Nanopores have become an important tool for the detection and analysis of molecules at the single-molecule level. Surface modification of solid-state nanopores can improve their durability and efficiency. Peptides are ideal for surface modifications as they allow tailoring of multiple properties by a rational design of their sequence. Here, silicon nitride nanopores were coated by a dipeptide layer where a l-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (DOPA) residue is the anchoring element and the other amino acid moiety is the functional element. DOPA binds tightly to many types of surfaces and allows a one-step functionalization of surfaces by simple immersion. As a result, the lifetime of coated nanopores increased from hours to months and the current-stability has significantly improved with respect to uncoated pores. This improvement is achieved by controlling the surface wettability and charge. Peptide-coated nanopores can be utilized as sensitive sensors that can be adjusted based on the choice of the functional moiety of the coated peptide. In addition, the coating slows down dsDNA translocation because of the DNA interaction with the pore coating.
Nanopores have become an important tool for the detection and analysis of molecules at the single-molecule level. Surface modification of solid-state nanopores can improve their durability and efficiency. Peptides are ideal for surface modifications as they allow tailoring of multiple properties by a rational design of their sequence. Here, silicon nitride nanopores were coated by a dipeptide layer where a l-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine (DOPA) residue is the anchoring element and the other amino acid moiety is the functional element. DOPA binds tightly to many types of surfaces and allows a one-step functionalization of surfaces by simple immersion. As a result, the lifetime of coated nanopores increased from hours to months and the current-stability has significantly improved with respect to uncoated pores. This improvement is achieved by controlling the surface wettability and charge. Peptide-coated nanopores can be utilized as sensitive sensors that can be adjusted based on the choice of the functional moiety of the coated peptide. In addition, the coating slows down dsDNA translocation because of the DNA interaction with the pore coating.
Nanopores
are selective and sensitive sensors at the single-molecule level.
They are used to detect various analytes, like single ions, organic
molecules, and more complex molecules such as proteins and nucleic
acid polymers. They are mainly used for rapid and low-cost DNA sequencing.[1]A nanopore is a nanometer-sized hole, embedded
in an insulating membrane. Electric potential is applied across the
insulating membrane that separates two chambers filled with ionic
solution, resulting in ions current through the nanopore. Molecule
detection and characterization with nanopores is based on a constant
flow of ions through the nanopore. When an analyte is translocated
through the pore, the flow of ions is normally blocked and results
in a change in the monitored current.Solid-state nanopores
are created by drilling a nanoscale hole in a synthetic membrane such
as silicon nitride, silicon oxide, or graphene.[2] Silicon-based materials have been popular for nanopores,
because of their low mechanical stress, high chemical resistance,
and processability.[3] The pore is typically
formed in the membrane either by a focused ion beam[4] or by a transmission electron microscope (TEM) beam.[5]It has been shown that interaction of analytes,
such as DNA, with the walls of the solid state nanopore can affect
their translocation dynamics.[6] One of the
ways to improve sequencing with solid-state nanopores is to slow down
the translocation speed by chemical modification of solid-state nanopores’
surface, thus improving the nanopore efficiency in detecting and analyzing
analytes.[7] Various approaches for nanopore
modification have been reported, including metal[8] and oxides[9] deposition, various
organic modifications,[9,10] assembly of fluidic lipid-bilayer
on the surface of a solid state nanopore,[11] and coating the pore surface with DNA hairpins.[12] Nanopore modification with peptides is attractive for cooperative
control over the translocation,[13] and broadens
the functionality of solid-state nanopores.[14] Peptides characteristics and configurations depend on their primary
sequence. Therefore, they allow tailoring of multiple properties by
rational design of their sequence. Peptides have been studied thoroughly
for their solid-surface coating ability, because of the presence of
specific bond formation between the peptide and the solid surface.[15−17] In addition, peptides are environmentally friendly and biocompatible
material, and can provide a required functionality by combining different
amino acids with several properties.[18] However,
these modifications have several limitations, such as the need of
treating the membranes with silane before peptide coating.[19]Here, we present coating of Si3N4 nanopore surfaces with various self-assembled dipeptide
monolayers. These monolayers enable manipulation of the nanopore properties
and affect its interaction with analytes such as DNA and proteins.
We report coating by dipeptides comprising the amino l-3,4-dihydroxyphenylalanine
(DOPA) (Figure ).
