Multifunctional biophotonic nanostructures inspired by the longtail glasswing butterfly for medical devices

Abstract

Numerous living organisms possess biophotonic nanostructures that provide colouration and other diverse functions for survival. While such structures have been actively studied and replicated in the laboratory, it remains unclear whether they can be used for biomedical applications. Here, we show a transparent photonic nanostructure inspired by the longtail glasswing butterfly (Chorinea faunus) and demonstrate its use in intraocular pressure (IOP) sensors in vivo. We exploit the phase separation between two immiscible polymers (poly(methyl methacrylate) and polystyrene) to form nanostructured features on top of a Si3N4 substrate. The membrane thus formed shows good angle-independent white-light transmission, strong hydrophilicity and anti-biofouling properties, which prevent adhesion of proteins, bacteria and eukaryotic cells. We then developed a microscale implantable IOP sensor using our photonic membrane as an optomechanical sensing element. Finally, we performed in vivo testing on New Zealand white rabbits, which showed that our device reduces the mean IOP measurement variation compared with conventional rebound tonometry without signs of inflammation.

Access options

Rent or Buy article

Get time limited or full article access on ReadCube.

from$8.99

All prices are NET prices.

Fig. 1: Characterization of C.faunus wings.
Fig. 2: Nanostructured Si3N4-membrane fabrication and optical properties.
Fig. 3: Nanostructured Si3N4 surface biophysical properties.
Fig. 4: Benchtop characterization of nanostructured IOP sensor.
Fig. 5: The in vivo performance and biocompatibility of the nanostructured IOP sensor .

References

  1. 1.

    Jiang, G. & Zhou, D. D. in Implantable Neural Prostheses 2: Techniques and Engineering Approaches (eds. Zhou, D. & Greenbaum, E.) 27–61 (Springer, New York, 2010).

  2. 2.

    Joung, Y.-H. Development of implantable medical devices: from an engineering perspective. Int. Neurourol. J. 17, 98–106 (2013).

  3. 3.

    Canales, A. et al. Multifunctional fibers for simultaneous optical, electrical and chemical interrogation of neural circuits in vivo. Nat. Biotechnol. 33, 277–284 (2015).

  4. 4.

    Leslie, D. C. et al. A bioinspired omniphobic surface coating on medical devices prevents thrombosis and biofouling. Nat. Biotechnol. 32, 1134–1140 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. 5.

    Li, Y. Q., Yu, T., Yang, T. Y., Zheng, L. X. & Liao, K. Bio-Inspired nacre-like composite films based on graphene with superior mechanical, electrical, and biocompatible properties. Adv. Mater. 24, 3426–3431 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  6. 6.

    Bixler, G. D. & Bhushan, B. Biofouling: lessons from nature. Philos. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 370, 2381–2417 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. 7.

    Li, L. et al. Multifunctionality of chiton biomineralized armor with an integrated visual system. Science 350, 952–956 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. 8.

    Liu, K. & Jiang, L. Multifunctional integration: from biological to bio-inspired materials. ACS Nano 5, 6786–6790 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. 9.

    Huang, Y.-F., Jen, Y.-J., Chen, L.-C., Chen, K.-H. & Chattopadhyay, S. Design for approaching cicada-wing reflectance in low- and high-index biomimetic nanostructures. ACS Nano 9, 301–311 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. 10.

    Ivanova, E. P. et al. Natural bactericidal surfaces: mechanical rupture of Pseudomonas aeruginosa cells by cicada wings. Small 8, 2489–2494 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. 11.

    Siddique, R. H., Gomard, G. & Hölscher, H. The role of random nanostructures for the omnidirectional anti-reflection properties of the glasswing butterfly. Nat. Commun. 6, 6909 (2015).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. 12.

    Ivanova, E. P. et al. Bactericidal activity of black silicon. Nat. Commun. 4, 2838 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. 13.

    Kim, S. et al. Nanostructured multifunctional surface with antireflective and antimicrobial characteristics. ACS Appl. Mater. Interf. 7, 326–331 (2015).

  14. 14.

    Nolte, D. D. Review of centrifugal microfluidic and bio-optical disks. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 80, 101101 (2009).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  15. 15.

    Lee, J. O. et al. A microscale optical implant for continuous in vivo monitoring of intraocular pressure. Microsyst. 3, 17057 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. 16.

