Conductivity of DNA probed by conducting-atomic force microscopy: Effects of contact electrode, DNA structure, and surface interactions

Journal of Applied Physics

Volumn 96, Issue 5, 2004, Pages 2927-2936

  Heim, Thomas ^a   Deresmes, Dominique ^a   Vuillaume, Dominique ^a  

^a CNRS   (France)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ATOMIC FORCE MICROSCOPY; CURRENT VOLTAGE CHARACTERISTICS; ELECTRIC CONDUCTIVITY; ELECTRIC SPACE CHARGE; ELECTRODES; EVAPORATION; HYDRATION; HYDROPHILICITY; RESONANT TUNNELING; SILICON WAFERS; SURFACE TREATMENT; ULTRAVIOLET RADIATION;

CHARGE DENSITY; ELECTRODE JUNCTIONS; SEMICONDUCTOR BUFFER FILM; VACCUM EVAPORATION;

DNA;

EID: 4944266681     PISSN: 00218979     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1063/1.1769606     Document Type: Article

References (39)

1. D. D. Eley and D. I. Spivey, Trans. Faraday Soc. 58, 411 (1962).
2. C. J. Murphy, M. R. Arkin, Y. Jenkins, N. D. Ghatlia, S. H. Bossman, N. J. Turro, and J. K. Barton, Science 262, 1025 (1993).
3. D. B. Hall, R. E. Holmlin, and J. K. Barton, Nature (London) 382, 731 (1996).
4. S. O. Kelley and J. K. Barton, Science 283, 375 (1999).
5. J. Jortner, M. Bixon, T. Langenbacher, and M. E. Michel-Beyerle, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 95, 12759 (1998).
6. T. J. Meade, Met. Ions Biol. Syst. 32, 453 (1996).
7. Y. Okahata, T. Kobayashi, H. Nakayama, and K. Tanaka, Supramol. Sci. 5, 317 (1998).
8. H.-W. Fink and C. Schönenberger, Nature (London) 398, 407 (1999).
9. A. Y. Kasumov, M. Kociak, S. Gueron, B. Reulet, V. T. Volkov, D. V. Klinov, and H. Bouchiat, Science 291, 280 (2001).
10. A. Rakitin, P. Aich, C. Papadopoulos, Y. Kobzar, A. S. Vedeneev, J. S. Lee, and J. M. Xu, Phys. Rev. Lett. 86, 3670 (2001).
11. P. J. de Pablo, F. Moreno-Herrero, J. Colchero, J. Gornez Herrero, P. Herrero, A. M. Baro, P. Ordejon, J. M. Soler, and E. Artacho, Phys, Rev. Lett. 85, 4992 (2000).
12. A. J. Storm, J. van Noort, S. de Vries, and C. Dekker, Appl. Phys. Lett. 79, 3881 (2001).
13. L. Cai, H. Tabata, and T. Kawai, Appl. Phys. Lett. 77, 3105 (2000).
14. L. Cai, H. Tabata, and T. Kawai, Nanotechnology 12, 211 (2001).
15. M. Bockrath, N. Markovic, A. Shepard, M. Tinkham, L. Gurevich, L. P. Kouwenhoven, W. Mingshaw, and L. L. Sohn, Nano Lett. 2, 187 (2002).
16. E. Braun, Y. Eichen, U. Sivan, and G. Ben-Yoseph, Nature (London) 391, 775 (1998).
17. D. Porath, A. Bezryadin, S. de Vries, and C. Dekker, Nature (London) 403, 635 (2000).
18. K.-H. Yoo, D. H. Ha, J.-O. Lee, J. W. Park, J. Kim, J. J. Kim, H.-Y. Lee, T. Kawai, and H. Y. Choi, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 198102 (2001).
19. R. G. Endres, D. L. Cox, and R. R. P. Singh, Rev. Mod. Phys. 76, 195 (2004).
20. A. Ulman, An Introduction to Ultrathin Organic Films: From LangmuirBlodgett to Self-Assembly (Academic, Boston, 1991).
21. J. B. Brzoska, I. Ben Azouz, and F. Rondelez, Langmuir 10, 4367 (1994).
22. J. B. Brzoska, N. Shahidzadeh, and F. Rondelez, Nature (London) 360, 719 (1992).
23. J. F. Allemand, D. Bensimon, L. Jullien, A. Bensimon, and V. Croquette, Biophys. J. 73, 2064 (1997).
24. A. Bensimon, A. Simon, A. Chiffaudel, V. Croquette, F. Heslot, and D. Bensimon, Science 265, 2096 (1994).
25. D. Bensimon, A. J. Simon, V. Croquette, and A. Bensimon, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74, 4754 (1995).
26. K. H. Choi, J. P. Bourgoin, D. Esteve, G. S. Duesberg, S. Roth, and M. Burghard, Surf. Sci. 462, 195 (2000).
27. This is the optimal force. Below 10 nN, the electrical contact is unreliable. This is agreement with other C-AFM experiments on DNA (see Ref. 13). This loading force is not detrimental. Control TM-AFM images taken after the current measurements showed that DNA molecules are not systematically broken by this mechanical constraint. This loading force value was also shown to be optimal for reliable measurements on organic self-assembled monolayers [see: D. J. Wold and C. D. Frisbie, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 153, 5549 (2001)].
28. D. H. Ha, H. Nham, K.-H. Yoo, H.-M. So, H.-Y. Lee, and T. Kawai, Chem. Phys. Lett. 355, 405 (2002).
29. Y. Otsuka, H.-Y. Lee, J.-H. Gu, J.-O. Lee, K.-H. Yoo, H. Tanaka, H. Tabata, and T. Kawai, Jpn. J. Appl. Phys., Part 1 41, 891 (2002).
30. D. F. Siqueira Petri, G. Wenz, P. Schunk, and T. Schimmel, Langmuir 15, 4520 (1999).
31. Y. Zhang, R. H. Austin, J. Kraeft, E. C. Cox, and N. P. Ong, Phys. Rev. Lett. 89, 198102 (2002).
32. A. Y. Kasumov, D. V. Klinov, P. E. Roche, S. Guéron, and H. Bouchiat, Appl. Phys. Lett. 84, 1007 (2004).
33. T. Heim, Ph.D. thesis, University of Lille, 2002.
34. M. Hjort and S. Stafström, Phys. Rev. Lett. 87, 228101 (2001).
35. E. Macia, F. Triozon, and S. Roche, Phys. Rev. Lett. (submitted).
36. Actually, the electronic structure of some of the samples is more complicated when using a pentacene layer between gold and DNA. Pentacene is a semiconductor, with a HOMO at -5 eV and a LUMO at -3.2 eV. Thus, the pentacene HOMO lines up with the Fermi level of the gold electrode, and then only a series resistance has to be considered in addition; the energy differences with the DNA molecular orbitals are not strongly modified.
37. S. Datta, W. Tian, S. Hong, R. Reifenberger, J. I. Henderson, and C. P. Kubiak, Phys. Rev. Lett. 79, 2530 (1997).
38. -1 in DNA ropes from contactless injection and delocalization experiments reported elsewhere: T. Heim, T. Melin, D. Deresmes, and D. Vuillaume, Appl. Phys. Lett, (submitted).
39. R. E. Franklin and R. G. Gosling, Acta Crystallogr, 6, 673 (1953).