One-Step Calibration of AFM in Liquid

Nanomechanical measurements of cells and single molecules with atomic force microscopy (AFM) require accurate calibration of two parameters: the spring constant of the cantilever (k) and the inverse of the optical lever sensitivity (InvOLS). The most established calibration approach in liquid involv...

Full description

Bibliographic Details
Main Authors: Fidan Sumbul, Nahid Hassanpour, Jorge Rodriguez-Ramos, Felix Rico
Format: Article
Language:English
Published: Frontiers Media S.A. 2020-09-01
Series:Frontiers in Physics
Subjects:
Online Access:https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphy.2020.00301/full
id doaj-06894266cfa148c1ac310ff7ac8aafd7
record_format Article
spelling doaj-06894266cfa148c1ac310ff7ac8aafd72020-11-25T01:25:58ZengFrontiers Media S.A.Frontiers in Physics2296-424X2020-09-01810.3389/fphy.2020.00301551246One-Step Calibration of AFM in LiquidFidan SumbulNahid HassanpourJorge Rodriguez-RamosFelix RicoNanomechanical measurements of cells and single molecules with atomic force microscopy (AFM) require accurate calibration of two parameters: the spring constant of the cantilever (k) and the inverse of the optical lever sensitivity (InvOLS). The most established calibration approach in liquid involves determining the InvOLS by acquiring force-distance curves on a stiff surface, k is then calculated using the thermal spectrum (PSD) of the cantilever via the equipartition theorem. Recent studies have proposed using cantilevers with calibrated k and then determining the InvOLS from the thermal spectrum. These non-contact approaches improve the precision of nanomechanical measurements compared to conventional contact-based approaches. The Sader method or the recent global calibration initiative (GCI) are accurate approaches and do not require knowledge of the InvOLS to determine k, thus they would allow one-step calibration of AFM in liquid. However, both methods assume high quality factor cantilevers, not the case for most cantilevers in liquid. Here we assess the accuracy and precision of the Sader and GCI methods in liquid on two types of cantilevers with low Q-factor using two different PSD fitting models (SHO and Pirzer). We evaluate the two approaches using only the thermal spectrum in liquid to calibrate both k and the InvOLS. While both methods led to similar results, the GCI approach is less prone to systematic uncertainties and, using the SHO model, provides higher accuracy in k and the InvOLS. Therefore, the proposed SHO, GCI-based approach utilizing only the thermal spectrum in liquid is precise and accurate and allows one-step calibration of AFM.https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphy.2020.00301/fullatomic force microscopyspring constant (k)InvOLSoptical lever sensitivityQ-factorsader method
collection DOAJ
language English
format Article
sources DOAJ
author Fidan Sumbul
Nahid Hassanpour
Jorge Rodriguez-Ramos
Felix Rico
spellingShingle Fidan Sumbul
Nahid Hassanpour
Jorge Rodriguez-Ramos
Felix Rico
One-Step Calibration of AFM in Liquid
Frontiers in Physics
atomic force microscopy
spring constant (k)
InvOLS
optical lever sensitivity
Q-factor
sader method
author_facet Fidan Sumbul
Nahid Hassanpour
Jorge Rodriguez-Ramos
Felix Rico
author_sort Fidan Sumbul
title One-Step Calibration of AFM in Liquid
title_short One-Step Calibration of AFM in Liquid
title_full One-Step Calibration of AFM in Liquid
title_fullStr One-Step Calibration of AFM in Liquid
title_full_unstemmed One-Step Calibration of AFM in Liquid
title_sort one-step calibration of afm in liquid
publisher Frontiers Media S.A.
series Frontiers in Physics
issn 2296-424X
publishDate 2020-09-01
description Nanomechanical measurements of cells and single molecules with atomic force microscopy (AFM) require accurate calibration of two parameters: the spring constant of the cantilever (k) and the inverse of the optical lever sensitivity (InvOLS). The most established calibration approach in liquid involves determining the InvOLS by acquiring force-distance curves on a stiff surface, k is then calculated using the thermal spectrum (PSD) of the cantilever via the equipartition theorem. Recent studies have proposed using cantilevers with calibrated k and then determining the InvOLS from the thermal spectrum. These non-contact approaches improve the precision of nanomechanical measurements compared to conventional contact-based approaches. The Sader method or the recent global calibration initiative (GCI) are accurate approaches and do not require knowledge of the InvOLS to determine k, thus they would allow one-step calibration of AFM in liquid. However, both methods assume high quality factor cantilevers, not the case for most cantilevers in liquid. Here we assess the accuracy and precision of the Sader and GCI methods in liquid on two types of cantilevers with low Q-factor using two different PSD fitting models (SHO and Pirzer). We evaluate the two approaches using only the thermal spectrum in liquid to calibrate both k and the InvOLS. While both methods led to similar results, the GCI approach is less prone to systematic uncertainties and, using the SHO model, provides higher accuracy in k and the InvOLS. Therefore, the proposed SHO, GCI-based approach utilizing only the thermal spectrum in liquid is precise and accurate and allows one-step calibration of AFM.
topic atomic force microscopy
spring constant (k)
InvOLS
optical lever sensitivity
Q-factor
sader method
url https://www.frontiersin.org/article/10.3389/fphy.2020.00301/full
work_keys_str_mv AT fidansumbul onestepcalibrationofafminliquid
AT nahidhassanpour onestepcalibrationofafminliquid
AT jorgerodriguezramos onestepcalibrationofafminliquid
AT felixrico onestepcalibrationofafminliquid
_version_ 1725111389528260608