Yusuke Sato1,2, Masahiro Takinoue2. 1. Frontier Research Institute for Interdisciplinary Sciences, Tohoku University, Miyagi 980-8579, Japan. 2. Department of Computer Science, Tokyo Institute of Technology, Kanagawa 226-8502, Japan.
Abstract
Phase separation is a key phenomenon in artificial cell construction. Recent studies have shown that the liquid-liquid phase separation of designed-DNA nanostructures induces the formation of liquid-like condensates that eventually become hydrogels by lowering the solution temperature. As a compartmental capsule is an essential artificial cell structure, many studies have focused on the lateral phase separation of artificial lipid vesicles. However, controlling phase separation using a molecular design approach remains challenging. Here, we present the lateral liquid-liquid phase separation of DNA nanostructures that leads to the formation of phase-separated capsule-like hydrogels. We designed three types of DNA nanostructures (two orthogonal and a linker nanostructure) that were adsorbed onto an interface of water-in-oil (W/O) droplets via electrostatic interactions. The phase separation of DNA nanostructures led to the formation of hydrogels with bicontinuous, patch, and mix patterns, due to the immiscibility of liquid-like DNA during the self-assembly process. The frequency of appearance of these patterns was altered by designing DNA sequences and altering the mixing ratio of the nanostructures. We constructed a phase diagram for the capsule-like DNA hydrogels by investigating pattern formation under various conditions. The phase-separated DNA hydrogels did not only form on the W/O droplet interface but also on the inner leaflet of lipid vesicles. Notably, the capsule-like hydrogels were extracted into an aqueous solution, maintaining the patterns formed by the lateral phase separation. In addition, the extracted hydrogels were successfully combined with enzymatic reactions, which induced their degradation. Our results provide a method for the design and control of phase-separated hydrogel capsules using sequence-designed DNAs. We envision that by incorporating various DNA nanodevices into DNA hydrogel capsules, the capsules will gain molecular sensing, chemical-information processing, and mechanochemical actuating functions, allowing the construction of functional molecular systems.
Phase separation is a key phenomenon in artificial cell construction. Recent studies have shown that the liquid-liquid phase separation of designed-DNA nanostructures induces the formation of liquid-like condensates that eventually become hydrogels by lowering the solution temperature. As a compartmental capsule is an essential artificial cell structure, many studies have focused on the lateral phase separation of artificial lipid vesicles. However, controlling phase separation using a molecular design approach remains challenging. Here, we present the lateral liquid-liquid phase separation of DNA nanostructures that leads to the formation of phase-separated capsule-like hydrogels. We designed three types of DNA nanostructures (two orthogonal and a linker nanostructure) that were adsorbed onto an interface of water-in-oil (W/O) droplets via electrostatic interactions. The phase separation of DNA nanostructures led to the formation of hydrogels with bicontinuous, patch, and mix patterns, due to the immiscibility of liquid-like DNA during the self-assembly process. The frequency of appearance of these patterns was altered by designing DNA sequences and altering the mixing ratio of the nanostructures. We constructed a phase diagram for the capsule-like DNA hydrogels by investigating pattern formation under various conditions. The phase-separated DNA hydrogels did not only form on the W/O droplet interface but also on the inner leaflet of lipid vesicles. Notably, the capsule-like hydrogels were extracted into an aqueous solution, maintaining the patterns formed by the lateral phase separation. In addition, the extracted hydrogels were successfully combined with enzymatic reactions, which induced their degradation. Our results provide a method for the design and control of phase-separated hydrogel capsules using sequence-designed DNAs. We envision that by incorporating various DNA nanodevices into DNA hydrogel capsules, the capsules will gain molecular sensing, chemical-information processing, and mechanochemical actuating functions, allowing the construction of functional molecular systems.
Phase
separation is a physical phenomenon by which a homogeneous
phase separates into two (or more) distinct phases, resulting in nonuniform
matter distribution. The phase separation of water-soluble molecules
in an aqueous solvent is called liquid–liquid phase separation.
