The shape and structure analyses capability of nanopore is powerful and complementary to mass spectrometry analysis. It is extremely attractive but challenging to integrate these two techniques. The feasibility of combining nanopore electrospray with mass spectrometry was explored in this study. A nanopore effect was observed during the nano-electrospray of single bacterium, through which the shape and dimension of a single bacterium could be obtained. Molecular information on these bacteria was then acquired by analyzing these bacteria deposited on the counter electrode through laser spray ionization mass spectrometry experiments. Proof-of-concept experiments were carried out for four types of bacteria. Results show that the combination of nanopore results with mass spectrum data could effectively improve the identification accuracy of these bacteria from 72.5% to 100%. Although initial experiments were demonstrated in this work, results showed that it is feasible and promising to integrate nanopore technology with mass spectrometry for large biomolecule studies in the near future.
The shape and structure analyses capability of nanopore is powerful and complementary to mass spectrometry analysis. It is extremely attractive but challenging to integrate these two techniques. The feasibility of combining nanopore electrospray with mass spectrometry was explored in this study. A nanopore effect was observed during the nano-electrospray of single bacterium, through which the shape and dimension of a single bacterium could be obtained. Molecular information on these bacteria was then acquired by analyzing these bacteria deposited on the counter electrode through laser spray ionization mass spectrometry experiments. Proof-of-concept experiments were carried out for four types of bacteria. Results show that the combination of nanopore results with mass spectrum data could effectively improve the identification accuracy of these bacteria from 72.5% to 100%. Although initial experiments were demonstrated in this work, results showed that it is feasible and promising to integrate nanopore technology with mass spectrometry for large biomolecule studies in the near future.
Mass spectrometry (MS)
is a powerful analytical technique, which
has been widely applied in various fields for the analysis of trace
amounts of chemicals in complex matrixes.[1−5] In MS, the molecular composition of a sample is obtained
by measuring the mass to charge (m/z) ratio of each ion, as well as a certain amount of ion structure
information (mainly primary structure) from tandem MS.[6] More recently, great efforts have been made to extend the
mass range of MS instruments,[7−11] so that direct analysis of large proteins,[12,13] protein complexes,[14−17] viruses,[18,19] bacteria, or even cells[20] could be achieved. Correspondingly, many new
tandem MS methods have been developed,[21−25] and the primary structure of biomolecules could be
better resolved. Although biological functions of biomolecules heavily
depend on their higher order structures, it is still a challenging
problem to acquire this information conveniently. To solve this problem,
attempts have been made to combine or integrate MS with structural
analysis techniques, such as infrared photodissociation spectroscopy,[26−28] ion mobility spectroscopy,[29−31] and mobility capillary electrophoresis.[32−36] Even though great advances have been made, it is still demanding
to have alternative tools to resolve the complex stereostructures
of biomolecules.On the other hand, nanopore technology is a
versatile and label-free
method for single-molecule detection, which has been successfully
used to detect and characterize DNA and single proteins.[37,38] Nanopore was first introduced as a new method for discerning the
four bases of a single strand of DNA in the early 1990s.[39−41] Over the past decade, significant advances have been achieved in
terms of structural analysis of biomolecules.[42−46] It has been demonstrated that nanopore can be used
to characterize proteins[42,47] and protein complexes,[48] and it is sensitive enough to distinguish the
folding state of a protein.[49] Nanopore
is actually an excellent confined space, and the electrochemically
confined effect allows the wide application of nanopore structure
in measurement science including the MS field.[50,51] The nanoscale confined space provided by a nanopore enhances the
electrostatic interaction between analytes and the sensing interface,
which is suitable for chemical analysis at the single molecule level.[52] Great efforts have been made to couple nanopore
technology with MS. For instance, researchers have been utilizing
nanopore to distinguish molecules with different masses/sizes,[53,54] which resemble the function of MS.Since the structure analysis
capability of nanopore is complementary
to the MS technique, it is highly attractive to combine nanopore technology
with MS, so that three-dimensional (3D) structure information, the m/z ratio, and primary structure information
on molecules in a sample could be obtained at the same time. However,
great challenges are present. By monitoring the translocation event
of a single analyte particle or molecule through a nanopore (typically
located on a surface or a sharp tip), structure/size information on
every individual particle/molecule can be obtained.[55] Nanopore experiments are conventionally performed in a
liquid environment,[38] and the translocation
event is on the time scale of approximately millisecond.[56,57] On the other side, MS is a gas phase technology, and samples/analytes
need to be gasified and ionized before performing MS analysis, which
is fast and on the time scale of a microsecond or less.[58] In addition, sensitivity and mass range of conventional
MS instruments may not be able to detect a single ion with heavy molecular
mass. Therefore, in order to combine these two techniques, key parameters
of these two technologies, such as detection speed of a nanopore device,
sensitivity, and mass range of a MS instrument, might need to be improved.In this study, a proof-of-concept design and workflow were proposed
to combine the results of nanopore electrospray with MS. As a very
initial exploration, a nanopore effect was observed at the emitter
tip of a nano-electrospray ionization (nESI) source during the analysis
of single bacterium. It is found that the passing event of a single
bacterium through the emitter tip would induce a pulse (∼4
nA) on the electrospray current, which lasts about 10–20 μs.