    Harding, J. L. & Reynolds, M. M. Combating medical device fouling. Trends Biotechnol. 32, 140–146 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  17. 17.

    Araci, I. E., Su, B., Quake, S. R. & Mandel, Y. An implantable microfluidic device for self-monitoring of intraocular pressure. Nat. Med. 20, 1074–1078 (2014).

  18. 18.

    Hasan, J., Crawford, R. J. & Ivanova, E. P. Antibacterial surfaces: the quest for a new generation of biomaterials. Trends Biotechnol. 31, 295–304 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. 19.

    Quigley, H. A. & Broman, A. T. The number of people with glaucoma worldwide in 2010 and 2020. Br. J. Ophthalmol. 90, 262–267 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. 20.

    Peters, D., Bengtsson, B. & Heijl, A. Lifetime risk of blindness in open-angle glaucoma. Am. J. Ophthalmol. 156, 724–730 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. 21.

    Tham, Y.-C. et al. Global prevalence of glaucoma and projections of glaucoma burden through 2040: a systematic review and meta-analysis. Ophthalmology 121, 2081–2090 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. 22.

    Hooper, I. R., Vukusic, P. & Wootton, R. J. Detailed optical study of the transparent wing membranes of the dragonfly Aeshna cyanea. Opt. Express 14, 4891–4897 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. 23.

    Noh, H. et al. How noniridescent colors are generated by quasi-ordered structures of bird feathers. Adv. Mater. 22, 2871–2880 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  24. 24.

    Raut, H. K., Ganesh, V. A., Nair, A. S. & Ramakrishna, S. Anti-reflective coatings: A critical, in-depth review. Energy Environ. Sci. 4, 3779–3804 (2011).

  25. 25.

    Van de Hulst, H. C. & Twersky, V. Light scattering by small particles. Phys. Today 10, 28–30 (1957).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. 26.

    Khudiyev, T., Huseyinoglu, E. & Bayindir, M. Non-resonant Mie scattering: emergent optical properties of core-shell polymer nanowires. Sci. Rep. 4, 4607 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. 27.

    Wanasekara, N. D. & Chalivendra, V. B. Role of surface roughness on wettability and coefficient of restitution in butterfly wings. Soft Matter 7, 373–379 (2011).

  28. 28.

    Huang, C. et al. Polymer blend lithography: a versatile method to fabricate nanopatterned self-assembled monolayers. Beilstein J. Nanotechnol. 3, 620–628 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. 29.

    Siddique, R. H. et al. Bioinspired phase-separated disordered nanostructures for thin photovoltaic absorbers. Sci. Adv. 3, e1700232 (2017).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. 30.

    Voskerician, G. et al. Biocompatibility and biofouling of MEMS drug delivery devices. Biomaterials 24, 1959–1967 (2003).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  31. 31.

    Neumann, A. et al. Comparative investigation of the biocompatibility of various silicon nitride ceramic qualities in vitro. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Med. 15, 1135–1140 (2004).

  32. 32.

    Limonov, M. F. & Richard, M. Optical Properties of Photonic Structures: Interplay of Order and Disorder (CRC, Boca Raton, 2012).

  33. 33.

    Lee, J. H., Lee, S. J., Khang, G. & Lee, H. B. The effect of fluid shear stress on endothelial cell adhesiveness to polymer surfaces with wettability gradient. J. Colloid Interf. Sci. 230, 84–90 (2000).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  34. 34.

    Lee, J. H. & Lee, H. B. A wettability gradient as a tool to study protein adsorption and cell adhesion on polymer surfaces. J. Biomater. Sci. Polym. Ed. 4, 467–481 (1993).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  35. 35.

    Banerjee, I., Pangule, R. C. & Kane, R. S. Antifouling coatings: recent developments in the design of surfaces that prevent fouling by proteins, bacteria, and marine organisms. Adv. Mater. 23, 690–718 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  36. 36.

    Peng, C., Song, S. & Fort, T. Study of hydration layers near a hydrophilic surface in water through AFM imaging. Surf. Interf. Anal. 38, 975–980 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  37. 37.

    An, Y. H. & Friedman, R. J. Concise review of mechanisms of bacterial adhesion to biomaterial surfaces. J. Biomed. Mater. Res. 43, 338–348 (1998).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  38. 38.

