| Literature DB >> 35406201 |
Eider Berganza1, Gurunath Apte1,2, Srivatsan K Vasantham1, Thi-Huong Nguyen2,3, Michael Hirtz1.
Abstract
Three-dimensional printing at the micro-/nanoscale represents a new challenge in research and development to achieve direct printing down to nanometre-sized objects. Here, FluidFM, a combination of microfluidics with atomic force microscopy, offers attractive options to fabricate hierarchical polymer structures at different scales. However, little is known about the effect of the substrate on the printed structures and the integration of (bio)functional groups into the polymer inks. In this study, we printed micro-/nanostructures on surfaces with different wetting properties, and integrated molecules with different functional groups (rhodamine as a fluorescent label and biotin as a binding tag for proteins) into the base polymer ink. The substrate wetting properties strongly affected the printing results, in that the lateral feature sizes increased with increasing substrate hydrophilicity. Overall, ink modification only caused minor changes in the stiffness of the printed structures. This shows the generality of the approach, as significant changes in the mechanical properties on chemical functionalization could be confounders in bioapplications. The retained functionality of the obtained structures after UV curing was demonstrated by selective binding of streptavidin to the printed structures. The ability to incorporate binding tags to achieve specific interactions between relevant proteins and the fabricated micro-/nanostructures, without compromising the mechanical properties, paves a way for numerous bio and sensing applications. Additional flexibility is obtained by tuning the substrate properties for feature size control, and the option to obtain functionalized printed structures without post-processing procedures will contribute to the development of 3D printing for biological applications, using FluidFM and similar dispensing techniques.Entities:
Keywords: 3D printing; FluidFM; biofunctionalization; mechanical properties; microstructures; nanostructures; scanning probe lithography
Year: 2022 PMID: 35406201 PMCID: PMC9002480 DOI: 10.3390/polym14071327
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Polymers (Basel) ISSN: 2073-4360 Impact factor: 4.329
Figure 1Ink preparation and printing. (a) Molecular structures of the phospholipids used for biofunctionalization. (b) Picture of the functionalized adhesive inks. (c) Scheme of functionalization and printing process.
Figure 2Basic geometrical patterns obtained with pure adhesive, Loctite. (a) Scheme of printing dots, lines, and squares as basic geometric patterns. (b) AFM topography images of exemplary printed structures and (c) corresponding profile sections of the structures at the yellow dashed line in (b).
Figure 3Influence of substrate wettability and chemistry on patterning. (a) Scheme of respective sample surface chemistry. (b) AFM images of polymer nanodots (left) and lines (right) patterned (right) on the functionalized substrates, showing increasing hydrophilicity from top to bottom (indicated by the arrow), written with the same working parameters. (c) Measured water contact angle for the different substrates. (d) Dot height on the different substrates as a function of the contact time. (e) Average line profiles showing different spreading behavior depending on the substrate functionalization.
Height of adhesive lines printed on differently functionalized substrates.
| Substrate Label | S1 | S2 | S3 | S4 |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Functionalization | 7-octenyl trichlorosilane | None | (3-glycidyl oxypropyl)-trimethoxysilan | O2 plasma activation |
| Width * (nm) | - ** | 300 ± 21 | 524 ± 26 | 1457 ± 65 |
| Height (nm) | - ** | 68 ± 16 | 32 ± 3 | 15 ± 1 |
| Aspect ratio *** | - | 0.23 ± 0.04 | 0.06 ± 0.01 | 0.01 ± 0.01 |
* full width at half maximum (FWHM). ** no continuous line writing was obtained. *** calculated as height/width, error calculated by error propagation.
Figure 4Influence of functional admixing on the mechanical properties of printed features determined by AFM nanoindentation. (a) Schematic of the nanoindentation experiments. (b) Typical AFM force-distance curve demonstrates the indentation on hard glass (black) to a compliant ink surface (red). (c) Quantification of Young’s modulus of bare glass and samples with modified inks. (d) Indentation map for the different composition nanodots (scale bar equals 500 nm for all images). (e) The Young’s modulus of modified nanodots shows small variation. Statistically significant difference determined by one-way ANOVA using Dunn’s test ** (p < 0.05).
Figure 5Biofunctionalization of adhesive-based structures by a model protein. (a) Scheme showing functionalization of the adhesive ink. Microscopy images of the (b) adhesive modified with rhodamine-PE (first row) and biotinylated adhesive structures (second row), and (c) the same adhesive structures after incubation with fluorescently labelled streptavidin, showing selective binding. Scale bar equals 40 µm for all images.