High-endurance mechanical switching in a DNA origami snap-through mechanism

Alexander Hebel; Christoph Karfusehr; Enzo Kopperger; Florian Rothfischer; Friedrich C. Simmel; Lennart J. K. Wei{\ss}; Matthias Vogt; Michael Matthies; Niccol\`o Tedeschi; Petr \v{S}ulc

REVIEW 4 major objections 5 minor 44 references

High-endurance mechanical switching in a DNA origami snap-through mechanism

T0 review · 4 major / 5 minor · reviewed 2026-08-15 · deepseek-v4-flash

Challenge this review Re-run · record.json Download PDF Read on arXiv ↗ Review JSON

Pith's one-line read A DNA origami snap-through mechanism is electrically toggled between two stable states in milliseconds and survives hundreds of thousands of cycles.

desk verdict A genuinely new DNA-origami switch that combines bistability, electrical actuation, and the first fatigue study; the headline energy-barrier numbers are softer than they look. read the letter →

arxiv 2505.10544 v1 pith:LRLWR5YE submitted 2025-05-15 physics.app-ph

Florian Rothfischer , Lennart J. K. Wei{ss} , Niccolò Tedeschi , Michael Matthies , Matthias Vogt , Christoph Karfusehr , Alexander Hebel , Petr Šulc

show 3 more authors

Tim Liedl Enzo Kopperger Friedrich C. Simmel

This is my paper · ORCID

classification physics.app-ph

keywords DNAorigamibistablemechanismsnap-throughelectricalactuationsingle-moleculefluorescenceplasmonicswitchingnanomechanicsdeviceendurance

verification ladder T0 review T1 audit T2 compute T3 formal

The pith

A machine-rendered reading of the paper's core claim, the machinery that carries it, and where it could break.

The reading

The paper reports a DNA-origami mechanical switch that snaps between two stable positions and is toggled by short electric-field pulses. It stays locked in either state for hours without power, yet switches in milliseconds when a field is applied, and individual devices survive hundreds of thousands of cycles. The authors argue this is the first molecular-scale mechanism to combine state stability, fast electrical actuation, and high endurance, and they use it to modulate the scattered light of a gold nanorod as a non-bleaching readout. If correct, it provides a durable electromechanical interface for molecular-scale switching, information storage, and optical devices.

What carries the argument

The load-bearing element is the double-well mechanical energy landscape $E(\varphi)=A\varphi^4-B\varphi^2+C$, fitted with $A=6.7\,k_{\mathrm{B}}T/\mathrm{rad}^4$, $B=19\,k_{\mathrm{B}}T/\mathrm{rad}^2$, and $C=11.2\,k_{\mathrm{B}}T$, placing the two minima near $\varphi\approx\pm 3\pi/8$ and the barrier at about $13.6\,k_{\mathrm{B}}T$; the barrier originates from an approximately 11 nm steric overlap at the elbow hinge between the two rotor arms. A charged 413 nm six-helix-bundle extension carrying 42 fluorescent dyes (or a gold nanorod) acts as the actuated lever, and the electric field adds a tilting term $\xi V_0\cos(\alpha-\varphi)$ with $\xi\approx 0.1\,k_{\mathrm{B}}T/\mathrm{V}$. Boltzmann inversion of single-molecule tip localizations gives the landscape, Kramers theory supplies escape rates and switching probabilities, and oxDNA simulations indicate that switching involves helix fraying, bending, and out-of-plane motion rather than a single rigid-body snap.

What would settle it

Measure, on the same device, both the lever-tip position and the internal rotor configuration—for example by labeling the two rotor arms with distinct colors and imaging in three dimensions (via two-focal-plane or defocused TIRF) while toggling the field—and check that every claimed switch changes the internal rotor angle by the designed amount, not merely the tip's projected position. A complementary check is TEM or cryo-EM of devices after many actuations to see whether failed particles have frayed or lost the expected rotor geometry.

