Xiao Wang1, Ruojie Sha1, William B Knowlton2, Nadrian C Seeman1, James W Canary1, Bernard Yurke2. 1. Department of Chemistry, New York University, New York, New York 10003, United States. 2. Micron School for Materials Science and Engineering and Department of Electrical & Computer Engineering, Boise State University, Boise, Idaho 83725, United States.
Abstract
A chiral dimer of an organic semiconductor was assembled from octaniline (octamer of polyaniline) conjugated to DNA. Facile reconfiguration between the monomer and dimer of octaniline-DNA was achieved. The geometry of the dimer and the exciton coupling between octaniline molecules in the assembly was studied both experimentally and theoretically. The octaniline dimer was readily switched between different electronic states by protonic doping and exhibited a Davydov splitting comparable to those previously reported for DNA-dye systems employing dyes with strong transition dipoles. This approach provides a possible platform for studying the fundamental properties of organic semiconductors with DNA-templated assemblies, which serve as candidates for artificial light-harvesting systems and excitonic devices.
A chiral dimer of an organic semiconductor was assembled from octaniline (octamer of polyaniline) conjugated to DNA. Facile reconfiguration between the monomer and dimer of octaniline-DNA was achieved. The geometry of the dimer and the exciton coupling between octaniline molecules in the assembly was studied both experimentally and theoretically. The octaniline dimer was readily switched between different electronic states by protonic doping and exhibited a Davydov splitting comparable to those previously reported for DNA-dye systems employing dyes with strong transition dipoles. This approach provides a possible platform for studying the fundamental properties of organic semiconductors with DNA-templated assemblies, which serve as candidates for artificial light-harvesting systems and excitonic devices.
The judicious placement
of chromophores[1,2] and
coherent exciton delocalization[3,4] in natural photosynthetic
systems has inspired the development of artificial energy transfer
systems[5,6] and quantum excitonic devices.[7] DNA nanotechnology offers the advantage of constructing
excitonic devices using chemistry by rational design.[8,9] Covalent bonding to DNA enhances control of placement and the number
of dye molecules within a DNA template, which offers the ability to
tune dye proximity and tailor exciton delocalization. A number of
studies have demonstrated exciton delocalization in DNA-templated
dye aggregates within linear duplex (dsDNA) structures.[10−16] Several studies have examined dye aggregates assembled using three-armed
DNA junctions, which have focused on either light-harvesting applications
or excimer behavior.[17,18] Both mobile and immobile DNA
Holliday junction[19,20] scaffolds have been used to organize
several types of aggregates including dimers, trimers, and tetramers.[21−23] Exciton delocalization has been observed in dimers templated via
DX tiles and compared to a dsDNA templated dimer.[24−26] In this work,
we apply this strategy to the study of an organic semiconductor related
to polyaniline.Conductive polymers, such as poly(phenylene
vinylene),[27,28] polyaniline[29,30] and polythiophene,[31] were introduced
into DNA nanostructures in recent
years. The delocalization of electrons along the quasi-one-dimensional
backbone of oligomers in conductive polymers provides a platform for
constructing molecular electronic and excitonic devices with DNA as
the template. Assemblies incorporating a discrete number of conductive
polymer molecules would allow exploration of their fundamental properties
and advance the construction of functional devices with such materials.
However, unlike the dye aggregates discussed above, only isolated
molecules or uncontrolled aggregates of conductive polymers have been
templated by DNA nanostructures, due to the hydrophobicity of these
molecules.[27,29−31]Here,
we report an example of an octaniline dimer formed by an
octaniline–DNA conjugate in a controlled manner. The dimer
formed by octaniline molecules exists as a monodispersed assembly
in aqueous solution with a chiral configuration. Moreover, by addition
of a surfactant or dopant, the octaniline dimer can be readily switched
between different monomeric states and electronic states. Large Davydov
splitting was observed in this chiral dimer in the DNA-templated dye
aggregate system based on our theoretical fitting,[32] indicating strong exciton exchange between octaniline molecules
in the dimer (Figure ). The size of octaniline molecule employed in this study (∼4
nm) serves as a great advantage compared to small dye molecules (usually
smaller than 2 nm), given that the diameter of the DNA duplex is 2
nm. Interhelical bridging of octaniline molecules can be used for
constructing complex networks for long-range exciton delocalization,
eventually on bigger DNA nanostructures such as DNA origami.