Since a state-of-the-art current amplifier may still not satisfy both
gain and bandwidth requirements, a data processing and signal reconstruction
method was established to capture this transient pulse and neutralize
signal distortions. With this method, the spheroid shape of each bacterium
was extracted from their corresponding transient pulses. To acquire
their molecular information, bacteria sprayed from the nESI source
were collected on a metal plate and then analyzed by a home-built
laser spray ionization (LSI) miniature mass spectrometer.[59] Metabolites and some other small molecules on
the cell wall were identified in the mass spectra. In this work, four
types of bacteria were analyzed. By combining bacteria geometrical
results with their molecular information, bacteria identification
accuracy was improved from 72.5 to 100%, suggesting the feasibility
and advantages of combining nanopore technology with MS.
Results and Discussion
Figure shows a
schematic diagram of the experimental setup. After samples will filled
into a nESI capillary, an electrode was inserted into the capillary,
and a negative high voltage (∼ −0.7 kV) was applied
onto it serving as the ionization voltage. The nESI capillary was
then placed in front of a stainless-steel plate to collect the sprayed
ion current, as well as the sprayed bacteria. The ion current signals
were then amplified with a current amplifier (Keithley 428) and recorded
with a Tektronix oscilloscope at a sampling frequency of 1 MHz. In
conventional nESI experiments, a constant electrospray current would
be observed. Similarly, a constant electrospray current was also observed
in our setup when a blank solution was filled in the nESI capillary.
However, since a bacterium has a comparable size with that of the
emitter orfice (∼1.5 μm), a bacterium would partially
block the electrospray current path when it migrates through the tip
of the nESI emitter. Therefore, when diluted bacteria solutions were
filled in the capillary, an ion current with inverted peaks would
be observed as shown in Figure a. Each peak corresponds to the event that a bacterium is
passing through the emitter tip.
Figure 1
Schematic diagram of the experimental
setup (not to scale). (a)
Step 1: nESI source and the schematic plot of the nanopore effect.
(b) Step 2: laser spray ionization MS analysis of the deposited bacteria.
Schematic diagram of the experimental
setup (not to scale). (a)
Step 1: nESI source and the schematic plot of the nanopore effect.
(b) Step 2: laser spray ionization MS analysis of the deposited bacteria.After mixing with matrix (3-NBN), bacteria deposited
on the stainless-steel
plate then underwent analysis using a home-developed laser-spray ionization
miniature mass spectrometer in the positive ion mode (Figure b). Details about the MS instrument
setup could be found in our previous literature studies.[59] Briefly, bacteria were quickly heated and fragmented
by the pulsed laser. Small molecules from bacteria together with matrix
molecules were then desorbed from the surface of the metal plate.
It is believed that ionizations happened during the molecule transfer
process from the atmosphere environment into the vacuum region.[60] In this study, pulse frequency and energy of
the laser were set as 10 Hz and 1.2 mJ/pulse, respectively. The mass
spectrometer was scanned over a range of 200–900 Th. To minimize
experimental errors, at least 20 mass spectra were collected for each
bacterium for multivariate statistical analysis.Nanopore has
been utilized to measure the geometrical shape of
individual protein molecules,[47] which is
highly complementary to MS results. It would be beneficial and attractive
to merge nanopore and MS techniques. However, great challenges are
present. In conventional nanopore experiments, liquid environments
present on both sides of the nanopore membrane.[38] Driven by a small voltage difference, molecules could migrate
from one side to the other side of the membrane through a nanopore.
