101 (Cr), MIL-101 (Fe), and MIL-101 (Al). Because
identical structures are found in all three MOFs, the importance of
phosphate–metal bond strength (postadsorption) on determining
DNA surface coverage can be evaluated. Metal–oxygen bond dissociation
energies (BDE) of 409, 477, and 512 kJ/mol for the Fe–O, Cr–O,
and Al–O bonds, respectively, have been reported.[28] An increase in DNA surface coverage as a function
of BDE was observed (SI Figure).Finally, with an understanding of the stability and density of
the oligonucleotides at the DNA-MOF nanoparticle conjugate surface,
we studied the hybridization and assembly properties of such structures
with different DNA-NP sizes, shapes, and compositions. In particular,
DNA-MOF nanoparticles and archetypical inorganic gold nanoparticle
(AuNP) SNA conjugates were used to synthesize hybrid core–satellite
nanoclusters. In a typical experiment, AuNPs of different sizes were
functionalized with a DNA sequence complementary to those on the MOF
nanoparticles to facilitate assembly, the compliments were mixed,
salt-aged, and the resulting core–satellite hybrid architectures
were isolated by low speed centrifugation. To confirm the morphology
of the assembled nanoclusters, a developed silica encapsulation protocol
for stabilizing DNA–nanoparticle assemblies was used, as shown
in Figure a.[29] Importantly, no MOF-AuNP nanoclusters form upon
mixing of noncomplementary DNA-functionalized particles.
Figure 3
TEM and EDX characterization of DNA interconnected MOF
NP-Au NP
assemblies. (a) Representative HAADF image of nanoclusters formed
from complementary 225 nm DNA-UiO-66 MOF NPs and 20 nm DNA-Au NPs.
Inset: schematic illustration of a MOF NP-AuNP cluster, and a single
nanocluster. (b)
TEM images of nanocluster assemblies demonstrating how the programmable
DNA ligands on MOF NPs and AuNPs provide control over the structural
makeup of the assemblies (Au NP size and MOF-to-Au NP stoichiometry).
All scale bars are 100 nm, except for in panel a, where it is 1 μm.
TEM and EDX characterization of DNA interconnected MOF
NP-Au NP
assemblies. (a) Representative HAADF image of nanoclusters formed
from complementary 225 nm DNA-UiO-66 MOF NPs and 20 nm DNA-Au NPs.
Inset: schematic illustration of a MOF NP-AuNP cluster, and a single
nanocluster. (b)
TEM images of nanocluster assemblies demonstrating how the programmable
DNA ligands on MOF NPs and AuNPs provide control over the structural
makeup of the assemblies (Au NP size and MOF-to-Au NP stoichiometry).
All scale bars are 100 nm, except for in panel a, where it is 1 μm.By
modifying the stoichiometry of the DNA-mediated hybridization
reaction (by varying MOF NP:AuNP ratio from 1:20 to 1:2000), the loading
of metal NPs on the centralMOF particle could be controlled (Figure b). The formation
of MOF-NP nanocluster satellite structures is favored over polymeric
structures at high AuNP:MOF ratios; once they form, they expose only
identical noncomplementary DNA on the nanocluster periphery which
inhibits the formation of extended networks via intercluster hybridization.
To further explore the generality of this DNA-mediated approach, we
systematically assembled satellite structures with MOF particle cores
with a variety of DNA-functionalized NP building blocks, including
gold nanostars, cubes, octahedra, and triangular prisms, silver spheres,
and Fe3O4 spheres. TEM and energy-dispersive
X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) mapping of the resulting structures show
their clean formation (Figures S10 and 11). The cellular cytotoxicity and uptake properties of MOF-NP hybrid
nanoclusters were also assessed. The enrichment of MOF-AuNP nanocluster
in cellular vesicles over time was demonstrated by confocal laser
scanning microscopy (Figure S13), where
strong accumulation of the nanocluster in cellular vesicle was observed
as compared to an equivalent amount of single strand dye-labeled DNA,
with no appreciable cytotoxicity (Figure S15). Together, the structures realized illustrate the versatility and
potential utility of these new DNA-modified MOF NPs for programmable
assembly and in applications where designer oligonucleotide interactions
are relevant.This work is important for the
following reasons. First, it provides
an approach to the synthesis of DNA-modified MOFs, independent of
the choices of organic linkers and broadly applicable to a variety
of metal clusters. Second, the structures realized are stable, have
many of the originalMOF characteristics, and can be programmably
assembled with complementary DNA-modified NP building blocks. Third,
design rules for modifying MOF NPs with DNA are emerging through this
work. Most notably, we show DNA surface coverage directly correlates
with MOF nanoparticle surface SBU density, coordination number, and
metal–phosphate bond strength. Finally, the experiments described
provide a route to a broad class of NP building blocks with tunable
properties that can used to prepare designer materials with properties
that may prove useful in biology,[30] catalysis,[31] and optics.[32]
Authors: Robert J Macfarlane; Byeongdu Lee; Matthew R Jones; Nadine Harris; George C Schatz; Chad A Mirkin Journal: Science Date: 2011-10-14 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Stephanie G Grancharov; Hao Zeng; Shouheng Sun; Shan X Wang; Stephen O'Brien; C B Murray; J R Kirtley; G A Held Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2005-07-07 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Dwight S Seferos; David A Giljohann; Haley D Hill; Andrew E Prigodich; Chad A Mirkin Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2007-11-23 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Guillaume Nonglaton; Isa O Benitez; Isabelle Guisle; Muriel Pipelier; Jean Léger; Didier Dubreuil; Charles Tellier; Daniel R Talham; Bruno Bujoli Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2004-02-11 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Xuan Zhang; Megan C Wasson; Mohsen Shayan; Ellan K Berdichevsky; Joseph Ricardo-Noordberg; Zujhar Singh; Edgar K Papazyan; Anthony J Castro; Paola Marino; Zvart Ajoyan; Zhijie Chen; Timur Islamoglu; Ashlee J Howarth; Yangyang Liu; Marek B Majewski; Michael J Katz; Joseph E Mondloch; Omar K Farha Journal: Coord Chem Rev Date: 2020-10-21 Impact factor: 22.315