Difference between revisions of "Structural DNA nanotechnology"
From apm
m |
m |
||
| Line 1: | Line 1: | ||
| + | {{Template:Stub}} | ||
| + | |||
| + | * 2D DNA origami | ||
| + | * extended 2D lattice crystals | ||
| + | * 3D DNA cages | ||
| + | * 3D DNA Bricks | ||
| + | * micro sized periodic 3D structures | ||
| + | * structures with elastic links that act as rotation allowing hinges actuated by single strand DNA as entropic spring | ||
| + | * more complex linkage structures including an sliding element | ||
| + | |||
== DNA frameworks == | == DNA frameworks == | ||
Revision as of 20:38, 14 March 2015
- 2D DNA origami
- extended 2D lattice crystals
- 3D DNA cages
- 3D DNA Bricks
- micro sized periodic 3D structures
- structures with elastic links that act as rotation allowing hinges actuated by single strand DNA as entropic spring
- more complex linkage structures including an sliding element
DNA frameworks
DNA bricks
[...]
When one watches the simulation of the self assembly process of DNA bricks [TODO add link] one is led to doubt the stiffness of the product. The DNA double helix can create siff polymeres if the used doublehelix segments are kept in the length range from one to three turns. Mentioned here [1] under the section "DNA as Construction Material" and referenced here [1] (unchecked). Is there quantitative information about the stiffness of whole DNA bricks (to investigate)?
References
- ↑ Hagerman, P.J. (1988), Flexibility of DNA, Ann. Rev. Biophys. & Biophys. Chem. 17, 265-286.