Figure 1
Octaniline–DNA
assemblies and the different states in response
to environmental change. Three different octaniline–DNA constructs
were synthesized and prepared (top): IS, I0, and II. Construct I0
spontaneously assembles into a chiral dimer in aqueous solution, and
the dimeric state is switched between two different monomer constructs
by adding a triggering DNA strand or a surfactant (middle). The octaniline
molecules can exist in different electronic states, emeraldine base
and emeraldine salt, which both show strong exciton exchange as a
result of electronic coupling in the dimer (bottom).
Octaniline–DNA
assemblies and the different states in response
to environmental change. Three different octaniline–DNA constructs
were synthesized and prepared (top): IS, I0, and II. Construct I0
spontaneously assembles into a chiral dimer in aqueous solution, and
the dimeric state is switched between two different monomer constructs
by adding a triggering DNA strand or a surfactant (middle). The octaniline
molecules can exist in different electronic states, emeraldine base
and emeraldine salt, which both show strong exciton exchange as a
result of electronic coupling in the dimer (bottom).
Results and Discussion
Octaniline–DNA Construct Design and
Synthesis
The octaniline–DNA conjugates were prepared
following our
previously reported synthesis, and two different asymmetric octaniline–DNA
strands were prepared for this study (Figure S1).[29] Given the hydrophobic nature of the
octaniline molecule, three different constructs were designed in an
attempt to control the number of octaniline molecules in the assemblies
by tuning the composition, as shown in Figure . The IS construct consists of an octaniline–DNA
single-strand and the long complementary strand with polyT in the
middle, which was designed to form a linear duplex monomer by isolating
octaniline molecules from each other. In contrast, the I0 construct
was designed with an octaniline–DNA single strand and two short
complementary strands, which leaves the octaniline molecules exposed
to the environment to further assemble into larger structures. Furthermore,
in order to bring two octaniline molecules proximate to one another
by hybridization, we also prepared the II construct that contains
an octaniline molecule in each complementary strand.The self-assembly
of the I0 construct into a dimer is most interesting of all three
designs. Being “wrapped” by polyT from the complementary
strand, the octaniline construct IS remains as a monomer at neutral
pH. As characterized by non-denaturing gel electrophoresis, the IS
construct migrates along with similarly sized linear DNA duplexes
(Figure S2), whereas in the same gel, the
I0 construct has much lower mobility and migrates in the same way
as a double-sized linear DNA duplex, which suggests that I0 exists
as (I0)2 under native conditions (Figure S2). We found that the dimerization of I0 is driven by the
aggregation of octaniline molecules, as the dimer dissociates into
monomers upon being treated with sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS), a condition
that can consistently prevent aggregation of such molecules. The monomeric
state was further confirmed by a size-titration experiment using non-denaturing
SDS gel (Figure S3). However, the II construct
appears as multiple bands in both non-denaturing and SDS gels, suggesting
that there are oligomers formed during assembly through cross-reaction
and then further aggregation into larger structures (Figure S4). Although II is the most intuitive dimer among
the three designs, the (I0)2 construct that spontaneously
formed from the I0 construct is the monodispersed dimer assembly that
is ideal for our study. Thus, we focused on using (I0)2 as a model dimer for further studies, with IS as an important control
construct.
Structural and Optical Characterization of
the Dimer Construct
The observation of distinctly different
Ferguson plots of (I0)2 compared to similarly sized DNA
linear duplex suggests that
the dimer exists in a branched geometry (Figure ), which is similar to the behavior of a
DNA immobile four-arm junction.[20] In contrast,
the Ferguson plots of compositional monomer IS are almost identical
to that of similarly sized linear DNA duplex. To investigate the dissociated
monomer further, Ferguson plots were also used to study the I0 monomer
in SDS gels. Surprisingly, the slope suggests that the dissociated
monomer I0 maintained a nonlinear shape, much like a similarly sized
DNA four-arm junction (Figure S5).
Figure 2
Characterization
of octaniline–DNA chiral dimer and two
different monomers. (a) Schematic depiction of octaniline–DNA
chiral dimer and two monomers. (b) Circular dichroism of dimeric and
monomeric octaniline–DNA constructs. (c) Ferguson plots used
to reveal the shape of different constructs, in comparison to similarly
sized linear DNA duplexes.