When size of the molecule is on the same scale of the nanopore, this
passing event would change equivalent impedance of the nanopore, which
induces a current variation.[38] The geometrical
shape of the molecule was then calculated by analyzing this current
variation. In the case of nESI, the opening of the emitter tip normally
varies from several micrometers to hundreds of nanometers,[61,62] which is much larger than molecules. Furthermore, analytes transfer
from the solution phase into the gas phase through the emitter tip.
To maintain a stable Taylor cone jet, the liquid flow rate needs to
match that of the electrospray rate.[63,64] Thus, the
liquid flow rate through the emitter tip is typically much larger
than that in a conventional nanopore experiment. Since the emitter
tip has a small opening, the speed of the liquid flow would also accelerate
near the emitter tip. As a result, the passing event in an electrospray
is >103 times faster than those in a conventional nanopore
experiment (please refer to the Supporting Information for details).[58,65] Therefore, a stable electrospray
current is expected and indeed observed in conventional nESI experiments.In order to be able to observe nanopore phenomena in nESI experiments,
three conditions need to be satisfied. First, the size and surface
charge of analytes as well as electrolyte concentration will influence
the ionic current signals. The ammonia–water solution could
maintain a reasonable background current (∼16 nA), while keep
bacteria negatively charged. Then, the size of the analyte needs to
be comparable to that of the nESI emitter tip diameter, so that a
noticeable current variation could be observed. Second, analyte concentration
needs to be low enough to make sure that every time there is only
a single analyte passing through the emitter tip. Finally, sensitivity
and bandwidth of the current measurement circuit need to be good enough
to catch the fast variations on top of the weak electrospray current.
These requirements posed great challenges in terms of fabrication
and operation of the nESI source, MS instrument sensitivity, and electrospray
current detection circuit. As a first step, microorganisms, specifically
four types of bacteria, were analyzed to showcase that nanopore effects
could be observed during the nESI process. As shown in Figure , a two-step experimental procedure
was carried out to couple nanopore nESI measurements with MS analyses.Following a similar procedure as in nanopore experiments, spheroid
approximation was first performed for bacteria. The shape of a bacterium
was approximated as a spheroid with two independent axes a and b, in which a is the rotational
axis. As shown in Figure a top, the electrospray current would be partially blocked
when a bacterium is passing through the emitter tip, which results
in an inverted current pulse on top of the stable electrospray current.
Duration of this current pulse is related to the length of the bacterium
(a), while its relative amplitude (ΔI/I0) correlates with the bacterium
radius (b). Specifically, the shape of this current
pulse could be described as,in which S is the area of
the ESI tip cross-section and r0 is its
radius, k is a proportional constant, v is the migrating speed of the bacterium when it is passing the ESI
tip, and t represents time. In this work, S ≈ 1.77 μm2, r0 ≈ 0.75 μm, k ≈
1.0. The flow rate of the nESI was measured as 1.5 μL/h, so v is estimated to be 0.24 m/s. Derivation of this equation
could be found in the Supporting Information.
Figure 2
Flowchart of the nanopore nESI experiment. (a) Schematic diagram
of the detection circuit, and the corresponding current measurement
process. (b) Data analysis process to calculate the shape of a bacterium.
