4.8 Article

Cluster Formation in Solutions of Polyelectrolyte Rings

期刊

ACS NANO
卷 17, 期 21, 页码 21369-21382

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsnano.3c06083

关键词

ring polymers; polyelectrolytes; slow dynamics; DNA mini-rings; clustering; threading; molecular dynamics

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Concentrated solutions of semiflexible polyelectrolyte ring polymers can form nanoscopic cylindrical stacks, and the morphology and dynamics of these clusters can be controlled by the presence of counterions. Addition of trivalent ions stabilizes the formation of clusters, while monovalent ions affect the density of the clusters.
We use molecular dynamics simulations to explore concentrated solutions of semiflexible polyelectrolyte ring polymers, akin to the DNA mini-circles, with counterions of different valences. We find that the assembly of rings into nanoscopic cylindrical stacks is a generic feature of the systems, but the morphology and dynamics of such a cluster can be steered by the counterion conditions. In general, a small addition of trivalent ions can stabilize the emergence of clusters due to the counterion condensation, which mitigates the repulsion between the like-charged rings. Stoichiometric addition of trivalent ions can even lead to phase separation of the polyelectrolyte ring phase due to the ion-bridging effects promoting otherwise entropically driven clustering. On the other hand, monovalent counterions cause the formation of stacks to be re-entrant with density. The clusters are stable within a certain window of concentration, while above the window the polyelectrolytes undergo an osmotic collapse, disfavoring ordering. The cluster phase exhibits characteristic cluster glass dynamics with arrest of collective degrees of freedom but not the self-ones. On the other hand, the collapsed phase shows arrest on both the collective and single level, suggesting an incipient glass-to-glass transition, from a cluster glass of ring clusters to a simple glass of rings.

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