Characterization
of octaniline–DNA chiral dimer and two
different monomers. (a) Schematic depiction of octaniline–DNA
chiral dimer and two monomers. (b) Circular dichroism of dimeric and
monomeric octaniline–DNA constructs. (c) Ferguson plots used
to reveal the shape of different constructs, in comparison to similarly
sized linear DNA duplexes.One challenge with studies of octaniline is that the absorbance
is broad (an inherent feature of bandgap-forming materials). As a
result, detailed spectral features are more difficult to discern accurately.
For example, dimeric constructs may show an obscured change or shift
in the electronic absorbance spectrum compared to the monomer, so
exciton delocalization may not be readily apparent in the absorbance
data. However, we found that the circular dichroism (CD) spectra were
useful to identify these interactions (Figure b).CD spectroscopy has been used previously
to characterize some polyaniline
materials in the presence of various chiral dopants[33−36] and also proved useful in this
study. It has been used widely to characterize excitonic interactions[37,38] as illustrated in Figure . The interaction of transition dipoles may result in a bisignate
signal with red- and blue-shifted peaks. Thus, splitting that is not
visible in UV–vis spectra can be observed in CD spectra since
coupled peaks display opposite polarity. These coupled peaks then
partially cancel, resulting in a characteristic bisignate signal.[39]
Figure 3
Coupling of octaniline chromophores. (a) Two aggregated
octaniline
moieties interact, resulting in a couplet and affording two broad,
unresolved peaks in the electronic absorption spectrum (b). The coupled
peaks are out of phase in the CD spectrum (c), affording a bisignate
curve.[39]
Coupling of octaniline chromophores. (a) Two aggregated
octaniline
moieties interact, resulting in a couplet and affording two broad,
unresolved peaks in the electronic absorption spectrum (b). The coupled
peaks are out of phase in the CD spectrum (c), affording a bisignate
curve.[39]The CD spectrum of (I0)2 indicates the presence of asymmetry
(Figure b). Besides
the characteristic CD signal from the B-form DNA duplex, there is
a sharp peak around 330 nm and a broad peak around 620 nm in the CD
spectrum of the dimer, and the bisignate CD curves correlate very
well to the UV–vis spectrum of octaniline (Figure S6). The CD spectrum of the octaniline is quite strong
given its relatively weaker extinction compared to the signal from
DNA bases (which are also far more preponderant). Interestingly, the
shape of the signal arising from the octaniline dimer is opposite
to that of B-form DNA, suggesting that the dimer may adopt a left-handed
asymmetric orientation. For both compositional and dissociated monomers,
there are weak to nonexistent CD signals from octaniline, which further
indicates that the CD signal in the dimer is the result of electronic
coupling between octaniline molecules (Figure b). We also compared the UV–vis spectrum
of (I0)2 to that of IS and dissociated I0, and in both
cases, there is a blue shift in the dimer aggregates (Figure S7). Although chiral, the blue shift in
the UV–vis spectrum indicates that the octaniline dimer has
an H-like configuration; thus the transition between the ground state
and the lower energy state in Davydov splitting was restricted.
Theoretical Spectral Modeling
The spectral theoretical
analysis of the octaniline dimer was performed by taking advantage
of the isothermal strand-displacement (Figure S8) experiment; we used the data collected from the in situ generated (I0)2 construct from a “toehold”
version of IS (Figure a). Vibronic shoulders in the monomer absorbance peaks arise from
the presence of a dominant vibronic mode or bands of modes. These
modes can strongly influence absorbance peak positions in chromophore
aggregates for which the vibronic energy of the dominant modes is
comparable to the exciton exchange energy. A simple Frenkel Hamiltonian,
neglecting vibronic effects due to the absence of prominent vibronic
shoulders on the octaniline absorbance peaks, presented in the SI, is employed in the analysis presented here.
Another consequence of the coupling between the electronic and vibrational
degrees of freedom is to give width to the absorbance peaks. This
effect is accounted for here by convolving the discrete absorbance
spectrum calculated from the Frenkel Hamiltonian with a Gaussian line
shape whose width is taken to match that of the absorbance data. The
phenomenological parameters of the Frenkel model are extracted by
simultaneous fitting of the absorbance and CD spectra. The extracted
parameters are given in Table S1, and a
comparison between the model and experimental spectra is given in Figure b.