    Wu, P., Hogrebe, P. & Grainger, D. W. DNA and protein microarray printing on silicon nitride waveguide surfaces. Biosens. Bioelectron. 21, 1252–1263 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  39. 39.

    Crémet, L. et al. Orthopaedic-implant infections by Escherichia coli: molecular and phenotypic analysis of the causative strains. J. Infect. 64, 169–175 (2012).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  40. 40.

    Hetrick, E. M. & Schoenfisch, M. H. Reducing implant-related infections: active release strategies. Chem. Soc. Rev. 35, 780–789 (2006).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  41. 41.

    Friedrichs, J., Helenius, J. & Muller, D. J. Quantifying cellular adhesion to extracellular matrix components by single-cell force spectroscopy. Nat. Protoc. 5, 1353–1361 (2010).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  42. 42.

    Chang, H.-H. et al. Cell adhesion as a novel approach to determining the cellular binding motif on the severe acute respiratory syndrome coronavirus spike protein. J. Virol. Methods 201, 1–6 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. 43.

    Pogodin, S. et al. Biophysical model of bacterial cell interactions with nanopatterned cicada wing surfaces. Biophysj 104, 835–840 (2013).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  44. 44.

    Pham, V. T. H. et al. Nanotopography as a trigger for the microscale, autogenous and passive lysis of erythrocytes. J. Mater. Chem. B 2, 2819–2826 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  45. 45.

    Weinreb, R. N., Aung, T. & Medeiros, F. A. The pathophysiology and treatment of glaucoma: a review. Jama 311, 1901–1911 (2014).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  46. 46.

    Dominguez, R. & Holmes, K. C. Actin structure and function. Annu. Rev. Biophys. 40, 169–186 (2011).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  47. 47.

    Parks, W. C., Wilson, C. L. & Lopez-Boado, Y. S. Matrix metalloproteinases as modulators of inflammation and innate immunity. Nat. Rev. Immunol. 4, 617–629 (2004).

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. 48.

    Fink, W. et al. Optically powered and optically data-transmitting wireless intraocular pressure sensor device. US patent US20040116794A1 (2004).

Download references

Acknowledgements

The work was funded by the National Institute of Health (NIH) research grant EY024582 to H.C. and D.S., a HMRI Investigator Award, Caltech CI2 programme, Powell Foundation Award to H.C., and a Research To Prevent Blindness Innovation Award to D.S. Imaging was performed in the Biological Imaging Facility, with the support of the Caltech Beckman Institute and the Arnold and Mabel Beckman Foundation. We acknowledge support from the Beckman Institute of the California Institute of Technology to the Molecular Materials Research Center.

Author information

Affiliations

Authors

Contributions

V.N., R.H.S. and H.C. conceived the study. V.N. and R.H.S. designed the analyses while supervised by H.C. R.H.S. conducted the microscopy and spectroscopy of the longtail glasswing butterfly. R.H.S. conducted the simulations and numerical analysis. V.N. and R.H.S. fabricated and characterized the nanostructured Si3N4-membrane samples. V.N., R.H.S., S.K. and N.H. conducted the in vitro tests. V.N., J.L. and R.H.S. fabricated and characterized the benchtop IOP sensors. V.N., J.L. and J.D. performed the in vivo experiments under the supervision of D.S., V.N. and B.N. conducted the biocompatibility experiments of the in vivo IOP sensors. V.N., R.H.S. and H.C. co-wrote the manuscript with assistance from D.S. All authors discussed the results and commented on the manuscript.

Corresponding authors

Correspondence to David Sretavan or Hyuck Choo.

Ethics declarations

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher’s note: Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary information

Supplementary Information

Supplementary Sections 1–3, Supplementary Table 1, Supplementary Figs. 1–20

Reporting Summary

Rights and permissions

Reprints and Permissions

About this article

Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Narasimhan, V., Siddique, R.H., Lee, J.O. et al. Multifunctional biophotonic nanostructures inspired by the longtail glasswing butterfly for medical devices. Nature Nanotech 13, 512–519 (2018). https://doi.org/10.1038/s41565-018-0111-5

Download citation

Further reading

Search

Quick links

Find nanotechnology articles, nanomaterial data and patents all in one place. Visit Nano by Nature Research