Watch

Extended reading notes

Core claim

The central claim is that a DNA origami snap-through mechanism—two rigid six-helix-bundle rotor arms mounted on a base plate and joined by a flexible elbow—is mechanically bistable, with an energy barrier of about $13.6\,k_{\mathrm{B}}T$ separating the two states. The device can be switched between states by applying roughly 300 V electric fields for 1–100 ms, and after the field is removed it remains in the new state; no spontaneous transitions were seen while monitoring 70 switches for 1 h, consistent with a Kramers estimate of about 6 h. Switching efficiency reaches near 100% at 300 V when the device is oriented at the optimum angle to the field. The same constructs with a gold nanorod attached produce polarization-dependent scattering that follows switching up to 10 Hz, and continuous actuation shows a heterogeneous lifetime distribution with median 5,682 actuations by the top-performance criterion or 20,254 by the functionality criterion, with the best device completing 206,800 actuations at 94% mean efficiency. The paper thus claims the first demonstration of stable, fast, and highly repeated mechanical switching in a DNA nanodevice, together with a platform for studying molecular-scale fatigue and failure.

Load-bearing premise

The argument assumes the fluorescent tip's position faithfully reports the rotor's mechanical state—that the projected lever angle is the right reaction coordinate and the tip moves rigidly with the rotor—so the two localization clusters are the two designed states rather than out-of-plane wobble, surface effects, or partial damage.

Editorial extensions

If this is right

Millisecond electric pulses can toggle a nanoscale mechanical bit without continuous power, since both states remain stable after the field is removed.
The device offers a fatigue-test platform for DNA nanomachines, with measured actuations-to-failure following a long-tailed log-normal distribution and some devices showing partial recovery or delayed activation.
Attachment of a gold nanorod gives a polarization-dependent optical readout that does not photobleach, allowing continuous multi-day observation of single molecular switches.
The fitted landscape predicts that the energy barrier vanishes near 240 V at the optimum orientation, so switching yield can be tuned across voltage, pulse duration, and device angle.

Reading between the lines

Editorial extensions of the paper, not claims the author makes directly.

If the lever-tip state assignment is verified independently, arrays of these switches could encode addressable mechanical bits, though the random surface orientation currently requires post-hoc selection or alignment of favorably oriented devices.
The observed 'healing' effect hints that staple rebinding may repair partially damaged structures; a direct test would be to add free staple strands during extended actuation and ask whether failure is delayed.
The same metal-nanoparticle readout and endurance assay could be applied to other DNA nanodevices, giving a general measure of mechanical fatigue that is not limited by fluorophore bleaching.
The model's prediction of barrier collapse near 240 V is testable by measuring switching yield versus voltage around that threshold and comparing the pulse-length dependence to drift-time estimates.

Share X Bluesky LinkedIn Reddit HN

Signed reviews

No signed human review yet.

Editorial analysis

A structured set of objections, weighed in public.

Desk editor's note, referee report, and a circularity audit.

Desk Editor's Note

read the letter

Short version: this paper is worth engaging. The device is a DNA-origami snap-through mechanism that is mechanically bistable, toggles with millisecond electric-field pulses, and a single device survived ~207,000 actuations. That combination—bistability plus electrical control plus endurance data—has not been demonstrated before, and the fatigue/lifetime analysis (log-normal reliability, median vs. best, day-scale recovery) is a useful contribution on its own. The gold-nanorod readout is a nice independent signal that avoids photobleaching.

The experimental core is solid: direct TIRF tracking shows two well-separated positional clusters, field-induced transitions between them, and stability for hours with no spontaneous switching. The oxDNA simulations support the plausibility of the mechanism.

Now the soft spots, in proportion. The energy landscape in Fig. 2D is derived from the same localization distributions that define the states, and the 13.6 kBT barrier and 6 h lifetime come from a quartic fit to points near the minima—the transition region is explicitly not sampled. So those numbers are semi-quantitative, as the authors admit. The bigger assumption is that the projected tip angle φ is a good reaction coordinate for the elbow/rotor motion. The oxDNA simulations show bending and out-of-plane movement during switching, which could decouple the 2D tip projection from the internal mechanical state. The authors do not independently validate that φ is the right coordinate. That said, this does not undercut the basic claim: something is bistable and switchable, and the state assignments are consistent across fluorescence and scattering readouts. It does mean the barrier height and Kramers lifetime should be treated as estimates, not measurements.