DOPA is known for its surface-adhesive properties.[18,20−23] It binds to different materials including metals, oxides, and polymers
as it can form various types of bonds with the surface.[21,24] The interaction of the catechol group of DOPA with the Si3N4 surface is pH-dependent. At pH 7.2, which was used
here during the coating, two coordination bonds per catechol are formed
with the Si3N4 surface.[25] We used DOPA as an anchoring group to functionalize the pore with
different amino acids (positively or negatively charged) that determine
the surface chemistry of the pore. We investigated coating with histidine,
lysine, and glutamate having pKa values
of 6.02, 10.52, and 4.25,[26] respectively
(Figure b). As we
show below, the coating modified the contact angle of the surface
as well as the nanopore behavior, indicating that coating indeed took
place. These modifications allow nanopore usage for at least 7 months
without further treatment, whereas uncoated nanopores need cleaning
and functionalization after each use (hours). Furthermore, they enable
the manipulation of the nanopore surface charge and influence the
interaction with translocated objects such as DNA.
Figure 1
(a) Schematic diagram
of the experimental setup. SiN nanopore is coated with DOPA-X dipeptides.
(b) Chemical structure of the studied dipeptides, DOPA-His (1), DOPA-Lys
(2), and DOPA-Glu (3).
(a) Schematic diagram
of the experimental setup. SiN nanopore is coated with DOPA-X dipeptides.
(b) Chemical structure of the studied dipeptides, DOPA-His (1), DOPA-Lys
(2), and DOPA-Glu (3).
Materials
and Methods
Nanopore Fabrication
Nanopores were fabricated by drilling
in a 30 nm thick, low-stress SiN membrane (50 × 50 μm2) supported by a silicon chip (Protochips, Inc.) using a focused
electron beam of 200 keV high-resolution TEM (FEI Tecnai G2-F20).
The drilling process involves alignment of the electron beam and adjustment
of the condenser astigmatism. The condenser lens was then used to
direct the intense beam to a target point.[27] After the alignment procedure, nanopores with the diameter in a
range from 8 to 12 nm were directly drilled. The time for pore formation
in a 30 nm thick Si3N4 membrane was in the range
of 30–60 s. Once the pores were drilled, they were stored in
ethanol/triple distilled water (TDW) (1:1, v/v) immediately to avoid
contamination.[28] Following drilling, the
nanopore was imaged and characterized by the TEM imaging mode.
Dipeptide
Synthesis
The dipeptidesDOPA-His, DOPA-Lys, and DOPA-Glu
(Figure ) were synthesized
using 9-fluorenylmethoxycarbonyl (Fmoc)-based solid-phase peptide
chemistry manually. Standard coupling conditions using AA/HATU/DIPEA
were employed to obtain the desired peptides. The peptides were synthesized
on Fmoc-Rink amide resin, which was subjected to Fmoc removal before
coupling the AA residues to yield C-terminus amides. Amino acids were
coupled in fivefold excess in the synthesis and all residues were
coupled once for 1 h. The coupling reactions were monitored by the
Kaiser ninhydrin test. Removal of the Fmoc group was performed using
20% Piperidine in DMF for 15 min twice and the residual piperidine
was removed by three consecutive washes with DMF. Peptide cleavage
from the resin support was performed using 95% trifluoroacetic acid,
2.5% water, and 2.5% triisopropylsilane (5 mL/183 mg of resin) for
2 h at room temperature around 25 °C. Crude peptides were purified
by preparative high-performance liquid chromatography.Peptide
identity was confirmed using electrospray ionization mass spectrometry
(LC(UV)MS/MS, Agilent 6520 QTOF analyzer for DOPA-His and ESI-MS,
Waters ZQ4000 for the rest) (Figure S1).
Pure peptides were stored at −20 °C.
Nanopore Modification
with a Dipeptide
Nanopore membranes were treated in a Plasma
Cleaner for 30 s before modification with the dipeptide to improve
binding. The Nanopore membrane was immersed in the dipeptide solution
(0.5 mg/mL dipeptide dissolved in Tris-HCl/ethanol (1:1, v/v), pH
7.2) overnight at room temperature and then washed with 3 mL of ethanol.
The SiN surface modification was characterized by contact angle measurements.
Membranes coated with the dipeptides were stored in ethanol/TDW (1:1,
v/v).To examine the chemical identity of the surfaces after
coating, X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy analysis was performed (Figure S2).