A typical example is the phase separation of a polyethylene glycol
(PEG)/dextran (DEX) mixture, which forms two liquid phases via segregative
phase separation.[1] The phase separation
of a polymer mixture generally occurs under specific polymer concentrations,
temperature, salt concentrations, and polymer molecular weight.[2] This phenomenon generates an aqueous two-phase
system, adopted in various applications, such as biomolecule extraction[3] and patterning.[4]Phase separation of water-soluble molecules, especially biomolecules,
has also been adopted for the construction of artificial cells.[5] For example, a cell-free transcription/translation
machinery was mixed with a PEG/DEX solution and encapsulated into
water-in-oil (W/O) droplets.[6] In another
example, artificial nucleoid-like structures containing transcriptional
reaction sets were formed in lipid vesicles.[7] Importantly, phase separation plays crucial roles in living cells,
such as heterochromatin formation,[8] gene
expression regulation,[9] and membrane-less
organelle construction.[10] In cells, proteins
and/or nucleic acids exhibit phase separation, leading to the formation
of liquid or hydrogel-like molecular condensates.[11,12] Given the utility and potential functions of phase separation, controlling
it by designing biopolymer molecules is an issue to be addressed in
artificial cell studies.The compartmental capsule is one of
the most important structures
in artificial cells because it is required for the integration of
multiple chemical reactions into a molecular system by separating
them from the environment.[13,14] W/O droplets[15−17] or lipid vesicles[18−21] have been typically adopted for compartmentalization. The compartmental
capsules of living cells, i.e., cellular membrane vesicles, have two-dimensionally
segregated domain structures[22] related
to biological events, such as signal transduction[23] or molecular uptake.[24] Lipid
vesicles prepared using two (or more) lipid species with different
phase transition temperatures or headgroup charges exhibit phase separation
on lipid bilayer membranes.[25−27] Studies have reported methods
to control the lateral phase separation of the lipid vesicle capsule
by changing the temperature,[25−27] membrane-tension,[26] or lipid composition.[27] However, designing and regulating the phase separation of the compartmental
capsule using a molecular design approach remains challenging.Sequence-specific DNA interactions can be used to control the phase
separation of DNA nanostructures at the molecular level.[28−33] Recent studies have demonstrated that sequence-designed DNA nanostructures
exhibit temperature-dependent phase separation and self-assembly into
liquid-like droplets.[28−32] The DNA nanostructures formed droplets under a specific temperature,
and the formed droplets became hydrogels when the temperature was
lowered.[30] Furthermore, two distinct liquid
DNA phases were formed on the two types of DNA nanostructures with
orthogonal sequence pairs,[29,30] allowing the formation
of two immiscible DNA liquid droplets and hydrogels. Designing a DNA-based
phase separation system is a feasible approach to the design and control
of lateral phase separation of compartmental capsules.We herein
report the formation of capsule-like DNA hydrogels with
several types of patterns formed by lateral phase separation of DNA
nanostructures. We used W/O droplets as the substrate to form the
hydrogels. A mixture of cationic and nonionic surfactants were used
for droplet preparation to enable DNA nanostructures to adsorb onto
the W/O droplet interface. We designed two types of DNA nanostructures
(Y-motif and orthogonal Y-motif, hereafter referred to as orthY-motif), whose sequences are orthogonal to each other, with the
ability to form different phases in selective and exclusive self-assembly
manners. We investigated the pattern formed on the interface by the
self-assembly and phase separation of the motifs using a variety of
Y- and orthY-motif mixture ratios. Then, to address the
sequence design-based control of phase separation, we designed additional
DNA nanostructures that acted as a linker for the Y- and orthY-motifs. We constructed a phase diagram by investigating how the
addition of the linker changed the phase-separation patterns. In addition
to the investigation of such patterns, we showed the formation of
the phase-separated hydrogels on inner leaflets of lipid vesicles.
The capsule-like hydrogels were further successfully extracted into
an aqueous solution and combined with an enzymatic reaction. DNA nanotechnology
provides various functional DNA devices, capable of computing,[34] sensing,[35] and actuating,[36] that can be incorporated in the hydrogel capsules.
Therefore, our results will serve as the means to design and construct
functional microcapsules for artificial cell studies.
Experimental Section
Materials
DNAs were purchased from
Eurofins Genomics
(Tokyo, Japan). Nonmodified and FAM-modified DNAs were of oligonucleotide
purification cartridge grade, and Alexa 405- and Cy3-modified DNAs
were of high-performance liquid chromatography purification grade.
DNA was stored in ultrapure water (18 MΩ·cm in resistance)
at a concentration of 100 μM at −20 °C until use.
DNA concentration was measured using a microvolume spectrometer (DS-11FX,
DeNovix, Wilmington, DE, USA). DNA sequences are provided in Table S1. Sorbitan monooleate (Span 80) and oleylamine
were purchased from Tokyo Chemical Industry (Tokyo, Japan) and Kanto
Chemical (Tokyo, Japan), respectively. Ultrapure water and Tris-HCl
(pH 8.0) were purchased from Thermo Fisher Scientific (Waltham, MA,
USA). NaCl powder, cholesterol, polyoxyethylene (10) octylphenyl ether
(Triton-X 100), sucrose, and liquid paraffin were purchased from FUJIFILM
Wako Pure Chemical (Osaka, Japan). Iodixanol (OptiPrep) was purchased
from Cosmo Bio (Tokyo, Japan). Silicone-coated glasses (30 mm by 40
mm with a thickness of 0.17 mm) were purchased from Matsunami Glass
(Osaka, Japan). 1,2-Dioleoyl-sn-glycero-3-phosphocholine
(DOPC) was purchased from NOF Corporation (Tokyo, Japan). 1,2-Dioleoyl-3-trimethylammonium-propane
(DOTAP) was purchased from Avanti Polar Lipids (Alabaster, AL, USA).
Exonuclease I and III were purchased from New England Biolabs (Ipswich,
MS, USA).
