IDEAS home Printed from https://ideas.repec.org/a/plo/pone00/0135594.html
   My bibliography  Save this article

Response to “Critical Assessment of the Evidence for Striped Nanoparticles”

Author

Listed:
  • Quy Khac Ong
  • Francesco Stellacci

Abstract

Stirling et al., (10.1371/journal.pone.0108482) presented an analysis on some of our publications on the formation of stripe-like domains on mixed-ligand coated gold nanoparticles. The authors shed doubts on some of our results however no valid argument is provided against what we have shown since our first publication: scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) images of striped nanoparticles show stripe-like domains that are independent of imaging parameters and in particular of imaging speed. We have consistently ruled out the presence of artifacts by comparing sets of images acquired at different tip speeds, finding invariance of the stipe-like domains. Stirling and co-workers incorrectly analyzed this key control, using a different microscope and imaging conditions that do not compare to ours. We show here data proving that our approach is rigorous. Furthermore, we never solely relied on image analysis to draw our conclusions; we have always used the chemical nature of the particles to assess the veracity of our images. Stirling et al. do not provide any justification for the spacing of the features that we find on nanoparticles: ~1 nm for mixed ligand particles and ~ 0.5 nm for homoligand particles. Hence our two central arguments remain unmodified: independence from imaging parameters and dependence on ligand shell chemical composition. The paper report observations on our STM images; none is a sufficient condition to prove that our images are artifacts. We thoroughly addressed issues related to STM artifacts throughout our microscopy work. Stirling et al. provide guidelines for what they consider good STM images of nanoparticles, such images are indeed present in our literature. They conclude that the evidences we provided to date are insufficient, this is a departure from one of the authors’ previous article which concluded that our images were composed of artifacts. Given that four independent laboratories have reproduced our measurements and that no scientifically rigorous argument is presented to invalidate our STM images, and also given that Stirling et al. do not contest the quality of our recent STM images, we re-affirm that specific binary mixture of ligands spontaneously form features in their ligand shell that we describe as stripe-like domains ~1 nm in width.

Suggested Citation

  • Quy Khac Ong & Francesco Stellacci, 2015. "Response to “Critical Assessment of the Evidence for Striped Nanoparticles”," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 10(11), pages 1-19, November.
  • Handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0135594
    DOI: 10.1371/journal.pone.0135594
    as

    Download full text from publisher

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0135594
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/article/file?id=10.1371/journal.pone.0135594&type=printable
    Download Restriction: no

    File URL: https://libkey.io/10.1371/journal.pone.0135594?utm_source=ideas
    LibKey link: if access is restricted and if your library uses this service, LibKey will redirect you to where you can use your library subscription to access this item
    ---><---

    References listed on IDEAS

    as
    1. Julian Stirling & Ioannis Lekkas & Adam Sweetman & Predrag Djuranovic & Quanmin Guo & Brian Pauw & Josef Granwehr & Raphaël Lévy & Philip Moriarty, 2014. "Critical Assessment of the Evidence for Striped Nanoparticles," PLOS ONE, Public Library of Science, vol. 9(11), pages 1-18, November.
    Full references (including those not matched with items on IDEAS)

    Most related items

    These are the items that most often cite the same works as this one and are cited by the same works as this one.

      More about this item

      Statistics

      Access and download statistics

      Corrections

      All material on this site has been provided by the respective publishers and authors. You can help correct errors and omissions. When requesting a correction, please mention this item's handle: RePEc:plo:pone00:0135594. See general information about how to correct material in RePEc.

      If you have authored this item and are not yet registered with RePEc, we encourage you to do it here. This allows to link your profile to this item. It also allows you to accept potential citations to this item that we are uncertain about.

      If CitEc recognized a bibliographic reference but did not link an item in RePEc to it, you can help with this form .

      If you know of missing items citing this one, you can help us creating those links by adding the relevant references in the same way as above, for each refering item. If you are a registered author of this item, you may also want to check the "citations" tab in your RePEc Author Service profile, as there may be some citations waiting for confirmation.

      For technical questions regarding this item, or to correct its authors, title, abstract, bibliographic or download information, contact: plosone (email available below). General contact details of provider: https://journals.plos.org/plosone/ .

      Please note that corrections may take a couple of weeks to filter through the various RePEc services.

      IDEAS is a RePEc service. RePEc uses bibliographic data supplied by the respective publishers.