Nanopore Activity Recording
A coated chip with a drilled pore is mounted in an electrophoresis
flow cell. Two reservoirs on each side with a volume of 100 μL
(trans and cis) were filled with filtered and degassed buffer of 0.02–1
M KCl, 10 nM Tris-HCl, 1 mM ethylenediaminetetraacetic acid (EDTA)
(pH 6,7.5, 9), or 0.02–1 M KCl, 10 nM succinic acid, 1 mM EDTA
(pH 4.5). Linear double-stranded DNA (2 kb NoLimits DNA Fragment and
48 kb Lambda DNA (Thermo Fisher Scientific)) translocation experiments
were done with 1 M KCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, 10% glycerol (pH
7.5). A pair of Ag/AgCl pellet electrodes were immersed in the two
reservoirs and connected to an Axopatch 200B amplifier (Molecular
Devices, Inc.) to record ionic current flow through the nanopore.
The whole setup was placed in a double Faraday cage to lower the external
electrostatic interference. Signals were collected at 10 kHz sampling
rate using a Digi-data 1440A (Molecular Devices, Inc.) and filtered
at 1 kHz using the built-in low pass Bessel filter of the Axopatch.After each measurement, the chips were washed with TDW to remove
salt residues, and then installed back into the flow cell without
any further cleaning.
Results and Discussion
Effect of Dipeptide Modification
on Nanopore Usability and Stability
Nanopores were coated
with a layer of dipeptides (DOPA-amino acid) by immersion overnight
after 30 s of cleaning with plasma. This was done without any chemical
treatment of the silicon surface as in other peptides binding procedures
reported for solid state nanopores.[29,30] In a typical
experiment, uncoated Si3N4 nanopores are treated
with plasma or piranha solution right before every usage.[31,32] However, in these nanopores a hydrophilic surface is not maintained
along the experiments. As a result, the current through the nanopore
varies for the same pore from experiment to experiment.We studied
the effect of peptide coating of Si3N4 surfaces
by contact angle measurements (Figure ). For the three types of coatings, DOPA-His, DOPA-Glu,
and DOPA-Lys, the contact angle was ∼50% smaller than for surfaces
treated for 30 s with plasma, indicating improved wetting.
Figure 2
Contact angle
measurements for different Si3N4 surfaces before
and after 30 s plasma treatment, and DOPA-His, DOPA-Lys, and DOPA-Glu
coating. For all the five columns, measurements were conducted for
three different SiN chips, pH 7.5.
Contact angle
measurements for different Si3N4 surfaces before
and after 30 s plasma treatment, and DOPA-His, DOPA-Lys, and DOPA-Glu
coating. For all the five columns, measurements were conducted for
three different SiN chips, pH 7.5.We tested the stability of the ionic current through the nanopore
after peptide coating. The term stability is used here to describe
the reproducibility of the results upon repeating the experiments
with the same pore several times. To test the stability, currents
through nanopores with similar diameter (∼12 nm) were measured
repeatedly five times, all at the same day and under the same conditions.
The current was reduced after coating because of a decrease in pore
diameter. We assume that this reduction is in correlation with DOPA-His
molecule length (∼1.5 nm) that may take some space in the pore.
As conductance through the pore depends on pore size,[33] the decrease in pore diameter reduces the current through
the coated pore. The variability of the current through DOPA-His-coated
nanopores was much smaller compared with unmodified nanopores, which
were treated with only plasma (see error bar in Figure a). Thus, after modifying the pore with DOPA-His,
the ionic current is much more stable. In our system, a nanopore is
considered ready for measurements only after becoming hydrophilic,
as all the measurements are in aqueous medium. When the hydrophilicity
of the pore is constant, the current through the pore remains stable,
including in repeated measurements through the same pore. As mentioned
above, the typical wetting of Si3N4 surfaces
can be achieved by plasma or piranha solution. These treatments cause
only a temporal oxidation of the surface. The dipeptides that were
used in this study contain, in addition to DOPA, a charged amino acid.
Therefore, this peptide coating allows covering the nanopores with
a durable (spatial and temporal) charged layer that keeps the pore
constantly wet. Importantly, the peptide coating considerably reduces
the current background noise level (Figure S3).
Figure 3
(a) Currents through representative uncoated (red) and DOPA-His dipeptide-coated
(blue) 12 nm diameter nanopores at 100 mV. Currents through each nanopore
were measured repeatedly five times in 1 M KCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1
mM EDTA (pH 7.5). After each measurement, the chambers were cleaned
with water and the solution was refilled. The graph presents the average
of these five measurements. Note the much larger error bar for the
uncoated nanopore. (b) Similar currents were measured [under the same
conditions as in (a)] through a single nanopore along several months
without any further treatment.