Flowchart of the nanopore nESI experiment. (a) Schematic diagram
of the detection circuit, and the corresponding current measurement
process. (b) Data analysis process to calculate the shape of a bacterium.Equation describes
the theoretical peak shape induced by the passing event of a spheroid
through the ESI tip. Under the electrophoretic force, a charged protein
passes through a nanopore at a constant drift velocity. This velocity
is determined by the nanopore dimensions and the translocation time,
which is usually considered as mm·s–1.[66] However, in the case of nESI, the migration
speed of a target particle (bacterium) would be much faster (>100
times) than that of a protein through a conventional nanopore, which
requires an amplifier with a bandwidth >236 kHz. Up to now, there
is no low noise current amplifier available that could cover such
a broad bandwidth. In order to have enough gain (107) for
small current detection, the Keithley current amplifier only has a
bandwidth of 39.42 kHz. With limited bandwidth, a distorted peak would
be observed, which is labeled as the expected signal in Figure a bottom. Theoretical expression
of this distorted peak is essential to characterize the shape of a
bacterium, which could be obtained by performing convolution between
input signal (eq ) and
transfer function of the current amplifier (H(t)) in time domain. The voltage-frequency characteristic
curve of the current amplifier was first measured (Figure a, middle), and transfer function
of the amplifier was then acquired by fitting this voltage-frequency
characteristic curve with the mathematic expression of a second-order
amplifier (please refer to Support Information for details).Figure b top shows
a typical nESI current chart collected for bacteria, in which each
inverted pulse corresponds to the event that a bacterium passing through
the emitter tip. The detection circuit has a sampling rate of 10 M/s,
and a signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) of ∼12 was achieved. As shown
in Figure b, a data
processing procedure was developed to determine the spheroid dimension
of each individual bacterium. Each peak was first inverted and then
normalized by the constant current amplitude (I0). After this normalized peak was fitted using eq , length and radius of each bacterium
could be obtained.Figure a plots
the measured spheroid dimensions of four types of bacteria with this
nanopore nESI, in which each dot represents an individual bacterium.
The scatter distributions of experimental results calculated from
current pulses were centered around the theoretical values within
the margin of error. For instance, the measured dimensions of Escherichia coliMC-5 (0.6–0.7 by 1.2–2.0
μm, Figure a-I), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (0.6–0.7 by 1.4–2.3
μm, Figure a-II), Staphylococcus aureus (0.7–0.8 by 0.7–1.0
μm, Figure a-III)
are in good agreement with their theoretical dimensions, which are
(0.5 by 1.0–3.0 μm), (0.5–0.8 by 1.5–3.0
μm), and (0.8 by 0.8 μm), respectively. However, the measured
sizes of Bacillus cereus using the nanopore nESI
(0.9–1.0 by 0.7–1.0 μm, Figure a-IV) are much smaller than their theoretical
sizes, which are (1.0–1.2 by 3.0–5.0 μm). The Bacillus cereus sample was then examined under a microscope.
It is found that a large number of spores presents in the sample,
and most of the mature bacteria aggregate into bacteria chains, preventing
them from translocating through the nESI emitter. Therefore, the measured
dimensions in Figure a IV are the dimensions of Bacillus cereus spores.
In this case, the measured results (0.9–1.0 by 0.7–1.0
μm) agree well with the theoretical dimensions of Bacillus
cereus spores (1.0 by 1.0 μm).
Figure 3
(a) Scatter plots of
the measured lengths and radii of four bacteria:
(I) Escherichia coli MC-5; (II) Pseudomonas
aeruginosa; (III) Staphylococcus aureus;
(IV) Bacillus cereus. The circles are drawn with
their centers and radii equal to the means and standard deviations
of experimental data, respectively. (b) Bacterial identification based
on their shapes. Different colored balls represent different bacterial
species.
(a) Scatter plots of
the measured lengths and radii of four bacteria:
(I) Escherichia coliMC-5; (II) Pseudomonas
aeruginosa; (III) Staphylococcus aureus;
(IV) Bacillus cereus. The circles are drawn with
their centers and radii equal to the means and standard deviations
of experimental data, respectively. (b) Bacterial identification based
on their shapes. Different colored balls represent different bacterial
species.Morphology is an important feature
of microorganism, and dimensions
are one of the most direct indications for bacteria differentiation.
