Wetting and Protein Adsorption on Self-Assembled Monolayers of

Algernon T. Kelley, Johnpeter N. Ngunjiri, Wilson K. Serem, Steve Lawrence, ..... Jayne C. Garno, Gang-Yu Liu, G. Kane Jennings, Tseh-Hwan Yong, Paul ...
0 downloads 0 Views 2MB Size
J. Am. Chem. Soe. 1994,116. 2225-2226 Wetting and Protein Adsorption of Self-Assmebled Monolayers of Alkanethiolates Supported on Transparent Films of Gold'

2225

I

I

I

Paul A. DiMilla,' John P. Folkers, Hans A. Biebuyck. Ralph Harter.3 Gabriel P. Lbpez,' and George M. Whitesides' Department of Chemistry. Harvard University Cambridge. Massachusetts 021 38 Received September 7. 1993 We have formed self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) of alkanethiolateson 5-nm-and IO-nm-thick filmsof gold supported on titanium-primed glass. These electrically-conductive films transmit visible light,JsupportSAMs that havewetting properties superior to those of SAMs supported on opaque 200-nm-thick filmscommonly used in thisarea of surfacechemistry.6and have surfacesthat aresmoother than thoseof thicker films. We present two examples demonstrating the combination of flexibility in control of surface chemistry offered by SAMs of alkanethiols and optical transparency provided by these thin films: measurements of the adsorption of RNase A [EC 3.1.27.51 labeled with eosin-5-isothiocyanate(EITC) on methyl-and hexaethylene glycol-terminated SAMs using transmission spectroscopy. and observations of the differential attachment and growth of living MG63 osteosarcoma cells on patterned SAMs of hydroxyl- and methyl-terminated alkanethiolates using conventional phasecontrast microscopy. To prepare 5-nm-and IO-nm-thick films of gold on titaniumprimed glass, we sequentially deposited 1 nm of titanium at 0.1 nm/s and gold at 0.1 nm/s; thick films of gold (200 nm) were deposited at 0.5 nm/s on glass primed with 5 nm of titanium at 0.2nm/s.'.8 Forstudiesofproteinadsorption.0.5nmoftitanium and 5 nm of gold were deposited on each side of glass substrates. The continuity of these films of gold was verified using X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS)! They also were electrically conductive, with the resistivities (7.1 0.3) X 1W !I-cm (5nm-thick Au). (4.8 f 0.4) X 1W R-cm (IO-nm-thick Au), and (3.7* 1.5) X l~!I-cm(200-nm-thi~kAu).'~ SAMswerefonned by chemisorption from 1 mM ethanolic solutions of wfunctionalized alkanethiols for 2 h at room temperature. The transparency of SAMs on thin films of gold increased withdecreasingthicknessofgold (Figure I). Filmsbecamemore blue and gray as the thickness of gold decreased (200-nm-thick gold had the same color as bulk gold). Formation of SAMs on these films did not affect their transparency or color." Transparency could be increased using a (3-mercaptopropyl)trimethoxysiloxy layerrather than titaniumasan adhesion promoter between gold and glass, but evaporation of titanium was a more

*

(1) Partialsupportwanprovided bytheOfficeofNaval Researchandthe Advanced Research Projects Agcncy. (2) NIH postdoctoral fellow. 1992-1993. (3) Swiss National Science Foundation fellow, 1992-1993. (4) Ford Foundation pastdoctoral fellow. 1992-1993. (5) Forarrviewoftranrparentmctalliefilmp,scc: Vmscn.J.L.InPhysics of Thin Films. V o l e Haar. G.. Francombe. M. H.. Hoffman, R. W.. Eds.; AcadcmicPrers: New York. 1977;pp 1-71. Forothcreiamplaoftransparcnt gold, see: Johnson, P. B.; Christy. R. W.Phys. Reo. B 1972,6,437&4379. Smith. G. B.: Niklasson, G. A.; Svcnwn, J. S.E. M.; Granquia. C. G. J. Appl. Phyr. 1986.59, 571-581. (6) For reviews scc: Whituida. G. M.; Laibinis. P. E. Inngmuir 1990. 6, 87-96. Ulman. A. An Inlroduelion Io Ulrrorhin Orgonic Films from Langmuir-Biodgerr roSelj-Am-mbly; Academic Pres. Inc.: Sa" Dicga. CA.