(a) Currents through representative uncoated (red) and DOPA-Hisdipeptide-coated
(blue) 12 nm diameter nanopores at 100 mV. Currents through each nanopore
were measured repeatedly five times in 1 M KCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1
mM EDTA (pH 7.5). After each measurement, the chambers were cleaned
with water and the solution was refilled. The graph presents the average
of these five measurements. Note the much larger error bar for the
uncoated nanopore. (b) Similar currents were measured [under the same
conditions as in (a)] through a single nanopore along several months
without any further treatment.To check the durability of the coated pore, we measured currents
in the coated pore from time to time. Similar ionic currents were
measured through peptide-coated nanopores for at least 7 months without
any additional treatment (Figure b). These results indicate that the peptide coating
improves the nanopore durability, stability, and usability, both for
short and long terms.
Effect of pH on the Conductance through the
Dipeptide-Treated Nanopores
Ionic transport through nanoscale
pores is affected by their surface charge, which influences the flow
of counterions near the pore walls.[7] The
effect of pH (in the range 4.5—9) that governs the amino acids
charge, on the conductance through three types of dipeptide-coated
nanopores, was investigated and is shown in Figure . The results are in good correlation with
the nature of the amino acid residue at the C-terminus of the dipeptide.
Glutamic acid, which is an acidic amino acid with pKa of 4.25, becomes more negatively charged as the pH rises,
whereas histidine, which is a basic amino acid with pKa of 6.02, become more positively charged as the pH is
reduced. Therefore, when the pH is raised, the charge of DOPA-Glupeptides is increased, whereas the charge of DOPA-Hispeptides is
decreased. These changes affect the conductivity of the peptide-treated
nanopore (Figure ).
On the other hand, the current through the DOPA-Lys-coated nanopore
was relatively high and constant along the tested pH range because
Lys is practically fully charged within this pH range as its pKa is 10.5.
Figure 4
Conductance measurements through dipeptide-treated
nanopores as a function of pH change (DOPA-Lys: purple, DOPA-His:
orange, and DOPA-Glu: green). Measurements were performed in 0.14
M KCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl/succinic acid, 1 mM EDTA (pH 4.5, 6, 7.5, and
9) at 100 mV. In some of the points, the error bars are smaller than
the marking.
Conductance measurements through dipeptide-treated
nanopores as a function of pH change (DOPA-Lys: purple, DOPA-His:
orange, and DOPA-Glu: green). Measurements were performed in 0.14
M KCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl/succinic acid, 1 mM EDTA (pH 4.5, 6, 7.5, and
9) at 100 mV. In some of the points, the error bars are smaller than
the marking.The pH effect on the conductivity
through peptide-treated nanopores is reduced as the salt concentration
is increased and is abolished around 0.5 M KCl (Figures , S4). The ratio
between the conductance at pH 4.5 and pH 9 at various salt concentrations
is shown in Figure . For nanopores treated with DOPA-His and DOPA-Glu, this ratio becomes
closer to 1 as the salt concentration is increased. This indicates
a loss of pH effect at high salt concentrations. The conductivity
through nanopores treated with DOPA-Lys is pH-independent at any salt
concertation, as expected.
Figure 5
Ratio of conductance at pH 4.5 to conductance
at pH 9 at different salt concentrations, for nanopores coated with
DOPA-His, DOPA-Glu, and DOPA-Lys.
Ratio of conductance at pH 4.5 to conductance
at pH 9 at different salt concentrations, for nanopores coated with
DOPA-His, DOPA-Glu, and DOPA-Lys.These results are not surprising as the pH effect on the amino acids
charge is dependent on their Debye length (how far a charge carrier’s
electrostatic effect persists)[34] and Debye
length becomes shorter as the salt concentration is increased. For
instance, at 0.14 M KCl, the Debye length is ∼0.8 nm and at
1.0 M KCl the Debye length is only ∼0.3 nm. Thus, the surface
charge of DOPA-His- and DOPA-Glu-treated nanopores, which is pH-dependent,
has more effect on the ion conductivity through the nanopore when
the salt concentration is low.The peptide-treated nanopores
can thus be utilized as small and sensitive pH and salt concentration
sensors and can be adjusted based on the coated peptide identity.
DNA Translocation through Dipeptide-Treated Nanopores
dsDNA
translocation through dipeptide-treated nanopores was also investigated.
The change in ionic conductance when dsDNA was translocated through
peptide-coated nanopores was measured with a buffer of 1 M KCl, pH
7.5. Blockage events were observed when dsDNA was added to a cell
with DOPA-His-coated nanopores (Figure ). The results demonstrate that the dsDNA was translocated
through the nanopore. The translocation of shorter DNA (2 kbp) had
a shorter dwell time, 0.1 ms (Figure a), than that of the long dsDNA (48 kbp), 5.0 ms (Figure b), confirming that
dsDNA is indeed the source of the blockage events. Figure S5a shows the dwell time and amplitude for dsDNA blocking
events measured at various voltages for the nanopore coated with DOPA-His,
further strengthening the conclusion that dsDNA is indeed translocated.