Figure 4
Octaniline–DNA
dimer construct generated by strand displacement
and the theoretical analysis. (a) Octaniline–DNA compositional
monomer spontaneously assembled into the chiral dimer by adding triggering
DNA strand. (b) Absorbance and CD spectral theoretical fits. Experimental
data sets are shown as black lines, while theoretical fits are given
as red curves.
Octaniline–DNA
dimer construct generated by strand displacement
and the theoretical analysis. (a) Octaniline–DNA compositional
monomer spontaneously assembled into the chiral dimer by adding triggering
DNA strand. (b) Absorbance and CD spectral theoretical fits. Experimental
data sets are shown as black lines, while theoretical fits are given
as red curves.As discussed above, clear indications
of coherent exciton exchange
giving rise to exciton delocalization have been observed. To predict
the configuration that the DNA organized octaniline dimer aggregates
adopt and to quantify the exciton exchange energy of these dimers,
data analysis was performed by simultaneously fitting the absorbance
data and CD data for the I0 construct used in the isothermal strand-displacement
experiment (Table S1). 3D molecular models
were generated using the quasi-1D model of the octaniline molecule
and assuming that the aggregates adopt a single conformation rather
than an ensemble of conformations. As shown in Figure , the intermolecular distance between octaniline
molecules was predicted to be 0.53 nm with an inter-backbone angle
of 34°. Taking the octaniline length l to be
4 nm, the distance between the ends is given by ,
which can be used as a good approximation
for the in-solution dimer assembly given that duplex DNA is 2 nm wide.
An exciton exchange energy of 110 meV was obtained. This is comparable
to the exciton exchange energy exhibited between dye pairs in DNA-assembled
dye aggregates employing dyes with strong transition dipoles.[32]
Figure 5
Molecular models of the octaniline dimer. Top view shows
the oblique
angle, in degrees, as an angle between vectors of the two octaniline
molecules. Side view shows the intermolecule distance from center
to center. The position and orientation of the long axes of the octaniline
molecules are from the theoretical fitting, but the rotation around
the long axis of both molecules was arbitrarily chosen.
Molecular models of the octaniline dimer. Top view shows
the oblique
angle, in degrees, as an angle between vectors of the two octaniline
molecules. Side view shows the intermolecule distance from center
to center. The position and orientation of the long axes of the octaniline
molecules are from the theoretical fitting, but the rotation around
the long axis of both molecules was arbitrarily chosen.
Proton Doping of Octaniline Dimer
So far, our discussion
has involved the dimer with the octaniline molecules in emeraldine
base form. However, the most interesting property of octaniline is
the transition from emeraldine base to emeraldine salt, which is the
conductive form.[40] The dimer can be readily
protonated around pH 4.5 in solution, similar to the monomer as shown
in a previous study.[29] Despite the octaniline
molecules being positively charged after proton doping, the construct
remains a dimer as indicated by gel electrophoresis at lower pH (Figure S9). The CD signal of the emeraldine salt
dimer shifted to longer wavelengths (Figure ), which follows the same trend as the UV–vis
spectra. We attribute this dramatic change to a greater delocalization
of electrons in the backbone of octaniline in the emeraldine salt
state upon proton doping. Although the longer wavelength part of the
spectrum is beyond our instrument measurement range, the CD curve
in the shorter wavelength region (360–480 nm) indicates strong
exciton exchange between octaniline molecules at emeraldine salt state.
The bisignate CD curve also suggests that the emeraldine salt dimer
exists in the same chirality compared to its emeraldine base state.
It is worth mentioning that, because of the facile switch between
emeraldine base and emeraldine salt states, the octaniline dimer covers
a broad range of absorbance including almost the entire UV–vis
spectrum and reaches the near-infrared region (Figure , Figure S10).
This feature potentiates construction of an artificial photosynthesis
system with the ability to adapt to environmental changes, such as
pH.
Figure 6
Proton doping of octaniline–DNA dimer construct. Octaniline
chiral dimer undergoes proton doping at a lower pH. The emeraldine
base (blue) and emeraldine salt (green) states of octaniline dimer
were confirmed by circular dichroism spectra.