Preparation of Surfactants in Oil Solution
A liquid
paraffin oil solution containing 20 mM Span 80 and the oleylamine
oil solution were, respectively, prepared as follows. First, Span
80 and liquid paraffin were mixed in a test tube. Similarly, oleylamine
was mixed with liquid paraffin. These solutions were well vortexed
and then sonicated for 1 h at 50 °C using a sonicator bath (CPX1800h-J,
Branson, Danbury, CT, USA). After the sonication treatment, the 20
mM Span 80 and oleylamine solutions were mixed at a molar ratio of
1:3 to prepare a 10 mM surfactant solution. The mixture was further
sonicated using the sonicator bath for 1 h at 50 °C. The mixed
solution was stored under N2 gas-filling and light-shielding
conditions until use at 23 °C.
Generation of Water-in-Oil
Droplets Containing DNA Nanostructures
and Their Annealing
DNA strands were mixed in a PCR tube
with a buffer containing 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH 8.0) and 350 mM NaCl.
The DNA concentrations were altered depending on each experiment.
Note that the dye-modified DNA strands without the sticky-end were
added at a 10% molar ratio (e.g., 2.5 μM for Y-1 and Y-3, 2.25
μM for Y-2, and 0.25 μM for the fluorescence-modified
strands; Table S1). The surfactant mixtures
in oil and DNA solution were incubated for 2 min at 95 °C using
a thermal cycler (MiniAmp Thermal Cycler, Thermo Fisher Scientific,
Waltham, MA, USA). Two microliters of DNA solution was added to 50
μL of the surfactant mixture in a PCR tube and incubated for
1 min at 95 °C. Then, the tube was well mixed by tapping it to
generate micrometer-sized water-in-oil droplets. The tubes containing
the droplets were again placed on the thermal cycler, and the temperature
was lowered from 95 to 25 °C at a rate of −1 °C/10
s (annealing process). The generated droplet radius was 4.7 ±
1.3 μm (mean ± standard deviation) (Figure S1).
Observation
After annealing, the
prepared droplets
were placed onto the silicone-coated glass using a micropipet with
a tip that was cut off to make the diameter larger than the droplets.
The bottom surfaces or cross sections of the droplets were visualized
using a confocal laser scanning microscope (FV1000, Olympus, Tokyo,
Japan) with a 40× objective lens (UPLAPO, Olympus, Tokyo, Japan).
Alexa 405, FAM, and Cy3 were imaged using lasers at 405, 473, and
543 nm, respectively.
Generation of Lipid Vesicles with Phase-Separated
Hydrogels
DOPC, a zwitterionic lipid, and DOTAP, a cationic
lipid, were used
as an alternative to Span 80 and oleylamine. Using this lipid mixture
(1 mM each), W/O droplets containing Y- and orthY-motifs
(5 μM each) were generated. Note that 142 mM of iodixanol was
additionally mixed in aqueous solution for droplet generation. A DOPC
(90%) and cholesterol (10%) mixture in liquid paraffin (5 mM in total)
was used to create an outer leaflet of lipid vesicles (outer lipid
mixture). An outer aqueous solution containing 20 mM Tris-HCl (pH
8.0), 350 mM NaCl, and 142 mM sucrose was prepared. The outer lipid
mixture (150 μL) was poured onto the outer solution (300 μL)
in a 1.5 mL tube and incubated for over 15 min at 23 °C. The
W/O droplet after annealing was gently poured onto the outer lipid
mixture and subsequently centrifuged at 8,000 g at
4 °C for 15 min. After centrifugation, the remaining liquid paraffin
was removed using a micropipette. The precipitated lipid vesicles
were dispersed by pipetting and observed on BSA-coated glass. A detailed
protocol is provided in Supplementary Note 1.
Extraction of Capsule-like Hydrogels and Combination with Enzymatic
Reaction
In the extraction, a 1.5 mm thick silicone rubber
sheet with a punch hole (5 mm in diameter) was placed on BSA-coated
glass (24 mm by 36 mm, with a thickness of 0.17 mm). To extract the
hydrogels, 27 μL of the lipid vesicle solution was poured in
the hole. After 10 min, 2 μL of 10% (v/v) Triton-X 100 in buffer
(20 mM Tris-HCl and 350 mM NaCl) was dropped into the vesicle solution
in the hole to remove lipid bilayers surrounding the hydrogels. Then,
extracted hydrogels and exonuclease I/III were mixed on the glass.
A detailed protocol of the enzymatic reaction is provided in Supplementary Note 2.
Results and Discussion
Phase-Separated
Hydrogel Formation
Span 80 and oleylamine
were used to prepare W/O droplets (Figure a). Span 80 and oleylamine have the same
alkyl chain (C18:1, 9-cis) but different head groups. Span 80 is a
nonionic surfactant that was used for stabilizing the generated droplet.
Oleylamine is a cationic surfactant that was used to accumulate the
DNA nanostructures onto the droplet interface via electrostatic interactions.
As the pKa value of oleylamine was around
10.0–10.7,[37,38] the amine part in oleylamine
was protonated (positively charged) in our buffer condition (pH 8.0).
