Multivalent display on linear platforms is used by many biomolecular systems to effectively interact with their corresponding binding partners in a dose-responsive and ultrasensitive manner appropriate to the biological system at hand. Synthetic supramolecular multivalent displays offer a matching approach for the modular and bottom-up construction and systematic study of dynamic 1D materials. Fundamental studies into multivalent interactions between such linear, 1D materials have been lacking because of the absence of appropriate modular nanoplatforms. In this work we interfaced two synthetic multivalent linear nanoplatforms based on a dynamic supramolecular polymer, formed by hybrid discotic-oligonucleotide monomers, and a series of complementary DNA-duplex-based multivalent ligands, also with appended short oligonucleotides. The combination of these two multivalent nanoplatforms provides for the first time entry to study multivalent effects in dynamic 1D systems, of relevance for the conceptual understanding of multivalency in biology and for the generation of novel multivalent biomaterials. Together the two nanoscaffolds provide easy access to libraries of multivalent ligands with tunable affinities. The DNA scaffold allows for exact control over valency and spatial ligand distribution, and the discotic supramolecular polymer allows for dynamic adaptation and control over receptor density. The interaction between the two nanoplatforms was studied as a function of ligand interaction strength, valency, and density. Usage of the enhancement parameter β allowed quantification of the effects of ligand valency and affinity. The results reveal a generalized principle of additive binding increments. Receptor density is shown to be crucially and nonlinearly correlated to complex formation, leading to ultrasensitive responses. The results reveal that, not unlike biomolecular signaling, high density multivalent display of receptors is crucial for functionally increased affinities.
Multivalent display on linear platforms is used by many biomolecular systems to effectively interact with their corresponding binding partners in a dose-responsive and ultrasensitive manner appropriate to the biological system at hand. Synthetic supramolecular multivalent displays offer a matching approach for the modular and bottom-up construction and systematic study of dynamic 1D materials. Fundamental studies into multivalent interactions between such linear, 1D materials have been lacking because of the absence of appropriate modular nanoplatforms. In this work we interfaced two synthetic multivalent linear nanoplatforms based on a dynamic supramolecular polymer, formed by hybrid discotic-oligonucleotide monomers, and a series of complementary DNA-duplex-based multivalent ligands, also with appended short oligonucleotides. The combination of these two multivalent nanoplatforms provides for the first time entry to study multivalent effects in dynamic 1D systems, of relevance for the conceptual understanding of multivalency in biology and for the generation of novel multivalent biomaterials. Together the two nanoscaffolds provide easy access to libraries of multivalent ligands with tunable affinities. The DNA scaffold allows for exact control over valency and spatial ligand distribution, and the discotic supramolecular polymer allows for dynamic adaptation and control over receptor density. The interaction between the two nanoplatforms was studied as a function of ligand interaction strength, valency, and density. Usage of the enhancement parameter β allowed quantification of the effects of ligand valency and affinity. The results reveal a generalized principle of additive binding increments. Receptor density is shown to be crucially and nonlinearly correlated to complex formation, leading to ultrasensitive responses. The results reveal that, not unlike biomolecular signaling, high density multivalent display of receptors is crucial for functionally increased affinities.