Proton doping of octaniline–DNA dimer construct. Octaniline
chiral dimer undergoes proton doping at a lower pH. The emeraldine
base (blue) and emeraldine salt (green) states of octaniline dimer
were confirmed by circular dichroism spectra.
Conclusion
In summary, we have controlled the association–dissociation
of the amphiphilic octaniline–DNA conjugate using a variety
of ways, such as tuning the composition, adding surfactant, and switching
by strand displacement. The H-like dimer construct showed strong exciton
coupling in both the emeraldine base and emeraldine salt states, and
the theoretical analysis fits agree well with the data. Nevertheless,
the octaniline–DNA single-strand and II construct also formed
larger aggregates, and their optical properties are also similar to
the dimer (Figures S11 and S12). Advancing
the control of the number and geometry of octaniline molecules in
such aggregates will be of great interest in the future. We envision
harnessing exciton delocalization in aggregates so as to allow the
development of light-harvesting systems, quantum computing systems,
and metamaterials based on octaniline or other organic semiconductors
templated by DNA nanostructures.
Methods
Materials
Commercially available reagents were purchased
and used without purification. Spin filters (3K), 0.22 μm filters,
and 4–7 pH strips were purchased from Millipore. Nucleoside
phosphoramidite and propargyl-modified phosphoramidite for oligonucleotide
synthesis were purchased from Chemgenes. DNA solid phase synthesis
was carried on ABI394 synthesizer. Unmodified oligonucleotides were
purchased from Integrated DNA Technologies and further purified. Ultraviolet–visible
(UV–vis) spectra were collected using Nanodrop 2000. Circular
dichroism spectra were collected using Jasco J-1500 circular dichroism
spectrophotometer with a microcuvette.
Self-Assembly of DNA Constructs
Constructs were formed
by mixing a stoichiometric quantity of each strand, as estimated by
OD260. The mixtures were dried and dissolved in 1×TAE
Mg (40 mM Tris-HCl, 20 mM acetic acid, 2 mM EDTA, and 12.5 mM magnesium
acetate) buffer, pH ≈ 7.5. The samples were sealed in PCR tubes
and were then incubated by the following the fast-annealing protocol:
20 min at 65 °C, 20 min at 45 °C, 30 min at 37 °C,
and 30 min at room temperature.
Circular Dichroism Measurement
The CD spectra were
collected using Jasco J-1500 circular dichroism spectrophotometer
at room temperature. The octaniline–DNA samples were loaded
in a microcuvette, which was formed by two parallel glass slides,
and the path length was controlled by a spacer between them. The samples
were held with two glass slides by the capillary effect. For samples
without SDS (sodium dodecyl sulfate), a 1 mm spacer was used, and
thus the path length was 1 mm. For samples with SDS, a 0.2 mm spacer
was used, which made the path length 0.2 mm.
Authors: Xiao Wang; Ruojie Sha; Martin Kristiansen; Carina Hernandez; Yudong Hao; Chengde Mao; James W Canary; Nadrian C Seeman Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2017-05-03 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Olga A Mass; Christopher K Wilson; Simon K Roy; Matthew S Barclay; Lance K Patten; Ewald A Terpetschnig; Jeunghoon Lee; Ryan D Pensack; Bernard Yurke; William B Knowlton Journal: J Phys Chem B Date: 2020-10-14 Impact factor: 2.991
Authors: Simon Rothenbühler; Adrian Gonzalez; Ioan Iacovache; Simon M Langenegger; Benoît Zuber; Robert Häner Journal: Org Biomol Chem Date: 2022-05-11 Impact factor: 3.890
Authors: Shibani Basu; Keitel Cervantes-Salguero; Bernard Yurke; William B Knowlton; Jeunghoon Lee; Olga A Mass Journal: Molecules Date: 2022-06-22 Impact factor: 4.927
Authors: Keitel Cervantes-Salguero; Austin Biaggne; John M Youngsman; Brett M Ward; Young C Kim; Lan Li; John A Hall; William B Knowlton; Elton Graugnard; Wan Kuang Journal: Int J Mol Sci Date: 2022-07-12 Impact factor: 6.208