Therefore, the DNA nanostructures with negatively charged-phosphate
groups, were adsorbed to the droplet interface. By optimizing the
mixing ratio of Span 80/oleylamine for DNA adsorption, we determined
that DNA nanostructures were well adsorbed at the Span 80/oleylamine
ratio of 1/3 (Figure S2).
Figure 1
Schematic illustrations
of the experimental system. (a) Structural
formulas of Span 80 and oleylamine. Oleylamine acts as a cationic
surfactant due to the protonation of the amine group. (b) DNA nanostructures.
The Y-motif and orthogonal Y-motif (orthY-motif) self-assemble
into two types of network structures, respectively, as the sticky-ends
in the two motifs are orthogonal sequences. (c) Formation of phase-separated
DNA hydrogels on a water-in-oil (W/O) droplet interface. The motifs
were adsorbed on the interface via electrostatic interaction and self-assembled
on the interface.
Schematic illustrations
of the experimental system. (a) Structural
formulas of Span 80 and oleylamine. Oleylamine acts as a cationic
surfactant due to the protonation of the amine group. (b) DNA nanostructures.
The Y-motif and orthogonal Y-motif (orthY-motif) self-assemble
into two types of network structures, respectively, as the sticky-ends
in the two motifs are orthogonal sequences. (c) Formation of phase-separated
DNA hydrogels on a water-in-oil (W/O) droplet interface. The motifs
were adsorbed on the interface via electrostatic interaction and self-assembled
on the interface.Two types of DNA nanostructures,
Y- and orthY-motif,
were designed. The motifs were respectively composed of three different
single-stranded DNAs (ssDNAs) (Figure b) of equal length (nucleotide (nt) number). Both motifs
have three sticky-ends with 8 nt palindrome sequences, however, the
sticky-end sequences between the two motifs were not complementary
(orthogonal sequences). Thus, each motif could interact with other
motifs of the same type. Owing to this design, each motif could selectively
and exclusively self-assemble into different hydrogels by forming
the network structures of the motifs (Figure b). The sequences of both motifs were designed
to have approximately the same thermodynamic parameters (melting temperature: Tm) of hybridization in the formation of the
motifs (Tm: ∼64.3 °C) and
in the sticky-ends (Tm: ∼43.5 °C)
(Table S2).[39] Phase-separated gel networks were formed on the interface by adding
the two motifs, the buffer, and salts in an aqueous phase for droplet
formation, after the annealing process (Figure c). These patterns were stable for at least
a day.We investigated hydrogel formation on the droplet interface
using
an equimolar motif concentration (2.5 μM each) (Figure a). For imaging, Y- and orthY-motifs were labeled with FAM and Alexa405, respectively
(fluorescence-modified strands were added at a 10% molar ratio). Microscopic
observation revealed that, after the annealing process, the DNA nanostructures
exhibited lateral phase separation on the droplet interfaces and the
droplets were covered with phase-separated DNA hydrogels that showed
various patterns (Figure b). We classified the patterns into three types: Bicontinuous,
Y-motif patch (Y-patch), and orthY-motif patch (orthY-patch) (Figure c). In the bicontinuous pattern, both the Y- and orthY-motifs
formed continuous hydrogels. In the Y-patch pattern, Y-motifs formed
smaller hydrogels in a continuous orthY-motif hydrogel,
and vice versa in a orthY-patch pattern. Only W/O droplets
without bicontinuous patterns on the surface were classified as patch
patterns. The appearance frequency of the patterns was analyzed by
observing the droplet surfaces. The results showed that bicontinuous
pattern was over 70% under the equimolar condition.
Figure 2
DNA hydrogel patterns
on the droplet interface formed by phase
separation of two DNA motifs. (a) Schematic representation of the
experimental condition. (b) Microscopy images of the droplet surfaces
(left) and droplet cross section (right). The green and blue channels
represent the FAM signal for the Y-motif and Alexa405 signal for the orthY-motif, respectively. Scale bar: 30 μm. (c) Classification
of the observed patterns. Bicontinuous pattern, Y-motif patch pattern
(Y-patch), and orthY-motif patch pattern (orthY-patch). Scale bar: 10 μm. (d) Pattern frequency. The number
of analyzed droplets was 491 in the different experiments.
DNA hydrogel patterns
on the droplet interface formed by phase
separation of two DNA motifs. (a) Schematic representation of the
experimental condition. (b) Microscopy images of the droplet surfaces
(left) and droplet cross section (right). The green and blue channels
represent the FAM signal for the Y-motif and Alexa405 signal for the orthY-motif, respectively. Scale bar: 30 μm. (c) Classification
of the observed patterns. Bicontinuous pattern, Y-motif patch pattern
(Y-patch), and orthY-motif patch pattern (orthY-patch). Scale bar: 10 μm. (d) Pattern frequency. The number
of analyzed droplets was 491 in the different experiments.The formation of the phase-separated gel patterns was attributed
to the immiscibility of the Y- and orthY-motifs, which
was due to their orthogonal sequences. Our earlier study[30] revealed that, in a specific temperature range,
the Y-motifs self-assembled into liquid-like microstructures (named
DNA droplets) and two types of DNA droplets composed of Y- or orthY-motifs exhibited selective/exclusive fusion behavior.