An exponential dependence of the DNA translocation dwell time (Figure S5b,c) on the voltage was observed. This
fits to electrophoretic dragging of the DNA through a pore.[34] All the above results indicate that dsDNA was
indeed translocated through the coated nanopore.
Figure 6
dsDNA translocation time
through 10 nm untreated and DOPA-His-coated nanopores. The measurements
were done at 1 M KCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, and pH 7.5, 200 mV,
pore size 10 nm. (a) Translocation dwell time histogram for 2 kbp
DNA (left) and an example of 2 kbp DNA translocation events (right),
through DOPA-His-coated and uncoated nanopores. (b) Translocation
dwell time histogram for 48 kbp DNA (left) and an example of 48 kbp
DNA translocation events (right) through DOPA-His-coated and uncoated
nanopore.
dsDNA translocation time
through 10 nm untreated and DOPA-His-coated nanopores. The measurements
were done at 1 M KCl, 10 mM Tris-HCl, 1 mM EDTA, and pH 7.5, 200 mV,
pore size 10 nm. (a) Translocation dwell time histogram for 2 kbp
DNA (left) and an example of 2 kbp DNA translocation events (right),
through DOPA-His-coated and uncoated nanopores. (b) Translocation
dwell time histogram for 48 kbp DNA (left) and an example of 48 kbp
DNA translocation events (right) through DOPA-His-coated and uncoated
nanopore.No conductance change, indicating
translocation, was measured for nanopores treated with DOPA-Glu (Figure S6). As Glu (pKa 4.25) is negatively charged at pH 7.5, it repels the DNA from the
pore. Currents measured through nanopores treated with DOPA-Lys fluctuate
between two levels (Figure S7). The source
of these fluctuations is unclear. After DNA addition to the cis chamber,
no new current changes that indicate translocation were observed.
It is possible that either the blockage level of DNA translocation
is of the same magnitude as that of the current fluctuations and cannot
be distinguished or that a large portion of the DNA binds tightly
to the positively charged DOPA-Lys coating, and therefore cannot be
translocated through the nanopore and blocks further translocation.The DOPA-His coating reduces the DNA translocation by about an
order of magnitude with respect to the uncoated nanopore (Figure a,b). After the coating,
the dwell time of 2 kbp dsDNA increased from 0.040 ± 0.025 to
0.20 ± 0.10 ms (n = 3) on average and the dwell
time of 48 kbp dsDNA increased from 0.50 ± 0.20 to 5.0 ±
1.4 ms (n = 3) on average. The slowdown may result
from either the positive charge residing in the coated pore (His is
positively charged at pH 7.5) and/or from a possible higher friction.
A further slowdown of the DNA translocation might be achieved by optimization
of the used peptides based on their charge and size, thus addressing
a central challenge for DNA sequencing.
Conclusions
Our
results show that DOPA allows a simple one-step peptide functionalization
of surfaces. We show that Si3N4 nanopores can
be easily modified by a simple immersion in DOPA-basedpeptides solutions.
This modification increases the nanopores’ durability and allows
using them for many months without special cleaning or necessity for
any other treatment. The coating enables to use them for a range of
sensing applications (such as pH and salt) and to control the translocation
time of analytes such as DNA. As peptides allow tailoring of multiple
properties by rational design of their sequence, solid-state nanopores
can be easily adapted to numerous functions by coating with predesigned
DOPA-basedpeptides.
Authors: Stefan W Kowalczyk; Larisa Kapinos; Timothy R Blosser; Tomás Magalhães; Pauline van Nies; Roderick Y H Lim; Cees Dekker Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2011-06-19 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: Daniel Branton; David W Deamer; Andre Marziali; Hagan Bayley; Steven A Benner; Thomas Butler; Massimiliano Di Ventra; Slaven Garaj; Andrew Hibbs; Xiaohua Huang; Stevan B Jovanovich; Predrag S Krstic; Stuart Lindsay; Xinsheng Sean Ling; Carlos H Mastrangelo; Amit Meller; John S Oliver; Yuriy V Pershin; J Michael Ramsey; Robert Riehn; Gautam V Soni; Vincent Tabard-Cossa; Meni Wanunu; Matthew Wiggin; Jeffery A Schloss Journal: Nat Biotechnol Date: 2008-10 Impact factor: 54.908