Hostname: page-component-8448b6f56d-c4f8m Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-19T12:27:05.652Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Selective Area Cell Adhesion on Amorphous Silicon Using Patterned Self-Assembled Monolayers

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  17 March 2011

Laura L. Smith ,
Kai Wang ,
Gregory N. Parsons ,
Raquel Hernandez  and
Dennis T. Brown
Laura L. Smith
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7905.
Kai Wang
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7905.
Gregory N. Parsons
Affiliation:
Department of Chemical Engineering, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7905.
Raquel Hernandez
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7622.
Dennis T. Brown
Affiliation:
Department of Biochemistry, North Carolina State University, Raleigh, NC 27695-7622.
Get access

Abstract

The compatibility of inorganic materials with living tissues and biological compounds is crucial in many areas, including medical diagnostics, biosensors, drug delivery, etc. In this work, we are interested in the interaction of living mammalian cells with semiconductor surfaces for novel thin-film biosensor devices. Amorphous silicon may give advantages over crystalline silicon for some devices because of its large-area, low-temperature compatibility, and its large optical absorption coefficient in the visible spectrum. Amorphous silicon thin films (500Å) deposited on quartz glass were cleaned using ambient UV/O3 treatment, leaving the surface largely OH-terminated and hydrophilic. The hydrophilic surface was then exposed to a vapor of octyltrichlorosilane (CH3(CH2)7SiCl3, OTS). The resulting surface was strongly hydrophobic, with advancing contact angles with water <106°. This organic surface was masked to reserve areas of uncoated hydrophilic substrate, and placed in a cell culture (BHK-21 cells) to observe cell adhesion and proliferation. A high degree of cell attachment was observed on the UV/O3-treated surfaces (~400 cells/mm2) compared to ~450 cells/mm2 on the culture dish control surface, indicating cell proliferation and growth. Little cell adhesion occurred on the hydrophobic organiccoated surface (~40 cells/mm2), and the cells remained round and only minimally attached. On masked surfaces, the organic-free areas showed dense, well-adhered cell growth while the coated areas showed much fewer and rounded cells. On all samples as well as control surfaces, cell death was <1%. These results suggest a means for selectively controlling cell adhesion to thin film electronic device surfaces, through the patterning of hydrophobic surface coatings.

Type
Research Article
Information
MRS Online Proceedings Library (OPL) , Volume 609: Symposium A – Amorphous & Heterogeneous Silicon Thin Films – 2000 , 2000 , A21.5
Copyright
Copyright © Materials Research Society 2000

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1. Hedinger, S., Sayah, A., and Gijs, M.A.M., Sensors and Actuators B 56, 175 (1999).Google Scholar
2. Ulman, A., Introduction to Ultrathin Organic Films (Academic Press, San Diego, CA, 1991).Google Scholar
3. Linford, M.R., Fenter, P., Eisenberger, P.M., and Chidsey, C.E.D., J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 117, 3145 (1995).Google Scholar
4. Braun, D. and Fromherz, P., Phys. Rev. Lett. 81, 5241 (1998).Google Scholar
5. Craighead, H.G., Turner, S.W., Davis, R.C., James, C., Perez, A. M., St.John, P.M., Issacson, M. S., Kam, L., Shain, W., Turner, J.N., and Banker, G., J. Biomedical Devices 1, 49 (1998).Google Scholar
6. Offenhausser, A., Ruhe, J., and Knoll, W., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 13, 2606 (1995)Google Scholar
7. Sung, M.M., Kluth, G.J., and Maboudian, R., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 17, 540 (1999).Google Scholar
8. Turner, S., Kam, L., Isaacson, M., Craighead, H.G., Shain, W., and Turner, J., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. B 15, 2848 (1997).Google Scholar
9. Humayun, M., Juan, E.D., and Dagnelie, G., Arch. Ophthalmology 114, 40 (1996).Google Scholar
10. Hammer, D.A. and Tirrell, M., Ann. Rev. Mater. Sci. 26, 651 (1996).Google Scholar
11. Mrksich, M. and Whitesides, G. M., Ann. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct. 25, 55 (1996).Google Scholar
12. Singhvi, R., Kumar, A., Lopez, G.P., Stephanopoulos, G. N., Wang, D.I.C., Whitesides, G.M., and Ingber, D.E., Science 264, 696 (1994).Google Scholar
13. Harder, P., Grunze, M., Dahint, R., Whitesides, G.M., and Laibinis, P.E., J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 426 (1998).Google Scholar
14. He, J., Lu, Z.H., Mitchell, S.A., and Wayner, D.D.M., J. Amer. Chem. Soc. 120, 2660 (1998).Google Scholar
15. Street, R.A., Hydrogenated Amorphous Silicon (Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1991). Google Scholar
16. Yang, C.S., Smith, L.L., Arthur, C.B., and Parsons, G.N., J. Vac. Sci. Technol. 18 (2000) in press.Google Scholar
17. Higashi, G. S., Chabal, Y.J., Trucks, G.W., and Ragavachari, K., Appl. Phys. Lett. 56, 656 (1990).Google Scholar