In this study, under a specific annealing temperature range between
approximately 63 and 35 °C,[30] the
motifs self-assembled into liquid-like structures on the W/O droplet
interface. The two types of “DNA liquids” on the interface
were immiscible, resulting in their phase separation. Because the
DNA liquids become hydrogels following a temperature decrease,[30] phase-separated hydrogel patterns can be formed
on the interface. Although DNA nanostructures without sticky-ends
were adsorbed onto the interfaces, the patterns were not observed
(Figure S3), clearly demonstrating that
the formation of phase-separated hydrogel patterns depended on the
orthogonality of the sticky-end sequences, not due to the fluorescence
molecules.
Changes of the Formed Patterns by Adjusting
the Nanostructure
Mixing Ratio
To explore the possibility of controlling the
patterns on the interface, we focused on the mixing ratio of the two
motifs. We prepared W/O droplets containing the Y- and orthY-motif mixture at a concentration ratio of 1.5/3.5 or 3.5/1.5 (μM/μM).
The results showed apparent differences in the trends of the pattern
formed between the two conditions (Figure ). At the Y/orthY ratio of 1.5/3.5,
approximately all droplet interfaces were covered with the Y-patch
pattern (Figure a).
In contrast, most of the droplets were covered with the orthY-patch pattern at the Y/orthY ratio of 3.5/1.5 (Figure b). The frequency
analysis of the formed patterns showed that the majority were patch
patterns; the Y-patch pattern or orthY-patch pattern frequency
was over 90 or 75% at Y/orthY = 1.5/3.5 or 3.5/1.5, respectively
(Figure c). These
results showed that the type of patterns formed can be altered by
adjusting the mixing ratio of the two immiscible motifs.
Figure 3
DNA hydrogel
patterns on the droplet interface under unbalanced
motif concentrations. (a and b) Representative microscopy images of
the droplet surfaces containing 1.5 and 3.5 μM (a) or 3.5 and
1.5 μM (b) of the Y- and orthY-motifs. Scale bar:
20 μm. (c) Frequency
of patterns using 1.5/3.5 or 3.5/1.5 (μM/μM) Y-/orthY-motifs. The number of analyzed droplets in each condition were
493 for 1.5/3.5 and 343 for 3.5/1.5, respectively.
DNA hydrogel
patterns on the droplet interface under unbalanced
motif concentrations. (a and b) Representative microscopy images of
the droplet surfaces containing 1.5 and 3.5 μM (a) or 3.5 and
1.5 μM (b) of the Y- and orthY-motifs. Scale bar:
20 μm. (c) Frequency
of patterns using 1.5/3.5 or 3.5/1.5 (μM/μM) Y-/orthY-motifs. The number of analyzed droplets in each condition were
493 for 1.5/3.5 and 343 for 3.5/1.5, respectively.The formation of patch patterns is expected to be determined
during
the self-assembly process of the motifs. Under an unbalanced motif
concentration, a large number of motifs can easily self-assemble into
large hydrogels that can almost entirely cover the droplet interface.
In contrast, a smaller number of motifs is difficult to assemble or
grow to large hydrogels. Notably, although the thermodynamic parameters
of sticky-end hybridization were approximately the same in both motifs,
the bicontinuous pattern frequency at Y/orthY = 3.5/1.5
was higher than that at Y/orthY = 1.5/3.5 (Figure c). In addition, the frequency
of the orthY-patch pattern was higher than that of the
Y-patch pattern (Figure d), which may imply that the sticky-end sequence in Y-motifs favors
the formation of the continuous hydrogel pattern rather than the formation
of patch patterns. Concentration imbalance is able to cause the pattern
frequency difference. However, the DNA solution was prepared from
stock solutions whose concentrations were measured using the spectrometer.
Nonuniform partitioning of the DNA strands into the droplets would
also change the concentration, but it will equally affect both motifs
and will not explain this pattern frequency difference. Although it
is challenging to reveal the detailed mechanisms causing this imbalance,
which is out of the scope of the present study, clarifying it would
deepen our understanding of the design of DNA nanostructures capable
of phase separation.
Changes of the Formed Patterns by Adding
Sequence-Designed Linker
Structures
In addition to the mixing ratio of the motifs,
the possibility to design a DNA sequence to control the formed patterns
was examined. We designed an X-shaped linker (X-linker) with four
sticky-ends, two for the Y-motif and two for the orthY-motif
(Figure a, left).
The X-linkers can form homogeneous hydrogels on the droplet interface
(Figure S4), similar to those of either
Y- or orthY-motifs (Figure S4). The X-linker is able to cross-link the Y- and orthY-motifs,
resulting in the elimination of orthogonality (Figure a, right). At a higher X-linker concentration,
the Y- and orthY-motifs should be homogeneously distributed
on the interface due to cross-bridging. This pattern was named Mix
pattern.