Multivalency plays
a critical role in tuning and increasing the
affinity and selectivity between interaction partners in numerous
biological systems.[1−3] The combination of multiple interaction pairs allows
for strong, yet dynamic, binding between platforms displaying the
complementary binding partners, even when the individual interaction
pairs bind only weakly.[4,5] For instance, the clustering of
receptors on the cell surface, due to the interaction with extracellular
multivalent ligands, results in intracellular downstream signals that
activate specific signaling pathways.[6] Inside
the cell, the activation of gene transcription typically occurs upon
the joint oligomerization of multiple transcription factors on specific
DNA sequences. The DNA acts as a quasi 1D platform for the templated
assembly of multiprotein complexes, as a mechanism to overcome the
low binding affinity of the individual proteins and to install selectivity
in the gene regulation.[7,8] Synthetic materials like polymers,
2D nanomaterials, and branched dendrimers have all been used as engineered
multivalent platforms to enhance binding affinities.[9−18] In contrast to most biological multivalent systems, these synthetic
materials are typically not of a supramolecular nature but of a polymeric
or nanoparticle nature. As a result, systems studied thus far only
have limited internal self-reorganization capacity to adapt to their
complementary multivalent binding partners in a dynamic and potentially
ultrasensitive manner, as observed for supramolecular biological systems.[19,20]Synthetic supramolecular systems provide an alternative entry
into
multivalent nanoplatforms, with properties more aligned to their biological
counterparts, including novel regulatory properties.[21−24] The intrinsic dynamic nature of supramolecular systems facilitates
rearrangement of interaction pairs within the multivalent platform,
providing responsive and functional adaptation. It nevertheless remains
a challenge to vary the ligand valency, position, and density in a
controlled manner on such synthetic multivalent platforms, which limits
exploration to the effects of these parameters on the interfacing
of supramolecular nanoplatforms. While both 2D and 3D materials have
received considerable conceptual evaluation regarding the effects
and fundamentals of the multivalency phenomenon,[4,6] in
contrast, linear 1D scaffolds have been addressed significantly less,[22] especially within a context of biomolecular
recognition.[25]DNA is a molecular
programmable material that can be used as nanoplatform
with controlled positioning of bioactive ligands.[26] Additionally, short DNA oligonucleotide overhangs can be
used as modular interaction pairs with controllable interaction strength
by varying the number and identity of complementary base pairs.[27−29] Interfacing DNA materials with supramolecular materials has shown
great promise in generating emergent properties.[30−33] We and others have previously
reported on the synthesis and study of supramolecular polymers featuring
appended DNA strands as ligands for inducing specific interactions
on a supramolecular platform.[33−38] Typically, the DNA-decorated supramolecular monomers self-assemble
into nanoplatforms that present short single-stranded DNA overhangs,
together effectively acting as a linear, 1D, multivalent scaffold
(see Figure a). These
self-assembling multivalent platforms provide ideal systems for studying
fundamental concepts in multivalent interactions, such as the role
of ligand affinity, valency, and density in interacting 1D nanoplatforms.
Figure 1
(a) Chemical
structures of (i) DNA-overhang-functionalized receptor
monomers (4-Disc and 5-Disc), where the DNA overhangs are shown as
light gray curved lines on the green discotic scaffold, and (ii) unfunctionalized
monomer (Inert-Disc). In water, the discotic monomers self-assemble
into columnar stacks, referred to here as receptor nanoscaffold. (b)
Schematic representation of the receptor–ligand complex formed
by the receptor nanoscaffold (made out of the discotics) and the DNA-duplex-based
ligands. The ligand (mL) and its corresponding components are shown: in yellow the branches
(mx and my) and in dark gray the
backbones (B). “n” denotes the valency of the ligands, while “m” represents the number of complementary A-T base
pairs between the DNA overhangs. The backbone units are made of sequences
x′ and y′ which are complementary to the branches mx and my, respectively. The complementary
base pairs between ligand/receptor and backbone/branches are drawn
with black dashed lines. (c) Specific DNA sequences used for the DNA-functionalized
discotic monomers (4-Disc and 5-Disc) and exemplary DNA-based ligands
of series I (m = 4) and series II (m = 5). The DNA sequences of branches 4x and 5x are shown in Figure S2.
