| Literature DB >> 31581547 |
Nina Turk1,2, Ali Raza3,4, Pieter Wuytens5, Hans Demol6,7, Michiel Van Daele8, Christophe Detavernier9, Andre Skirtach10,11, Kris Gevaert12,13, Roel Baets14,15.
Abstract
Surface-Enhanced Raman Spectroscopy (SERS) allows for the highly specific detection of molecules by enhancing the inherently weak Raman signals near the surface of plasmonic nanostructures. A variety of plasmonic nanostructures have been developed for SERS signal excitation and collection in a conventional free-space microscope, among which the gold nanodomes offer one of the highest SERS enhancements. Nanophotonic waveguides have recently emerged as an alternative to the conventional Raman microscope as they can be used to efficiently excite and collect Raman signals. Integration of plasmonic structures on nanophotonic waveguides enables reproducible waveguide-based excitation and collection of SERS spectra, such as in nanoplasmonic slot waveguides. In this paper, we compare the SERS performance of gold nanodomes, in which the signal is excited and collected in free space, and waveguide-based nanoplasmonic slot waveguide. We evaluate the SERS signal enhancement and the SERS background of the different SERS platforms using a monolayer of nitrothiophenol. We show that the nanoplasmonic slot waveguide approaches the gold nanodomes in terms of the signal-to-background ratio. We additionally demonstrate the first-time detection of a peptide monolayer on a waveguide-based SERS platform, paving the way towards the SERS monitoring of biologically relevant molecules on an integrated lab-on-a-chip platform.Entities:
Keywords: Raman spectroscopy; SERS; gold nanodomes; nanoplasmonic slot waveguide; peptide detection; photonic integrated circuit; waveguide-based SERS
Year: 2019 PMID: 31581547 PMCID: PMC6835592 DOI: 10.3390/nano9101401
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanomaterials (Basel) ISSN: 2079-4991 Impact factor: 5.076
Figure 1Fabrication process of gold nanodomes. (a) Spincoating of polystyrene beads on a Si3N4 chip. (b) Thinning down of the polystyrene beads by oxygen plasma. (c) Etching of the nanodome pattern in Si3N4. (d) Removal of the remains of the polystyrene beads. (e) Gold deposition. (f) The arrows mark the gap in the gold nanodomes.
Figure 2Fabrication of a nanoplasmonic slot waveguide. (a) Fabrication of the Si3N4 slot waveguides. (b) Atomic layer deposition of Al2O3. (c) Gold deposition. The arrows mark the gap width of the nanoplasmonic slot waveguide.
Figure 3Schematic of an optical setup used to measure the surface-enhanced Raman spectra. Gold nanodomes were measured in a conventional free-space configuration, whereas in the case of the nanoplasmonic slot waveguides, the microscope objective was used to couple the light to the waveguide and then to collect the SERS signal in the back reflection.
Figure 4Scanning electron microscope images of gold nanodomes. (a) Tilted view. (b) Top-down view. (c) Cross-section of a nanodome-patterned chip with a 12 nm wide gap between nanodomes.
Figure 5Nanoplasmonic slot waveguide. (a) Schematic showing that the input and Stokes powers are guided by the waveguide. (b) Scanning electron microscope image of the gold-covered slot in top view. (c) Cross-section of a nanoplasmonic slot waveguide with a gap of 15 nm.
Figure 6Averaged SERS spectra of the NTP monolayer acquired on gold nanodomes and on the nanoplasmonic slot waveguide. The spectrum on the gold nanodomes was obtained using a laser power of 300 µW and an integration time of 0.13 s. The spectrum on the nanoplasmonic slot waveguide was obtained using a laser power of 350 µW and an integration time of 10 s. The SERS spectrum on the nanodomes was divided by a factor of 40 to allow for better visualization. We subtracted the dark counts, but not the SERS background of the spectra. The spectra are offset on the y-axis for clarity, and the dashed line represents the zero line of each spectrum.
Figure 7Comparison of SERS background power P (x-axis) and SERS Stokes power P (y-axis) of different SERS platforms. Both parameters are normalized on the input power and the integration time. FS indicates free-space and WG is the waveguide-based excitation and collection of the SERS signal.
The signal-to-background ratio (SBR) and signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) values at P = 1 mW and t = 1 s for different SERS platforms evaluated based on the 1339 cm−1 mode of a NTP monolayer. If we use another input power or integration time, the absolute value of the SNR will change, but the relative SNR of different SERS platforms will remain the same. FS indicates free-space and WG is the waveguide-based excitation and collection of the SERS signal. For the sake of this table, only the shot noise contribution from the background is taken into account (as it will be more relevant when looking for weaker peaks than the 1339 cm−1 mode).
| SERS Platform | SBR | SNR (Pin = 1 mW, t = 1 s) |
|---|---|---|
| Gold nanodomes (FS) | 3.28 | 3 × 104 |
| Integrated bowties (WG) | 0.12 | 102 |
| Integrated nanotriangles (WG) | 0.72 | 103 |
| Nanoplasmonic slot waveguide (WG) | 1.16 | 2 × 103 |
Figure 8Background-subtracted SERS spectra of the peptide NH2-CALNNFCNSFCNGGGGVR-GNFSF-COOH acquired on gold nanodomes and on the nanoplasmonic slot waveguide. The spectrum on the gold nanodomes was obtained using a laser power of 1 mW and an integration time of 1 s. The spectrum on the nanoplasmonic slot waveguide was obtained using a laser power of 1 mW and an integration time of 30 s, and the SERS intensity was divided by a factor of 10 to allow for better visualization. The spectra are offset on the y-axis for clarity, and the dashed line represents the zero line of each spectrum.