1991. (7) It is also passiblc to prepare discontinuous tramprent metallic films

byphotoelwtrodcpasition(r.g..Poner.J.D.;Heller.A.;~pna.D.E.Norure 1985. 313. 664-666). (8) Glass slides (I-in. X 3-in., 1.2 pg thick, VWR Scientific, catalog no. 48300036) were cleaned with 70130 v/v concentrated HZSO4/3O% H202. (9) The intensilia of the Au(40. Ti(2p). and Si(2p) pcak by XF'S were morcconrirtcnt with the intensities predicted by a model in which wntinuous filmsofgold wercpraentontitanium than withamodel in whichgold formed islands on titmium.l'

Figure 1. Photograph of 100-pL drops of water on methyl- and hydroxyl-terminated SAMs on 5-nm-. IO-om-. and 200-nm-thick films of gold supported on titanium-primed glass slides.

reliable and convenient technique than silanization." Thin gold films ( 5 and 10 nm) deposited in the absence of either adhesion promoter were significantly grayer and less conductivethan gold supported on titanium-primed glass and did not support wellordered SAMs. The advancing contact angles of water and hexadecane (HD) for SAMs of undecanethiol and 1I-(hexaethylene glycol)undecane-I-thiol were relatively independent of the thickness of the supportinggold (Table 1).I3 Hysteresis, however, was smaller for the SAMs on 5-nm-and IO-nm-thick gold than for these SAMs on 200-nm thick gold because the receding contact angles for these liquids increased with decreasing thickness of gold." The thickness of the gold on hysteresis also correlates with the morphology of the surface: atomic force microscopy (AFM) demonstrated that the mean absolute roughness of films of gold decreased from 1.2 nm for 100-nm-thick gold to 0.2 nm for 10nm-thick gold and 0.09 nm for 5-nm-thick gold." We measured the adsorption of RNase A on methyl- and hexaethylene glycol-terminated SAMs by observing the change in optical absorbance of SAMs after incubation with I mg/mL solutionsof protein covalently labeled with EITC (Figure 2).I6J' The visible spectra for both types of SAMs before and after exposure to unlabeled RNase A were comparable. but the spectrum for EITC-RNase A on a methyl-terminated SAM showed a distinct peak at 532 nm.18J9 This peak corresponded to 0.35 ,tg/cmZ of EITC-RNase A 3 0 we estimate that a closepacked monolayer of RNase A would contain 0.21437 r g / cm2.21 In contrast, no peak was observed for a hexaethylene glycol-terminated SAM exposed to EITC-RNase A; the demonstration that these SAMs resist protein adsorption agrees with previous results.'6J8 (IO) Ruistivitiu wcrcdclcrmined b y m c a s u r i n g t h c v o l ~ g e d ~ a t ~ ~ n t applied current using a four-point probc with armium tips (tip spacing of 0.0625 in.. tip radius of 0.W5 in. Alessi. Imine, CA) and correcting for the finite si= of the film. The resistivity of bulk gold is 2.4 X lW R s m (Kittcl. C. Inrroduerion 10 Solid-Stare Phy$ics; John Wilcy and Sons: New York. IOrlL\ "'Y,.

(11) Allara. D. L.; Hebard. A. F.;Padden. F. J.;Nuuo. R.G.; Falmne. D. R. J. Vne. Sei. Technoi. A 1983,1.376382. (12) DiMilla. P. A,; Folkers. I. P.; Biebuyek. H.A.; Whituida, 0 M.,

unpublished data. (13) Bain.C.D.;Troughton.E. B.;Tao.Y.-T.;Evall.J.; Whituidcs.G. M. 1. Am. Chcm.Soc. 1989, 111,321-335. Tmughton. E. E.;Bain. C. D.;

Whitesidu.G.M.;Nuua.R.G.;Allara.D.L.;Portcr.M.D.Inngmuir1988. 4. 365-385. (14) We define hysteresis in tbc contact angle as the difference bclwscn

the Usin- of the receding and advancing wntact angla. (15) Value for mean absolute roughness were measured using a TMX2000 AFM (Topometrir. Sunnyvale, CA) with a electrodepasited carbon tip and silicon cantilever. AFM rather than STM was used bsausc the total conductance of our films was limited by the total amount of metal prcscnt.'2 The roughnes of bare glass and 5 nm of gold on glass primed with I nm of titanium was indistinguishable; wc cxpcel that 2W-nm-thick gold is at least as rough as IW-nm-thick gold.

0 1994 American Chemical Society

2226 J. Am. Chem. Soc., Vol. 116, No. 5. 1994

Communications 10 rhe Editor

T i b k 1. Wetting F'ropcrties of Water and Hexadecane (HD) on SAMs Prepared by Adsorption of Methyl- and Hexaethylene Glycol-Terminated Alkanethiols on Thin Films of Gold Supported on Titanium-Primed Glass contact angles (advancing, 8.. receding. 8,. in deg). and hysteresis (-A cos 8 = cos 8, - cos 8.) in wetting of HzO and H D on SAMs HS(CHdioCHi thickness of gold (nm)

H20

5

IO 200

HD

a,. e,

-Am8

e.. a,

-Am8

112,104 1 IO, 98 113.98

0.133 0.203

44,39 44.39 45.30

0.058 0.058 0.159

0.252

8..

a,

HS(CHZ)II(OCH~CHZ)~OH Hz0 HW -A cos 8 8.. a, -Am8

36.31

0.048 0.062 0.141

34.27 31.20