4.8 Article

3D Hexagonal Arrangement of DNA Tensegrity Triangles

期刊

ACS NANO
卷 15, 期 10, 页码 16788-16793

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.1c06963

关键词

DNA crystals; self-assembly; crystal packing; sticky ends; nanomaterials

资金

  1. Office of Naval Research [N000141912596]
  2. Department of Energy [DE-SC0007991]
  3. National Science Foundation [2106790]
  4. Human Frontiers Science Program [RPG0010/2017]
  5. MRSEC Program of the National Science Foundation [DMR-1420073]
  6. Societe de Chimie Industrielle Undergraduate Fellowship
  7. Division of Computing and Communication Foundations
  8. Direct For Computer & Info Scie & Enginr [2106790] Funding Source: National Science Foundation
  9. U.S. Department of Defense (DOD) [N000141912596] Funding Source: U.S. Department of Defense (DOD)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

It has been discovered that using noncanonical sticky ends in tensegrity triangle crystal structures can alter the self-assembly process, resulting in a left-handed superstructure and microtubule-like structure formation.
The tensegrity triangle motif utilizes Watson-Crick sticky end cohesion to self-assemble into a rhombohedral crystal lattice using complementary 5'-GA and 5'-TC sticky ends. Here, we report that using noncanonical 5'-AG and 5'-TC sticky ends in otherwise isomorphic tensegrity triangles results in crystal self-assembly in the P6(3) hexagonal space group as revealed by X-ray crystallography. In this structure, the DNA double helices bend at the crossover positions, a feature that was not observed in the original design. Instead of propagating linearly, the tilt between base pairs of each right-handed helix results in a left-handed superstructure along the screw axis, forming a microtubule-like structure composed of three double helices with an unbroken channel at the center. This hexagonal lattice has a cavity diameter of 11 nm and a unit cell volume of 886 000 A(3)-far larger than the rhombohedral counterpart 5 nm, 330 000 A(3)).

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.8
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据