(a) Chemical
structures of (i) DNA-overhang-functionalized receptor
monomers (4-Disc and 5-Disc), where the DNA overhangs are shown as
light gray curved lines on the green discotic scaffold, and (ii) unfunctionalized
monomer (Inert-Disc). In water, the discotic monomers self-assemble
into columnar stacks, referred to here as receptor nanoscaffold. (b)
Schematic representation of the receptor–ligand complex formed
by the receptor nanoscaffold (made out of the discotics) and the DNA-duplex-based
ligands. The ligand (mL) and its corresponding components are shown: in yellow the branches
(mx and my) and in dark gray the
backbones (B). “n” denotes the valency of the ligands, while “m” represents the number of complementary A-T base
pairs between the DNA overhangs. The backbone units are made of sequences
x′ and y′ which are complementary to the branches mx and my, respectively. The complementary
base pairs between ligand/receptor and backbone/branches are drawn
with black dashed lines. (c) Specific DNA sequences used for the DNA-functionalized
discotic monomers (4-Disc and 5-Disc) and exemplary DNA-based ligands
of series I (m = 4) and series II (m = 5). The DNA sequences of branches 4x and 5x are shown in Figure S2.Here, we have interfaced 1D supramolecular columnar assemblies
of discotics with the 1D columnar nanoscaffolds formed by DNA duplexes,
via short DNA overhangs as biomolecular interaction pairs, resulting
in two multivalent linear nanoplatforms with controllable and responsive
display of ligands (Figure b). The decoration of these nanoscaffolds with short oligonucleotide
sequences, acting as controllable biomolecular ligands, allowed us
to address the long-standing desire to study the interplay and role
of valency, density, and interaction strength in well-defined quasi
1D multivalent platforms. The number of complementary base pairs between
the DNA overhangs was adjusted to tune the overall affinity of multivalent
complex formation between both platforms. The role of receptor density
in the multivalent binding process was explored by systematically
changing the composition of the supramolecular discotic polymer, revealing
ultrasensitivity and providing insights into the nonlinear behavior
of such adaptive supramolecular materials with biomolecular interaction
pairs.
Results and Discussion
Design of the Two Multivalent Nanoplatforms
Oligonucleotide-functionalized
bis-pyridine-based C3-symmetrical amphiphilic
monomers[39,40] were used as building blocks for the formation
of the dynamic self-assembled receptor nanoscaffolds with single-stranded
DNA overhangs[35] (Figure a). Transmission electron microscopy shows
the columnar assembly of these DNA-appended discotic monomers by virtue
of the stacking of the discotics (Figure S1a), in line with observations on discotics decorated with other diverse
functional groups.[41] The resulting 1D assembly
(termed “the receptor”) can thus present multiple copies
of single-stranded DNA overhangs. The receptor monomer toolbox consists
of a discotic monomer featuring only glycol side-chains (Inert-Disc)
and a set of single-stranded oligonucleotide-functionalized monomers
(receptor monomer, m-Disc), with “m” being the number of deoxythymidylates (4 or 5)
available for hybridization. We selected these low numbers of complementary
bases in the oligonucleotide overhangs to ensure binding via multivalent
mechanisms only.The multivalent DNA duplex-based nanoplatforms
(termed “the ligand”) were obtained by the assembly
of a series of DNA branches (mx and my, Figure b) on single-stranded
DNA backbones of different lengths. The repetition of the backbone
units (B) defines the final valency of
the nanoscaffold ligands. The final assembly outcome is a double-stranded
DNA duplex with “n” number of single-stranded
oligonucleotide overhangs with “m”
number of deoxyadenylates (4 or 5), complementary to the receptor
oligonucleotide overhangs. The design accounts for the helicity of
DNA-duplexes of 10.5 bases per turn to position the oligonucleotides
at one side of the double helix (see Figure S2 for full details). The branches were designed with sequences x and
y with 10 and 11 complementary bases of the respective DNA backbone
repeating units x′ and y′. As depicted in Figure c, the overhangs of the ligand
oligonucleotides are functionalized at the 3′-end with a quencher
(BHQ-2), while the receptor oligonucleotides have a Cy3-dye at their
3′-end. These two moieties allow us to monitor the duplex formation
using FRET quenching; in the bound state, dye and quencher are in
the required close proximity to observe fluorescence energy transfer
with resulting quenching of the Cy3-fluorescence (see also Figure a).
Figure 2
(a) Schematic representation
of the Cy3-functionalized discotic
receptor building block and nanoscaffold, and the BHQ-2-functionalized
ligand nanoscaffold (series I and II respectively feature four and
five bases of complementarity). Binding of the ligand to the receptor
via duplex formation between the overhangs results in quenching of
the Cy3-dye fluorescence. (b) Titration curves of series I ligands
(4L2,4L3, 4L4, 4L5, 4L6) to the receptor nanoscaffold formed by the 4-Disc (10 nM).
