Advertisement

Bio-Nanorobotics: Mimicking Life at the Nanoscale

  • Young-Chul Lee
  • Ju-Young Moon
Chapter
  • 56 Downloads

Abstract

Nanotechnology can be defined as a description of matters at nanometer scale and its applications at that scale. According to the tiny size of features (1–100 nm), the capability of measuring, manipulating, and assembling are still challenges that are not easy to overcome. Automatic molecular-size manufacturing could be a solution for this, and the concept of nanorobot was born which had been termed by Freitas [1, 2]. A basic nanorobot is a controllable nanometer/molecular-scale device which is combined, designed, manufactured, and programmed with components at the nano-scale along with input forces and information. In the other words, nanorobotics is a very new potential area of nanotechnology that is basically identified the type of nanotechnology engineering of designing, building and fabricating machines, and devices or robots reached the scale of nanometers [3, 4]. Nanorobots functionalities are capable of operation, sense, signaling, information processing or automatic intelligence handling that could be utilized individually or in combinations in a nanorobot. Nanorobots thereby have the abilities to interact and impact to matter, and perform the selected functions at the nano scale. Some of nanorobot abilities that are needed for functioning may include automatic intelligence handling, self-assembly and replication, information processing and programmability at the nano-scale and nano-interface structure. There are studies that having been conducted about the significance and how to molecular construct a nanorobot as well as the applications in not only medical and environmental area but also to field of space. For example, in the field of nanomedicine, with the effective drug delivery, repairing cells or especially fighting tumor cells, nanorobots are a promising solution for upgrading the medical industry [1, 2] and an emerging area in nanotechnology research.