Figure 4
Changes of formed patterns by the addition of sequence-designed
X-shaped linker (X-linker). (a) Schematic representation of the X-linker
capable of cross-linking the Y- and orthY-motifs. (b) Representative
microscopy images of the droplet surfaces containing 2.5 μM
Y- and orthY-motif with the designated concentration of
the X-linker. Scale bar: 20 μm. (c) Frequency of patterns under
various X-linker amounts.
Changes of formed patterns by the addition of sequence-designed
X-shaped linker (X-linker). (a) Schematic representation of the X-linker
capable of cross-linking the Y- and orthY-motifs. (b) Representative
microscopy images of the droplet surfaces containing 2.5 μM
Y- and orthY-motif with the designated concentration of
the X-linker. Scale bar: 20 μm. (c) Frequency of patterns under
various X-linker amounts.The X-linker concentration ranged from 0 to 1 μM using a
concentration of 2.5 μM of Y- and orthY-motifs. The
appearance frequency of the patterns was analyzed using imaging (Figure b and c). At 0 and
0.1 μM, most of the droplet interfaces were covered with phase-separated
hydrogels. At 0.25 and 0.5 μM, although the Mix pattern formed
on some droplets, phase-separated hydrogels were still observed, where
the boundary between the hydrogels of each motif was vague and the
size of patches seemed to become smaller (Figure S5, Supplementary Note 3). At 1 μM, all droplets were
covered with the Mix pattern. To further investigate the effect of
the X-linker concentration on Mix pattern appearance, sigmoidal curve
fitting of the X-linker concentration-dependent frequency of Mix pattern
formation was performed using a Hill-type sigmoidal curve[40] (Figure S6, Supplementary Note 4). The fitting result showed that 0.43 μM of the
X-linker concentration results in a 50% Mix pattern appearance.The size decrease of the patches (Figure S5) at the X-linker concentrations of 0.25 and 0.5 μM was likely
attributed to the emulsification of DNA liquid during annealing. Since
the X-linker linked the Y- and orthY-motifs, it can be
regarded as a surfactant between the two motifs. This surfactant-like
role has been confirmed in previous studies in bulk solution.[29,30] Jeon et al. indicated that DNA liquid composed of DNA nanostars
can form microemulsions in another DNA liquid using cross-linker nanostars.[29] In addition, they showed that the cross-linkers
formed micelles in DNA liquids where the cross-linker nanostars were
distributed in the bulk DNA liquid. In the present study, the X-linkers
were almost homogeneously distributed in both hydrogels formed by
the Y- and orthY-motifs on the droplet interface (Figure S7), suggesting that the X-linkers also
formed micelles in DNA liquid. Due to the surfactant-like behavior,
the Y-motif (or orthY-motif) DNA liquid in the orthY-motif (or Y-motif) DNA liquid on the interface can be surrounded
by the X-linkers during annealing, forming DNA liquid emulsions and
contributing to forming smaller patches due to the decrease of interfacial
tension between the two DNA liquids.[29] The
emulsified DNA liquids eventually became hydrogels with temperature
lowering.To gain further insight into regulating the patterns
of the phase-separated
hydrogels, we investigated the effect of X-linker concentration on
the appearance frequency of the patterns using the 1.5/3.5 or 3.5/1.5
of Y-/orthY-motif ratio. The obtained data were fitted
using the sigmoidal curve (Figure S6).
Based on the results, we constructed a phase diagram of the gel patterns
on the interface (Figures and S8). The phase diagram showed
that the appearance of the Mix pattern was determined by the amount
of the X-linker rather than the Y-/orthY-motif ratio. Notably,
using 1 μM X-linker resulted in the formation of the Mix pattern
in all tested Y- and orthY-motif concentrations. The phase
diagram also suggested that the Mix pattern could appear at lower
X-linker concentration under an unbalanced Y-/orthY-motif
ratio. The appearance of the Mix pattern is a result of DNA liquid
emulsification, as discussed above. When the concentration of the
one motif is lower than that of the other, X-linker-induced emulsification
occurs more easily, leading to high frequency of Mix pattern appearance.
Taken together, these findings show that sequence design of the motifs
and adjustment of the amount of each motif can be used to regulate
the patterns formed on the droplet interface.
Figure 5
Phase diagram of the
hydrogel patterns on the W/O droplet interfaces,
representing the effects of the Y- and orthY-motif mixing
ratio and the added amount of X-linker on the patterns formed. Note
that the dashed lines are eye-guide sketches representing the phase
boundary. Pie charts in the phase diagram show the frequency of each
pattern.
Phase diagram of the
hydrogel patterns on the W/O droplet interfaces,
representing the effects of the Y- and orthY-motif mixing
ratio and the added amount of X-linker on the patterns formed. Note
that the dashed lines are eye-guide sketches representing the phase
boundary. Pie charts in the phase diagram show the frequency of each
pattern.