(c) Titration curves of series II ligands (5L2, 5L3, 5L4, 5L5, 5L6) to the receptor
nanoscaffold formed by the 5-Disc (10 nM). The assay concentration
conditions limit the evaluation of binding affinities below 1 nM (see
5L6, yellow line). (d) Gibbs free energies (ΔG°) for each ligand–receptor complex formation
plotted against the valency of the ligand (L) and linear fit for each series.
(a) Schematic representation
of the Cy3-functionalized discotic
receptor building block and nanoscaffold, and the BHQ-2-functionalized
ligand nanoscaffold (series I and II respectively feature four and
five bases of complementarity). Binding of the ligand to the receptor
via duplex formation between the overhangs results in quenching of
the Cy3-dye fluorescence. (b) Titration curves of series I ligands
(4L2,4L3, 4L4, 4L5, 4L6) to the receptor nanoscaffold formed by the 4-Disc (10 nM).
(c) Titration curves of series II ligands (5L2, 5L3, 5L4, 5L5, 5L6) to the receptor
nanoscaffold formed by the 5-Disc (10 nM). The assay concentration
conditions limit the evaluation of binding affinities below 1 nM (see
5L6, yellow line). (d) Gibbs free energies (ΔG°) for each ligand–receptor complex formation
plotted against the valency of the ligand (L) and linear fit for each series.
Effect of Ligand Affinity and Valency
Ligand valency
plays a key role in the enhancement of the binding affinities between
ligands and receptors. Therefore, the effect of valency on the binding
affinities between the two nanoplatforms was tested using a library
of ligands (Figure ). The experiments were carried out for two series of ligands with
four (series I, 4L) and five (series
II, 5L) complementary base pairs to the
discotic receptor nanoscaffold (built up out of 4-Disc or 5-Disc,
respectively). Agarose gel was first used to confirm the integrity
of the DNA-based ligand assemblies. Singular bands correlated to a
gradual decrease in electrophoretic mobility with increasing ligand
valency (n) and could clearly be distinguished (Figure S4).The binding studies between
the supramolecular receptor and the DNA duplex ligand series were
followed using the quenching of the fluorescence of the Cy3-labeled
receptor as a reporter to determine the fraction of bound receptor.First, the formation of the ligand–receptor complex was
followed over time (see Figure S5). Upon
addition of the quencher-labeled ligand, an immediate drop in the
Cy3-dye fluorescence signal at 570 nm was observed. The fluorescence
spectra did not change over the course of 15 min, revealing fast kinetics
for the ligand–receptor complex formation. Potential background
binding or unspecific fluorescence quenching by the ligands was evaluated
by titrating a tetravalent ligand with mismatching DNA sequence to
the receptor nanoscaffold. At concentrations only in the high micromolar
regime, the titration curve (see Figure S6) showed background fluorescence quenching of the Cy3-dye, due to
the high concentration of quencher in solution, confirming absence
of aspecific interactions between the two 1D nanoscaffolds. Transmission
electron microscopy (Figure S1b,c) and
temperature-dependent spectroscopic optical studies (Figure S7) confirmed the assembly of the discotics into the
typical columnar nanoscaffolds, also upon binding of the DNA-based
ligands.Figure b and Figure c depict
the binding
isotherms for both series I and series II, respectively. The association
constants for the corresponding series are calculated from the titration
curves (Table ). The
increase in valency of the ligands for both series shows a linear
correlation with the overall association constants (Figure d). As expected, series II,
made of ligands with five complementary bases, has overall higher
association constants than series I, which only uses four complementary
bases. As a result of the higher monovalent binding affinity within
series II, only two ligands (5L2) are required to observe
full binding between the two nanoplatforms at the concentrations studied.
In contrast, for series I three (4L3) receptor–ligand
interactions just sufficed to observe complete binding saturation.
The stronger monovalent binding affinity within series II results
in the hexameric (n = 6) ligand having a binding
affinity which is beyond the assay window (Figure c, yellow line). The monovalent binding affinity
for series I was too weak to be experimentally determined and was
therefore only calculated (Table ).