References

  1. 1.
    Freitas Jr., R. A. Nanomedicine, Volume I: basic capabilities. 6 edn, Vol. 18. Landes Bioscience, 1999.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Freitas Jr., R. A. Nanomedicine, Volume IIA: biocompatibility. 18 edn, 348. Landes Bioscience, 2003.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Requicha AAG. et al. In Proceedings. IEEE International Conference on Robotics and Automation. 1998; 4 3368–74.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Requicha AAG. In Proceedings of the IEEE. 2003; 91: 1922–33.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rohl CA, Strauss CEM, Misura KMS, Baker D. Protein structure prediction using rosetta. Methods Enzymol. 2004; 383: 66–93, doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0076-6879(04)83004-0.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kinosita K, Yasuda R, Noji H, Adachi K. A rotary molecular motor that can work at near 100% efficiency. Philos Trans R Soc Lond B Biol Sci. 2000; 355: 473–489, doi:10.1098/rstb.2000.0589.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Rajendran V, Jagannathan S, Pachamuthu RG, Dawood C. Nanorobotics: a newer platform for molecular diagnose. Nano Biomed Eng. 2011;3:192–201.  https://doi.org/10.5101/nbe.v3i3.p192-201.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Ummat A, Dubey A, Mavroidis C. In Yoseph Bar-Cohen (ed). Biomimetics: biologically inspired technologies. CRC Press, 2005. 200–226.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Smith SS. Construction of nucleoprotein based assemblies comprising addressable components for nanoscale assembly and nanoprocessors. United States of America patent; 2001.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Boyer P, Energy D. Life, and ATP (Nobel lecture). Angew Chem Int Edit. 1998;37:2296–307.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1521-3773(19980918)37:17<2296::AID-ANIE2296>3.0.CO;2-W.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Yasuda R, Noji H, Kinosita K, Yoshida M. F1-ATPase is a highly efficient molecular motor that rotates with discrete 120° steps. Cell. 1998;93:1117–24.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81456-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Block SM. Kinesin: what gives? Cell. 1998;93, 5–8. doi: https://doi.org/10.1016/S0092-8674(00)81138-1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Schnitzer MJ, Block SM. Kinesin hydrolyses one ATP per 8-nm step. Nature. 1997;388:386–90.  https://doi.org/10.1038/41111.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Kitamura K, Tokunaga M, Iwane AH, Yanagida T. A single myosin head moves along an actin filament with regular steps of 5.3 nanometres. Nature. 1999;397:129.  https://doi.org/10.1038/16403.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Khan S, Zhao R, Reese TS. Architectural features of the Salmonella typhimurium Flagellar motor switch revealed by disrupted C-Rings. J Struct Biol. 1998;122:311–9.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jsbi.1998.3999.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang MD, et al. Force and velocity measured for single molecules of RNA polymerase. Science. 1998; 282: 902–7, doi: https://doi.org/10.1126/science.282.5390.902.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Noji H, Yasuda R, Yoshida M, Kinosita K Jr. Direct observation of the rotation of F1-ATPase. Nature. 1997;386:299–302.  https://doi.org/10.1038/386299a0.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Walker JE. ATP synthesis by rotary catalysis (Nobel lecture). Angew Chem Int Edit. 1998;37:2308–19.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1521-3773(19980918)37:17<2308::AID-ANIE2308>3.0.CO;2-W.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Carlo M, George B. Constructing nanomechanical devices powered by biomolecular motors. Nanotechnology. 1999;10:225.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Soong RK, et al. Powering an Inorganic Nanodevice with a Biomolecular Motor. Science. 2000;290:1555–8.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.290.5496.1555.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bachand GD, Montemagno CD. Constructing organic/inorganic NEMS devices powered by biomolecular motors. Biomed Microdevices. 2000;2:179–84.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1009924327649.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Frasch WD. Vanadyl as a probe of the function of the F1-ATPase-Mg2+ cofactor. J Bioenerg Biomembr. 2000;32:539–46.  https://doi.org/10.1023/a:1005629427630.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Farrell CM, Mackey AT, Klumpp LM, Gilbert SP. The role of ATP hydrolysis for kinesin processivity. J Biol Chem. 2002;277:17079–87.  https://doi.org/10.1074/jbc.M108793200.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Block SM, Goldstein LSB, Schnapp BJ. Bead movement by single kinesin molecules studied with optical tweezers. Nature. 1990;348:348–52.  https://doi.org/10.1038/348348a0.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Howard J, Hudspeth AJ, Vale RD. Movement of microtubules by single kinesin molecules. Nature. 1989;342:154–8.  https://doi.org/10.1038/342154a0.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Finer JT, Simmons RM, Spudich JA. Single myosin molecule mechanics: piconewton forces and nanometre steps. Nature. 1994;368:113–9.  https://doi.org/10.1038/368113a0.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Hackney DD. The kinetic cycles of myosin, kinesin, and dynein. Annu Rev Physiol. 1996;58:731–50.  https://doi.org/10.1146/annurev.ph.58.030196.003503.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Vale RD, Milligan RA. The way things move: looking under the Hood of molecular motor proteins. Science. 2000;288:88–95.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.288.5463.88.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Böhm KJ, et al. Kinesin-driven microtubule motility in the presence of alkaline–earth metal ions: indication for a calcium ion-dependent motility. Cell Motil. 1997;37:226–31.  https://doi.org/10.1002/(SICI)1097-0169(1997)37:3<226::AID-CM4>3.0.CO;2-4.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Berg C, Motile H. Behavior of bacteria. Phys Today. 2000;53:24–9.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.882934.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Berg HC. Dynamic properties of bacterial flagellar motors. Nature. 1974;249:77–9.  https://doi.org/10.1038/249077a0.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Ueno T, Oosawa K, Aizawa S-I. M ring, S ring and proximal rod of the flagellar basal body of Salmonella typhimurium are composed of subunits of a single protein, FliF. J Mol Biol. 1992;227:672–7.