Generation of Lipid Vesicles
with Phase-Separated Hydrogels
Although W/O droplets have
widely been used as a model for artificial
cells, a lipid vesicle is a closer model because the cellular membrane
is composed of a lipid bilayer. We found that the phase-separated
hydrogels could also be formed on droplets surrounded by the cationic
and zwitterionic lipid mixture (Figure S9). Because lipid-surrounded W/O droplets were used as precursors
of lipid vesicles in a droplet transfer method,[41,42] lipid vesicles supported by the phase-separated hydrogels could
be constructed (Figure a).
Figure 6
Lipid vesicle with phase-separated DNA hydrogels on its inner leaflet.
(a) Schematic illustrations of the formation of the lipid vesicle.
(b) Differential interference contrast (DIC), surface, and cross-sectional
microscopy images of the lipid vesicle. Scale bar: 10 μm.
Lipid vesicle with phase-separated DNA hydrogels on its inner leaflet.
(a) Schematic illustrations of the formation of the lipid vesicle.
(b) Differential interference contrast (DIC), surface, and cross-sectional
microscopy images of the lipid vesicle. Scale bar: 10 μm.Using the lipid-surrounded droplets, a lipid vesicle
with the phase-separated
DNA hydrogel on its inner leaflet was successfully generated (Figure b). This result showed
that our strategy to use positively charged interfaces for generating
phase-separated hydrogel capsules was not limited to W/O droplets
composed of Span80 and oleylamine but also applies to other charged
materials, including lipid molecules. This result also suggests that
interactions with interfaces via other approaches (e.g., hydrophobic
interaction) can apply in generating phase-separated capsule-like
hydrogels.
Extraction of Phase-Separated Capsule-like
Hydrogels into an
Aqueous Solution
To showcase the further potential of the
phase-separated hydrogels in artificial cell studies, we extracted
them into an aqueous solution from lipid vesicles. In the extraction,
5 μM Y- and orthY-motifs and 0.1 μM of the
X-linker were adopted to connect the two types of hydrogels. Removing
the bilayers by adding detergents (Triton-X 100) allowed for the extraction
(Figure S10).The extracted hydrogels
successfully maintained a capsule-like shape (Figure a). Without the X-linker, only destroyed
structures (fragments of gel films or gel particles) were observed
(Figure S11), suggesting that connecting
the two types of hydrogels by the linker is essential to maintain
capsule-like shapes after the extraction. It is noteworthy that even
after the extraction, the formed patterns by the phase separation
remained, which was well visualized in the 3D-reconstructed image
(Figure b).
Figure 7
Extraction
of the phase-separated DNA hydrogel capsules in aqueous
solution from W/O droplets. (a) Representative microscopy images of
the extracted capsule surfaces (left) and cross section (right). The
capsules were formed using 5/5/0.1 μM Y-motif/orthY-motif/X-linker. Scale bar: 30 μm. (b) Three-dimensional (3D)
reconstructed images shown in (a). Scale bar: 30 μm. (c) Schematic
illustrations of the enzymatic degradation of the extracted DNA hydrogel
capsule. (d) Time series images of the degradation of the DNA hydrogel
capsule. t = 0 min means observation start time after
the addition of exonuclease. Scale bar: 20 μm.
Extraction
of the phase-separated DNA hydrogel capsules in aqueous
solution from W/O droplets. (a) Representative microscopy images of
the extracted capsule surfaces (left) and cross section (right). The
capsules were formed using 5/5/0.1 μM Y-motif/orthY-motif/X-linker. Scale bar: 30 μm. (b) Three-dimensional (3D)
reconstructed images shown in (a). Scale bar: 30 μm. (c) Schematic
illustrations of the enzymatic degradation of the extracted DNA hydrogel
capsule. (d) Time series images of the degradation of the DNA hydrogel
capsule. t = 0 min means observation start time after
the addition of exonuclease. Scale bar: 20 μm.Regarding the shape of the extracted structures, although
the hydrogels
formed spherical shapes on the droplet interface before the extraction,
they were distorted, i.e., not complete spherical shapes, after the
extraction (Figure a and b). This may be attributed to the release of hydrogels from
the droplet interface. The hydrogels formed on the spherical droplet’s
interface were forced to adsorb onto the interface by electrostatic
interaction. After the extraction, the hydrogels were released from
the adsorption force. If the actual surface area of the capsule-like
hydrogels before the extraction is larger than the ideal values determined
by the droplet size, the capsule would have a wavy interface and change
into a nonspherical shape after the extraction because of the excess
surface area. The elasticity or stiffness of the DNA hydrogel may
also affect the shape after the extraction.Since the extracted
gel capsules were formed by DNA nanostructures
only, these capsules are able to be degraded by nuclease enzymes.