Table 1
Association Constants (Ka), Free Energies (ΔG°), and
the β Enhancement Factor of the Ligand Series I and Series II
ligand (Ln)
Ka (M–1)
ΔG° (kcal/mol)
β
series I
4L1 to
free DNAb
1.32 × 103a
–4.2a
4L2
1.10 × 105
–6.7
8.2 × 101
4L3
2.79
× 105
–7.3
2.1 × 102
4L4
2.53
× 106
–8.6
1.9 × 103
4L5
1.54
× 107
–9.7
1.2 × 104
4L6
4.31
× 107
–10.3
3.3 × 104
series II
5L1 to free DNAb
1.50 × 104
–5.6a/–5.7
5L1
1.07
× 105
–6.8
5L2
1.64 × 106
–8.4
1.1 × 102
5L3
1.56
× 107
–9.7
1.0 × 103
5L4
1.75
× 108
–11.1
1.2 × 104
5L5
1.59
× 109
–12.4
1.1 × 105
5L6
ndc
ndc
ndc
Calculated value.
Affinity
of the DNA overhang when
not displayed on the receptor.
nd: not determined.
Calculated value.Affinity
of the DNA overhang when
not displayed on the receptor.nd: not determined.Figure d shows
the plotting of the change in free energy (ΔG°) versus the ligand valency. The free energy values are extracted
from the binding isotherms obtained in Figure b and Figure c. The results show a linear relationship between the
number of binding epitopes (n) and the free energy
(ΔG°) associated with the binding event
for both series. The slope of the line represents the sensitivity
of the system to changes in the number of epitopes. The slope of series
I (with four complementary base pairs) has a value of −0.89,
while in series II (with five complementary base pairs) the slope
value is −1.4 kcal/mol. This result indicates that the favorable
energetic contribution of each additional binding epitope depends
on the binding strength of the interaction between the ligand and
the receptor.Multivalent interactions are often characterized
using the cooperativity
factor α or the effective molarity parameter (EM).[42−47] However, these parameters are not suitable for a dynamic supramolecular
system, since the exact geometry, the statistical factors of all the
possible interactions, and the stoichiometry of the interaction are
not known and will responsively change upon adjustments to the system.
Our supramolecular nanoscaffold receptor has an unknown and adaptive
number of available epitopes for binding, with different interaction
geometries. Hence, in order to quantify the role of the multivalency
effect in our system, we strictly used the “enhancement parameter”
β as defined by Whitesides et al.[5] The term β (eq ) quantifies the contribution of the multivalent interaction in relation
to the monovalent interaction, in a simplified manner.where β
is the enhancement parameter, Kmulti is the association
constant of the n-valent interaction, and Kmono is the association constant of the monovalent
interaction. The parameter
β was calculated for both series (I and II) using the theoretically
expected Kmono. The expected monovalent
association constant values were obtained using the NuPack package
(see Figure S8). The monovalent interaction
with four complementary bases has a ΔG°
value of −4.2 kcal/mol, and the corresponding system with five
base pairs has a ΔG° value of −5.6
kcal/mol. The theoretically expected ΔG°
value of the monovalent interaction for series II was also experimentally
corroborated, giving a value of −5.7 kcal/mol (Figure S9a). The enhancement parameter β
(Table , Figure S10) shows that series II is more sensitive
to the increase of valency (n) than series I. Since
the contribution of each individual binding epitope is lower in series
I than in series II, the increase in the number of interactions is
reflected in higher β values for series II.It is worth
noticing that the theoretical values of the monovalent
base pairing of the overhangs do not correspond to the values that
can be extracted from the fit of the data (Figure d, Table , Table S2). Thus, we measured
the association constant for the case of the monovalent 5L1 ligand with the receptor supramolecular nanoscaffold 5-Disc under
adjusted assay conditions enabling us to measure this weaker affinity
(Figure S9b). This monovalent binding affinity
of the 5-Disc corresponded nicely to the fit from the plot in Figure d (series II, n = 1). It can thus be concluded that the display of the
DNA overhangs on the supramolecular nanoscaffold translates into a
higher monovalent association value due to the high, multivalent density
of available receptor strands. When the supramolecular nanoscaffold
is present, the rebinding of the dissociated ligands is more favorable
due to the high ligand density making the dissociation of the ligand
shift to the bound state. The energetic contribution of this multivalent
display in the nanoscaffold to the binding affinity is −1.1
kcal/mol.