Also, the headline endurance number is the best device. The median to failure (top-performance criterion) is 5,682 actuations, and the reliability curves come from pre-selected well-behaving particles. Those numbers are reported transparently, which is good, but the abstract's 'hundreds of thousands' should be read with that context.

Who this is for: anyone working on dynamic DNA nanodevices, molecular switches, or nanomechanical fatigue. It deserves a serious referee. For the revision, I'd push for a clearer statement that the barrier and lifetime are model-dependent estimates, and for any data that helps validate the reaction-coordinate assumption—for example, tracking both rotors or measuring under different immobilization geometries.

Recommendation: send to peer review.

Referee Report

4 major / 5 minor

Summary. The manuscript reports a DNA origami-based compliant mechanism with two mechanically stable states, actuated by transient electric fields. The authors immobilize the structure on a glass surface, track a fluorescent tip by TIRF microscopy, observe two well-separated positional clusters, and induce transitions between them with millisecond voltage pulses. They characterize switching efficiency as a function of voltage and pulse duration, demonstrate a plasmonic readout using gold nanorods, and report endurance statistics with the best device undergoing more than 200,000 actuations. From the localization histograms they construct an energy landscape, fit a quartic double-well potential, estimate a barrier of about 13.6 kBT and a Kramers lifetime of about 6 hours, and model field-induced barrier reduction. oxDNA simulations are used to support the switching mechanism.

Significance. If the core claims hold, this would be the first DNA nanodevice that simultaneously achieves long-term state stability, fast electrical actuation, and high cycling endurance. The paper's strengths are its direct single-molecule observations, the independent plasmonic intensity readout, the detailed design and sequence documentation in the Supplementary Information, and the systematic endurance analysis over several days. However, several quantitative and interpretive claims—the 13.6 kBT barrier, the 6 h lifetime, and the identification of the observed two-state behavior with the designed mechanical snap-through states—rest on assumptions that are not fully supported by the presented data. The central switching and endurance observations are plausible, but the quantitative energy-landscape claims and the reaction-coordinate interpretation require additional validation before the paper can be accepted.

major comments (4)

[Results, 'Energy landscape of the bistable switch' and 'Comparison to theoretical estimations'; Supplementary Note 3…] The barrier height of 13.6 kBT and the resulting Kramers lifetime of about 6 h are extrapolations from a quartic double-well potential fitted to localization data collected only near the two minima. The text itself states that the transition region cannot be reconstructed from the data, and the Methods note that bins without localizations were manually set to 10 kBT. This means the quoted barrier height, the lifetime, and the predicted barrier disappearance near 240 V are model-dependent estimates rather than measured quantities. The authors should either clearly re-label these as model estimates or provide an independent validation, for example from field-dependent escape-rate measurements, oxDNA free-energy profiles, or direct observation of spontaneous switching on a longer timescale.
[Results, 'Comparison to theoretical estimations'] The observation that 70 switches monitored for 1 hour show no spontaneous transitions is difficult to reconcile with the quoted estimate τ ≈ 6 h. Under the quoted Kramers rate of 4.5×10^-5 s^-1, the expected number of escape events in 70 device-hours is about 11, so observing zero events is statistically very unlikely. This inconsistency suggests that either the barrier/lifetime estimate is inaccurate or the state classifier does not detect transient excursions into the other state. Please address this discrepancy explicitly, since it directly concerns the central stability claim.
[Results, Fig. 2A-C; Methods, 'Analysis of single molecule fluorescence measurements'; Supplementary Note 2, Fig. S7] The two-state classification is based on k-means clustering of the two-dimensional projected tip positions, with particles manually selected if they showed the expected localization and movement pattern. The oxDNA simulations show that the rotor arms bend and move out of plane during the transition, so the projected angle φ is not demonstrated to be a one-to-one reaction coordinate for the internal elbow configuration. Without ruling out out-of-plane lever fluctuations, surface interactions, or partial disassembly as alternative sources of two tip clusters, the assignment of the observed bistability to the designed mechanical snap-through states remains an assumption. Please provide additional evidence, such as three-dimensional localization, independent structural verification before and after switching, or a quantitative assessment of the rigidity of the lever-rotor coupling.
[Results, Fig. 5; Methods, 'Analysis of scattering microscopy data'] The endurance statistics and survival curves depend on several analysis choices: the HMM/decision-tree classification with thresholds on amplitude, dwell time, and spectral power, and the preselection of particles that exceeded 80% switching efficiency at least once in the first 3 minutes. The reported median actuations-to-failure (5,682 and 20,254) and the log-normal reliability curves are therefore not uniquely determined by the raw data. Please report the sensitivity of the survival curves to these thresholds and to the preselection criterion, or provide a blinded validation of the state classifier against manually annotated traces.