Differentiation of these four types of bacteria was first performed
using their size data shown in Figure a. All data were first classified to determine the
category centers using the canopy algorithm, and then further classified
by the K-means algorithm. The K-means uses iterative refinement to
get a final clustering result, which has a risk of instability.[67] To overcome this limitation, a precluster step
based on the canopy clustering was carried out before the K-means
algorithm.[68] The prepartition results from
canopy clustering algorithm could pass the appropriate center points
to K-means, which improve the stability of K-means. Detailed program
procedure is found in the Supporting Information. As shown in Figure b, data points are divided into four categories by the algorithm: Escherichia coliMC-5 (blue), Pseudomonas aeruginosa (green), Staphylococcus aureus (red), and Bacillus cereus (black). In particular, misidentified data
points are plotted in gray. Classification accuracy of the algorithm
is ∼72.5%, suggesting that morphology is an important parameter
for the differentiation of bacteria at the genus level. However, it
is hard to differentiate bacteria with similar shape and dimensions,
such as Escherichia coliMC-5 and Pseudomonas
aeruginosa.Conventionally, nESI is an ionization method
for a mass spectrometer,
through which molecular components within a liquid sample could be
analyzed. The data obtained by nanopore ESI and MS would be complementary
to each other, and it is highly desired to combine these two techniques
together. Although a particle mass spectrometer exists,[7,19,69,70] there is no mass spectrometer available to us that could couple
with a nanopore nESI source for the direct analysis of bacteria. As
a proof-of-concept experiment, bacteria deposited on the metal plate
were further analyzed by LSI mini MS. Figure a displays representative mass spectra of
four bacteria in the positive ion mode. Small metabolite and lipid
ions were observed in the mass spectra. Generally, most of the peaks
observed in the 690–800 Th range are related to lipids, which
exist in the cell wall and membrane of bacteria. In accordance with
previous reports, the peaks at m/z 690 Th refer to phosphatidylethanolamine PE (16:0/16:1).[71] Furthermore, metabolites of bacteria could also
be observed in the spectra, which also play important roles in bacterial
differentiation. Specifically, two peaks at m/z 248 and 278 Th observed in the mass spectra of Pseudomonas aeruginosa and Escherichia coliMC-5 are teichoic acid and compositions of peptidoglycan on bacteria
cell walls.[72] The mass peak at m/z 308 Th observed in the mass spectra
of Staphylococcus aureus and Bacillus cereus (spore) refers to glutathione.[71]
Figure 4
(a) The mass
spectra of four types of bacteria in the positive
ion mode. Species are indicated by color and Roman numerals: (I) Escherichia coli MC-5, (II) Pseudomonas aeruginosa, (III) Staphylococcus aureus, (IV) Bacillus
cereus (spore). (b) Bacteria differentiation based on their
shape and mass spectrum data; 2D PCA score plots of PC1 against PC2.
(a) The mass
spectra of four types of bacteria in the positive
ion mode. Species are indicated by color and Roman numerals: (I) Escherichia coliMC-5, (II) Pseudomonas aeruginosa, (III) Staphylococcus aureus, (IV) Bacillus
cereus (spore). (b) Bacteria differentiation based on their
shape and mass spectrum data; 2D PCA score plots of PC1 against PC2.The combination of bacteria shape results obtained
from nanopore
experiments with their molecular information obtained from MS analysis
would greatly improve identification accuracy of bacteria. To differentiate
these bacteria based on their shape and mass spectrum data, principal
component analysis (PCA) was first applied to reduce the high order
data set to a two-dimensional data set. Then, the same cluster algorithm/procedure
was used to process the two-dimensional data for clustering, which
is using the canopy algorithm to determine category centers and the
K-means algorithm for further data classification. As shown in Figure b, these four types
of bacteria could be well separated in the plane of PC1 and PC2, and
the accuracy of classification becomes 100%. Figure S6 also plots the classification results using the MS data
only, in which only small differences were observed when MS data solely
or shape plus MS data were used. Several reasons would contribute
to this particular phenomenon. (1) The chemical information obtained
from MS is rich and typically sufficient to classify the type of bacteria.[73,74] As a result, although the shape information is different and complementary
to the chemical information from MS, MS data are overwhelming over
the shape information in bacteria identification. The shape information
obtained here is a two-dimensional data, length, and radius. On the
other hand, many metabolite and small molecules within a bacterium
were detected by the MS, which becomes a high-order multidimensional
data (∼800 variables within the mass range 200–900 Th
at a unit mass resolution). (2) Intrinsically, shape of a bacterium
is not critical for bacteria differentiation, especially when compared
with the molecule composition information. As we know, genetic differences
are the key for bacteria differentiation.[75,76] Therefore, gene sequencing is the gold standard for bacteria identification,
and this genetic information could translate into proteins (thus metabolites
and the corresponding small molecules), which enable the use of MS
for bacteria identification. However, different bacteria could have
similar shapes and dimensions, and even the same type of bacteria
may have different dimensions at different growth stages.In
many other cases, the coupling of nanopore electrospray and
MS would be important, and sometimes essential in biomolecule analyses.