Effect of the Receptor Density
Next to enhancing interaction
strengths, multivalency can also increase the sensitivity of the interaction
between binding partners in a nonlinear manner. Among others, the
binding strength can be sensitive to the receptor concentration, resulting
in ultrasensitivity,[19] potentially even
superselectivity,[22,48,49] but studies showing such events between two complementary linear
supramolecular platforms have been lacking. We, therefore, explored
the role of the receptor density on the interaction between these
two 1D nanoscaffolds and probed its interplay with the valency of
the ligands. For this, the receptor density ΘR (eq ) was varied by increasing
the total number of monomers (NT) via
the additional incorporation of Inert-Disc (Figure a) at different ratios.The total concentration of receptor 5-Disc
(NR) was thus kept constant (10 nM), and
the concentration of Inert-Disc monomers was varied from 0 to 1 μM,
leading to nanoscaffolds with a receptor density ΘR ranging from 100% to 1%. We selected series II for the receptor
density studies because the higher epitope affinity for this series
offers the study of a broader range of combinations of receptor densities
and valencies.
Figure 3
(a) Schematic representation of receptor nanoscaffold
with different
densities of DNA overhangs. Note that the total concentration of receptor
buildings blocks with DNA overhangs (i.e., 5-Disc) was kept constant
and that the density was controlled by the addition of Inert-Disc.
(b–f) Titration curves of ligands 5L2–5L6 from series II with five complementary base pairs to the
receptor nanoscaffolds with differing receptor density (for color
coding see (a)). The concentration of 5-Disc was constant at 10 nM.
β enhancement factors calculated with eq (see also Table S3), plotted against (g) the ligand valency (n) and
(h) receptor density (ΘR).
(a) Schematic representation of receptor nanoscaffold
with different
densities of DNA overhangs. Note that the total concentration of receptor
buildings blocks with DNA overhangs (i.e., 5-Disc) was kept constant
and that the density was controlled by the addition of Inert-Disc.
(b–f) Titration curves of ligands 5L2–5L6 from series II with five complementary base pairs to the
receptor nanoscaffolds with differing receptor density (for color
coding see (a)). The concentration of 5-Disc was constant at 10 nM.
β enhancement factors calculated with eq (see also Table S3), plotted against (g) the ligand valency (n) and
(h) receptor density (ΘR).The multivalent ligands of series II (5L) were incubated with the receptor platforms at the variable
receptor densities. The binding isotherms of the 5L2–5L6 ligands with the discotic nanoscaffolds of different receptor
densities were monitored by using the quenching of the fluorescent
signal of the receptor nanoscaffold upon binding of the quencher-labeled
ligands. Figure shows
the binding curves corresponding to the multivalent ligands at different
receptor densities ΘR (100, 50, 10, 2, 1%). The binding
isotherms report a strong sensitivity of the affinity between the
two nanoscaffolds on the receptor density. The values of the binding
constants drop up to approximately 2 orders of magnitude upon reduction
of receptor density but with constant receptor concentration. Table S3 reports the free energy (ΔG°) values calculated for the ligand–receptor
interactions at the different receptor densities. The lowering of
the interaction strength is more pronounced with higher ligand valency;
the ΔΔG between high and low receptor
density is larger for the 5L6 ligand than for the 5L3 ligand for example (compare Figure f and Figure c and see Table S3). This
phenomenon implies that for these ligand affinities the valency has
a big effect in determining the binding event, requiring the supramolecular
receptor scaffold to include multiple copies of the DNA overhangs
in its structure. Reference studies with both nanoplatforms featuring
DNA overhangs with significantly higher affinity, using seven and
eight complementary base pairings, showed much less dependency on
the receptor density in the concentration regime studied (Figure S11). In those cases, the strong ligand
affinity thus overrules the need for precisely controlled valency
numbers and density.We also analyzed the receptor density binding
affinities in terms
of the enhancement parameter β (Table S4, Figure g,h). The
β values converge to a lower limit for each multivalent ligand
when the receptor density reached lower levels of around 2%. Nevertheless,
the β values remained high, especially those of the ligands
with higher valency, indicating that the number of multivalent interactions
between the two nanoplatforms likewise remains high. The binding of
the multivalent DNA nanoscaffold ligand to the discotic receptor platform
thus probably plays a role in directing the templation of the supramolecular
building blocks. Overall, the association constants for even the most
dilute receptor densities measured are still significantly higher
than those of the monovalent interaction. For instance, with the receptor
diluted 100-fold (ΘR = 1%), the association constant
is still 3 orders of magnitude higher for the multivalent ligands
5L6 and 5L5 than that of the monovalent interaction.