To demonstrate this process, exonuclease I and III were added to the
solution containing the extracted capsules (Figure c, Supplementary Note 2). After the addition of the enzymes, the capsules were successfully
degraded over time (Figure d). Such degradation was not observed before enzyme addition
(Figure S12). These results suggest that
our phase-separated DNA hydrogels extracted in an aqueous solution
can be combined with enzymatic or other biochemical reactions, which
may offer a means to construct cell-sized functional “DNA vesicles.”
Conclusion
We constructed phase-separated DNA hydrogels
on W/O droplet interfaces,
formed by the lateral phase separation of two orthogonal DNA nanostructure
pairs (Figure ). Microscopic
observation revealed that the two DNA nanostructures self-assembled
into phase-separated hydrogels with bicontinuous, Y-patch, and orthY-patch patterns (Figure ). Differences in the mixing ratio of Y- and orthY-motifs changed the appearance frequency of the patterns (Figure ). Moreover, the
addition of the X-linkers, which were designed to cross-link the Y-
and orthY-motifs, resulted in the formation of the Mix
pattern (Figure ),
where both motifs were homogeneously distributed on the interface
due to the elimination of orthogonality. We also demonstrated that
the patterns of the hydrogels formed by phase separation were altered
by adjusting the mixing ratio of Y- and orthY-motifs and
the added amount of the sequence-designed X-linkers, represented as
a phase diagram (Figure ). The formation of the phase-separated DNA hydrogels was also achieved
on a lipid vesicle interface (Figure ), whose inner leaflet was covered with the hydrogels.
We finally showed that the capsule-like DNA hydrogels can be extracted
in an aqueous solution and maintain their capsule-like shape, with
patterns derived from the phase separation (Figure ). These results offer an approach to design
and fabricate the capsule made of phase-separated hydrogel using sequence-designed
DNAs.Further investigation of the effect of DNA sequences on
phase separation
may provide a way for precise pattern control. The results we showed
here did not lead to the formation of targeted patterns, such as an
only bicontinuous pattern, Y-patch pattern, or orthY-patch
pattern. As we discussed in the results shown in Figures d and 3c, the sticky-end sequences may influence pattern formation. Thus,
understanding the relations between the sequence and phase-separated
hydrogel formation may lead to the formation of the desired pattern.The formation of the phase-separated hydrogel on the inner leaflet
of lipid vesicles (Figure ) would serve to increase the designability of lipid vesicles.
Lipid bilayers can phase separate into a cholesterol-rich liquid ordered
phase and cholesterol-less liquid-disordered phase. Because DNA can
be modified with cholesterol, it can be expected that the phase separation
of lipid bilayers by the phase-separated hydrogels on the inner leaflet
can be controlled. Moreover, such a phase-separated hydrogel “cortex”
in lipid vesicles not only can stabilize vesicles[42] but also may provide heterogeneous mechanochemical properties
for lipid vesicle interfaces.We envision the construction of
functional microcapsules using
our phase-separated hydrogels. As shown in Figure , the extracted gel capsules were successfully
degraded by exonuclease enzymes. Apart from enzymes, also photo-[43] or molecular-stimulation[44] can alter the interaction between DNA molecules. Such stimuli-responsivity
will allow the degradation of targeted patches in the hydrogels, which
offers a cargo release function encapsulated in capsule-like hydrogels.
In addition, because DNA hydrogels can dynamically alter their shapes
via stiffness changes in response to DNA strands with specific sequence,[45] our hydrogel capsules may obtain motility function
by repetitive shape changes. Moreover, DNA can be modified with various
functional proteins,[46] which may enable
us to construct phase-separated hydrogel capsules comparable to cellular
membranes. Furthermore, DNA molecular devices capable of signal processing[47] or stimuli-responsive actuation[48,49] will be implemented into our microsized DNA-hydrogel capsule. We
believe that such functional capsules composed of DNA will provide
a new approach to developing capsule structures for artificial cell
studies and molecular robotics.[50]
Authors: Amy R Strom; Alexander V Emelyanov; Mustafa Mir; Dmitry V Fyodorov; Xavier Darzacq; Gary H Karpen Journal: Nature Date: 2017-06-21 Impact factor: 49.962
Authors: Gourab Chatterjee; Neil Dalchau; Richard A Muscat; Andrew Phillips; Georg Seelig Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2017-07-24 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: Benjamin R Sabari; Alessandra Dall'Agnese; Ann Boija; Isaac A Klein; Eliot L Coffey; Krishna Shrinivas; Brian J Abraham; Nancy M Hannett; Alicia V Zamudio; John C Manteiga; Charles H Li; Yang E Guo; Daniel S Day; Jurian Schuijers; Eliza Vasile; Sohail Malik; Denes Hnisz; Tong Ihn Lee; Ibrahim I Cisse; Robert G Roeder; Phillip A Sharp; Arup K Chakraborty; Richard A Young Journal: Science Date: 2018-06-21 Impact factor: 47.728
Authors: Kaiser Karamdad; James W Hindley; Guido Bolognesi; Mark S Friddin; Robert V Law; Nicholas J Brooks; Oscar Ces; Yuval Elani Journal: Chem Sci Date: 2018-05-11 Impact factor: 9.825