Reversible switching of microtubule motility using thermoresponsive polymer surfaces

Nano Letters

Volumn 6, Issue 9, 2006, Pages 1982-1987

  Ionov, Leonid ^a,b   Stamm, Manfred ^b   Diez, Stefan ^a  

^a MAX PLANCK INSTITUTE OF MOLECULAR CELL BIOLOGY AND GENETICS   (Germany)

^b LEIBNIZ INSTITUTE OF POLYMER RESEARCH DRESDEN   (Germany)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMOLECULAR MOTORS; CONFORMATIONAL CHANGES; MICROTUBULE MOTILITY; MOTOR-DRIVEN MICROTUBULES;

BIOTECHNOLOGY; CONFORMATIONS; ENZYME KINETICS; NANOTECHNOLOGY; TEMPERATURE CONTROL;

POLYACRYLATES;

ACRYLIC ACID RESIN; KINESIN; MOLECULAR MOTOR; NANOMATERIAL; POLY N ISOPROPYLACRYLAMIDE; POLY-N-ISOPROPYLACRYLAMIDE;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; MATERIALS TESTING; MICROTUBULE; MOTION; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; SURFACE PROPERTY; TEMPERATURE; ULTRASTRUCTURE;

ACRYLIC RESINS; KINESIN; MATERIALS TESTING; MICROTUBULES; MOLECULAR MOTOR PROTEINS; MOTION; NANOSTRUCTURES; PROTEIN CONFORMATION; SURFACE PROPERTIES; TEMPERATURE;

EID: 33749651750     PISSN: 15306984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/nl0611539     Document Type: Article

References (29)

1. Postma, H. W. C.; Sellmeijer, A.; Dekker, C. Adv. Mater. 2000, 12, 1299.
2. Shu, L. J.; Schluter, A. D.; Ecker, C.; Severin, N.; Rabe, J. P. Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2001, 40, 4666.
3. MacDonald, M. P.; Paterson, L.; Volke-Sepulveda, K.; Arlt, J.; Sibbett, W.; Dholakia, K. Science 2002, 296, 1101-1103.
4. Schenning, A. P. H. J.; Jonkheijm, P.; Hofkens, J.; De Feyter, S.; Asavei, T.; Cotlet, M.; De Schryver, F. C.; Meijer, E. W. Chem Commun 2002, 1264-1265.
5. Svoboda, K.; Schmidt, C. F.; Schnapp, B. J.; Block, S. M. Nature 1993, 565, 721-727.
6. Howard, J. Nature 1997, 389, 561-567.
7. Howard, J. Mechanics of Motor Proteins and the Cytoskeleton; Sinauer Press: Sunderland, MA, 2001.
8. Vale, R. D. Cell 2003, 112, 467-480.
9. Hess, H.; Clemmens, J.; Qin, D.; Howard, J.: Vogel, V. Nano Lett. 2001, 1, 235-239.
10. Hiratsuka, Y.; Tada, T.; Oiwa, K.; Kanayama, T.; Uyeda, T. Q. P. Biophys. J. 2001, 81, 1555-1561.
11. Hess, H.; Bachand, G. D.; Vogel, V. Chem - Eur. J. 2004, 10, 2110-2116.
12. Ionov, L.; Stamm, M.; Diez, S. Nano Lett. 2005, 5, 1910-1914.
13. Clemmens, J.; Hess, H.; Lipscomb, R.; Hanein, Y.; Bohringer, K. F.; Matzke, C. M.; Bachand, G. D.; Bunker, B. C.; Vogel, V. Langmuir 2003, 19, 10967-10974.
14. Hess, H.; Clemmens, J.; Matzke, C. M.; Bachand, G. D.; Bunker, B. C.; Vogel, V. Appl. Phys. A: Mater. Sci. Process. 2002, 75, 309-313.
15. vandenHeuvel, M. G. L.; Butcher, C. T.; Smeets, R. M. M.; Diez, S.; Dekker: C. Nono Lett. 2005, 5, 1117-1122.
16. Riveline, D.; Ott, A.; Julicher, F.; Winkelmann, D. A.; Cardoso, O.; Lacapere, J. J.; Magnusdottir, S.; Viovy, J. L.; Gorre-Talini, L.; Prost, J. Eur. Biophys. J. Biophys. Lett. 1998, 27, 403-408.
17. Asokan, S. B.; Jawerth, L.; Carroll, R. L.; Cheney, R. E.; Washburn, S.; R. Superfine, R. Nano Lett. 2003, 3, 431-437.
18. van den Heuvel, M. G. L.; De Graaff, M. P.; Dekker, C. Science 2006, 312, 910-914.
19. Prots, I.; Stracke, R.; Unger, E.; Bohm, K. J. Cell Biol. Int. 2003, 27, 251-253.
20. Gast, F.-U.; Dittrich, P. S.; Schwille, P.; Weigel, M.; Mertig, M.; Opitz, J.; Queitsch, U.; Diez, S.; Lincoln, B.; Wottawah, F.; Schinkinger, S.; Guck, J.; Käs, J.; Smolinski, J.; Salchert, K.; Werner, C.; Duschl, C.; Jäger, M. S.; Uhlig, K.; Geggier, P.; Howitz, S. Microfluid. Nanofluid. 2006, 2, 21-36.
21. Bohm, K. J.; Stracke, R.; Baum, M.; Zieren, M.; Unger, E. FEBS Lett. 2000, 466, 59-62.
22. Nath, N.; Chilkoti, A. Adv. Mater. 2002, 14, 1243-1246.
23. Huber, D. L.; Manginell, R. P.; Samara, M. A.; Kim, B.-I.; C. Bunker, B. Science 2003, 301, 352-354.
24. Sun, T. L.; Wang, G. J.; Lin, F.; Biqian, L.; Yongmei, M.; Lei, J.; Zhu, D.-B. Angew. Chem. 2004, 116, 361.
25. Ionov, L.; Zdyrko, B.; Sidorenko, A.; Minko, S.; Klep, V.; Luzinov, I.; Stamm, M. Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2004, 25, 360-365.
26. Schmaljohann, D.; Nitschke, M.; Schulze, R.; Eing, A.; Werner, C.; Eichhorn, Y. J. Langmuir 2005, 21, 2317-2322.
27. Coy, D. L.; Wagenbach, M.; Howard, J. J. Biol. Chem. 1999, 274, 3667-3671.
28. We note that the number of microtubules gliding on the glass surface is approximately two times higher than that on the polymer surface. This is most probably due to stronger affinity of kinesin to glass than to the polymer surface at the chosen grafting density.
29. Hunt, A.; Howard, J. Biophys. J. 1993, 64, A263-A263.