The steep, nonlinear rise in the β values indicates ultrasensitivity
of the interaction of the multivalent nanoplatforms for the receptor
density. The interplay of ligand density, local concentration of receptors,
dynamics within the supramolecular polymer and templated assembly
of the discotics most probably all come to action to direct the overall
assembly process and ultrasensitive response.
Conclusions
In this manuscript we bring forward the use of two 1D supramolecular
nanoplatforms, based on a supramolecular polymer as receptor and on
multivalent DNA-based ligands, to evaluate multivalent display on
dynamic linear platforms. The sequential increase in the number of
displayed DNA overhangs, as interacting elements between the two nanoplatforms,
induces a linear increase in binding affinity, enhanced several orders
of magnitude in comparison with the monovalent interaction. The DNA
nanoplatform provides rapid access to a library of 1D multivalent
ligands with tunable affinities, in both affinity and valency. The
discotic supramolecular nanoplatform allows for simple tuning of ligand
density by copolymerization with monomers without DNA-overhangs. The
binding characteristics between both nanoplatforms were studied as
a function of the ligand interaction strength, valency number, and
ligand density. The effects of ligand valency and affinity of this
multivalent system could be efficiently analyzed using the enhancement
parameter β. The results reveal a generalized principle of additive
binding increments, similar to the case of interactions between multivalent
charged species, with a constant increment of ΔG = −1.4 kcal/mol per each additional ligand for series II.
The receptor density was shown to be crucially and nonlinearly correlated
with the binding affinities. A low display density of ligands was
already leading to significant enhancements of the binding affinities
in comparison to the monovalent binding affinity. An ultrasensitive
increase in binding affinity was observed upon increased receptor
densities, leading to strongly increased enhancement factors over
a small range in receptor densities at constant receptor concentration.The study of these synthetic multivalent double linear nanoplatforms
provides for the first time entry to study multivalent effects in
dynamic 1D systems, of relevance for the conceptual understanding
of multivalency in biology and beyond and for the generation of novel
ultrasensitive materials interfacing with biological matter. This
molecular system might also open up opportunities to address outstanding
questions in the field of supramolecular chemistry related to building
block distribution within supramolecular assemblies and control over
polymerization degree via multivalent templating.
Authors: Carlo Fasting; Christoph A Schalley; Marcus Weber; Oliver Seitz; Stefan Hecht; Beate Koksch; Jens Dernedde; Christina Graf; Ernst-Walter Knapp; Rainer Haag Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2012-09-05 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Lorenzo Albertazzi; Francisco J Martinez-Veracoechea; Christianus M A Leenders; Ilja K Voets; Daan Frenkel; E W Meijer Journal: Proc Natl Acad Sci U S A Date: 2013-07-08 Impact factor: 11.205
Authors: Pilong Li; Sudeep Banjade; Hui-Chun Cheng; Soyeon Kim; Baoyu Chen; Liang Guo; Marc Llaguno; Javoris V Hollingsworth; David S King; Salman F Banani; Paul S Russo; Qiu-Xing Jiang; B Tracy Nixon; Michael K Rosen Journal: Nature Date: 2012-03-07 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Brendan R Deal; Rong Ma; Victor Pui-Yan Ma; Hanquan Su; James T Kindt; Khalid Salaita Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2020-05-14 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Eva Magdalena Estirado; Alexander F Mason; Miguel Ángel Alemán García; Jan C M van Hest; Luc Brunsveld Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2020-05-07 Impact factor: 15.419