For example, the primary sequence of a protein could be well measured
by a mass spectrometer.[1] However, by keeping
the same primary sequence, a protein could have different conformations
under different environments or disease conditions.[77,78] In such cases, the capability of measuring its shape and geometric
dimension would be critical in differentiating protein conformations,
which becomes essential in understanding its biological function or
in disease diagnosis. Therefore, we believe the coupling of nanopore
electrospray and MS would greatly enhance protein and protein complex
analyses, and continuous efforts need to be placed to extend this
technique for biomolecule analyses. To extend this technique to protein
complex or protein analyses, we need to develop more sensitive current
detection circuits with broader bandwidth and preferably a MS instrument
with single ion detection capability.
Experimental Section
Chemicals
and Materials
NESI ionization emitters are
made from borosilicate capillaries (1.5 mm o.d./0.8 mm i.d.) by pulling
their tips to i.d. of 1.5 ± 0.1 μm using a Flaming/Brown
micropipette style puller (model P-1000, Sutter Instrument Inc., USA).
A scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image of the emitter tip was
also shown in Figure S1 in the Supporting Information. Ammonia was purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). Deionized
water was purchased from Wahaha (Hangzhou, China). All samples were
diluted in NH3H2O (pH = 8.7). 3-Nitrobenzonitrile
(3-NBN) was purchased from Acros Organics (Geel, Belgium). The matrix
(0.1 mg/μL) was prepared by dissolving 3-NBN into acetonitrile.
Microorganism Culturing
In this work, four kinds of
bacteria (Escherichia coliMC-5, Pseudomonas
aeruginosa, Staphylococcus aureus, Bacillus cereus) were studied. Bacteria samples, stored
at −80 °C in magnetic bead preservation tubes, were activated
for culturing and subculturing. All microorganisms were cultured on
MRS agar plates and incubated at 36 °C for 24 h. Bacteria culturing
experiments were carried out in biological safety cabinets. Bacteria
samples cultured on MRS agar plates were collected by a sterile inoculation
loop in NH3H2O solution (pH = 8.7) to make a
suspension with a final concentration of about 4.0 × 104 cfu/mL. NH3H2O (pH = 8.7) solution ensures
that bacteria are negatively charged, and the Coulomb force would
repel bacteria away from each other. Bacteria dilution in a NH3H2O solution could minimize bacteria aggregation
and adhesion to the channel wall,[79,80] which helps
preventing bacteria chains blocking the emitter tip.
Conclusion
In this work, it has been demonstrated that nanopore effects do
exist in nESI sources, and geometrical results from nanopore nESI
measurement are complementary to the m/z ratio information from MS analysis. As a proof-of-concept exploration,
four types of bacteria were first analyzed by the nanopore nESI to
acquire their spheroid dimensions. Deposited bacteria on a metal plate
then underwent LSI-MS analysis, in which molecular information (mainly
metabolites and lipids on the cell wall) was obtained. The combination
of nanopore nESI with MS results could enhance bacteria differentiation
accuracy from 72.5 to 100%. Although similar to nanopore that particle
geometrical dimensions could be obtained by measuring the current
perturbation induced by the passing event of a single particle, the
passing speed of a particle (bacterium or protein) through a nESI
emitter is >103 times faster than that in a conventional
nanopore experiment. This poses a great challenge for the current
detection circuit in terms of sensitivity and bandwidth. As shown
in this work, a state-of-the-art current amplifier could be used to
track the passing event of a bacterium through a nESI emitter. A current
amplifier with ∼ >100 times broader bandwidth is required
to
track the passing event of a protein ion. Either alternative detection
methods or advanced current detection chips would enable the direct
coupling of nanopore ESI with MS instruments, and their coupling would
greatly enhance protein complex and protein analyses in the near future.
Authors: Erik C Yusko; Brandon R Bruhn; Olivia M Eggenberger; Jared Houghtaling; Ryan C Rollings; Nathan C Walsh; Santoshi Nandivada; Mariya Pindrus; Adam R Hall; David Sept; Jiali Li; Devendra S Kalonia; Michael Mayer Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2016-12-19 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
Authors: Joost Snijder; Michiel van de Waterbeemd; Eugen Damoc; Eduard Denisov; Dmitry Grinfeld; Antonette Bennett; Mavis Agbandje-McKenna; Alexander Makarov; Albert J R Heck Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2014-05-07 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Nicolas Di Fiori; Allison Squires; Daniel Bar; Tal Gilboa; Theodore D Moustakas; Amit Meller Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2013-11-03 Impact factor: 39.213