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0022-2836(92)90216-7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Ueno T, Oosawa K, Aizawa S-I. Domain Structures of the MS Ring Component Protein (FliF) of the Flagellar Basal Body of Salmonella typhimurium. J Mol Biol. 1994;236:546–55.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jmbi.1994.1164.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Namba K, Vonderveczt F. Molecular structure of bacterial flagellum. Q Rev Biophys. 1997;30:1–65.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Hess H, Vogel V. Molecular shuttles based on motor proteins: active transport in synthetic environments. Rev Mol Biotechnol. 2001;82:67–85.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S1389-0352(01)00029-0.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Harada A. Cyclodextrin-based molecular machines. Acc Chem Res. 2001;34:456–64.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ar000174l.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Schalley CA, Beizai K, Vögtle F. On the way to Rotaxane-based molecular motors: studies in molecular mobility and topological chirality. Acc Chem Res. 2001;34:465–76.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ar000179i.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Fyfe MCT, Stoddart JF. Synthetic supramolecular chemistry. Acc Chem Res. 1997;30:393–401.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ar950199y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Whitesides G, Mathias J, Seto C. Molecular self-assembly and nanochemistry: a chemical strategy for the synthesis of nanostructures. Science. 1991;254:1312–9.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1962191.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Fujita M. Self-assembly of [2]Catenanes containing metals in their backbones. Acc Chem Res. 1999;32:53–61.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ar9701068.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Collier CP, et al. A [2]Catenane-based solid state electronically reconfigurable switch. Science. 2000;289:1172–5.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.289.5482.1172.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Stoddart JF, et al. Molecular Meccano. 3. Constitutional and Translational Isomerism in [2]Catenanes and [n]Pseudorotaxanes. J Am Chem Soc. 1995;117:11142–70.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja00150a014.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Balzani V, Gómez-López M, Stoddart JF. Molecular machines. Acc Chem Res. 1998;31:405–14.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ar970340y.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Koumura, N., Zijlstra, R. W. J., van Delden, R. A., Harada, N. & Feringa, B. L. Light-driven monodirectional molecular rotor. Nature 401, 152, doi: https://doi.org/10.1038/43646 (1999), 155.
  45. 45.
    Amendola V, Fabbrizzi L, Mangano C, Pallavicini P. Molecular machines based on metal ion translocation. Acc Chem Res. 2001;34:488–93.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ar010011c.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Chen J, Seeman NC. Synthesis from DNA of a molecule with the connectivity of a cube. Nature. 1991;350:631–3.  https://doi.org/10.1038/350631a0.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Seeman NC. Construction of three-dimensional stick figures from branched DNA. DNA Cell Biol. 1991;10:475–86.  https://doi.org/10.1089/dna.1991.10.475.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Mao C, Sun W, Seeman NC. Designed two-dimensional DNA Holliday junction arrays visualized by atomic force microscopy. J Am Chem Soc. 1999;121:5437–43.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja9900398.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. 49.
    Seeman NC. DNA in a material world. Nature. 2003;421:427–31.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nature01406.ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Cees D, Mark R. Electronic properties of DNA. Phys World. 2001;14:29.Google Scholar
  51. 51.
    Robinson BH, Seeman NC. The design of a biochip—A self-assembling molecular-scale memory device. Protein Eng. 1987;1:295–300.  https://doi.org/10.1093/protein/1.4.295.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Seeman NC, Belcher AM. Emulating biology: building nanostructures from the bottom up. Proc Natl Acad Sci. 2002;99:6451–5.  https://doi.org/10.1073/pnas.221458298.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Tobias I, Swigon D, Coleman BD. Elastic stability of DNA configurations. I. General theory. Phys Rev E. 2000;61:747–58.  https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevE.61.747.ADSMathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Hu J, Zhang Y, Gao H, Li M, Hartmann U. Artificial DNA patterns by mechanical Nanomanipulation. Nano Lett. 2002;2:55–7.  https://doi.org/10.1021/nl0156336.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Mao C, Sun W, Shen Z, Seeman NC. A nanomechanical device based on the B–Z transition of DNA. Nature. 1999;397:144–6.  https://doi.org/10.1038/16437.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  56. 56.
    Yan H, Zhang X, Shen Z, Seeman NC. A robust DNA mechanical device controlled by hybridization topology. Nature. 2002;415:62–5.  https://doi.org/10.1038/415062a.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  57. 57.
    Yurke B, Turberfield AJ, Mills AP Jr, Simmel FC, Neumann JL. A DNA-fuelled molecular machine made of DNA. Nature. 2000;406:605–8.  https://doi.org/10.1038/35020524.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  58. 58.
    Hellinga HW, Richards FM. Construction of new ligand binding sites in proteins of known structure. I Computer-aided modeling of sites with pre-defined geometry. J Mol Biol. 1991;222:763–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  59. 59.
    Liu H, et al. Control of a biomolecular motor-powered nanodevice with an engineered chemical switch. Nat Mater. 2002;1:173–7.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  60. 60.
    Benenson Y, Gil B, Ben-Dor U, Adar R, Shapiro E. An autonomous molecular computer for logical control of gene expression. Nature. 2004;429:423–9.ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  61. 61.
    Mathieu J-B, Martel S, Yahia L H, Soulez G, Beaudoin G. In EMBC; 2003.Google Scholar
  62. 62.
    Cavalcanti A, Freitas JRA, Kretly LC. In ASME 28th biennial mechanisms and robotics conference. Salt Lake City, UT; 2004.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2020

Authors and Affiliations

  • Young-Chul Lee
    • 1
  • Ju-Young Moon
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of BioNano TechnologyGachon UniversitySeongnam-siRepublic of Korea
  2. 2.Department of Beauty Design ManagementHansung UniversitySeoulRepublic of Korea

Personalised recommendations