minor comments (5)

[Methods, 'Transmission electron microscopy'] The word 'pushed' in 'as pusblished previously' is a typo and should read 'published'.
[Results, 'Characterization of switching behavior'] The word 'occuring' in 'heat dissipation occuring from the field application' should be spelled 'occurring'.
[Fig. 5 caption] In 'T emporal evolution', there is an unintended space; it should read 'Temporal evolution'.
[References] Several references have incomplete bibliographic details, for example reference [28] lacks the article number and reference [29] lacks volume/page information; please complete these entries.
[Data and Code Availability] The availability statements say that source data and code are available from the corresponding authors upon reasonable request. For a study of this type, deposition in a public repository would substantially improve reproducibility and should be considered.

Circularity Check

0 steps flagged · score 0.0 of 10

No significant circularity: the central switching and endurance claims are direct experimental observations, and the quartic/Kramers analysis is explicitly a semi-quantitative fit, not an independent prediction.

full rationale

The paper's main claims—bistable state retention without fields, electrical toggling on millisecond timescales, and endurance over hundreds of thousands of cycles—are supported by single-molecule fluorescence tracking (Figs. 2, 3), plasmonic scattering traces (Fig. 4), and reliability statistics (Fig. 5), none of which depend on the theoretical model. The energy-landscape section is candidly a fit: the distribution p(phi) is Boltzmann-inverted to E(phi), and a quartic fit yields A = 6.7 kBT/rad4, B = 19 kBT/rad2, and C = 11.2 kBT, giving Delta E = B^2/4A = 13.6 kBT. This is a parameter extraction rather than a prediction from first principles, and the paper labels its use as a semi-quantitative description. The Kramers lifetime and switching-yield estimates inherit the fitted barrier and the previously determined xi and gamma_r, but these are auxiliary rationalizations, not the load-bearing evidence for the main result; the paper even notes that the barrier shape cannot be reconstructed from the data and that several microscopic scenarios are possible. The self-citations for xi and gamma_r parameter values are prior external measurements on related DNA rotors and are not used to establish the target phenomenon. The acknowledged limitations—manual particle selection, projected lever angle as reaction coordinate, and possible out-of-plane motion—are validity risks for the mechanical interpretation, not circularity in the derivation chain. No step reduces to its inputs by construction or imports an unverified uniqueness result.

Assumptions & free parameters 5 free parameters · 6 assumptions · 0 invented entities

The paper fits a quartic double-well potential to single-molecule localization data and then uses those fitted parameters, together with friction and coupling constants from the same group's prior work, to estimate barrier height, state lifetime, and switching probabilities. The central experimental claims are independent of these model parameters, but the quantitative theoretical outputs are not self-contained predictions.

free parameters (5)

A (quartic coefficient) = 6.7 kBT/rad4
Fit of E(phi) = A phi^4 - B phi^2 + C to the Boltzmann-inverted localization histogram in Fig. 2D; determines barrier height and Kramers lifetime.
B (quartic coefficient) = 19 kBT/rad2
Same fit; together with A sets minima at phi around +/- 3pi/8 and barrier B^2/(4A).
C (quartic offset) = 11.2 kBT
Same fit; vertical offset, does not affect barrier or dynamics.
xi (voltage-to-energy coupling) = 0.1 kBT/V
Taken from prior work by the same group (Kopperger et al. 2018, Vogt et al. 2023) rather than fitted in this paper; converts applied voltage into tilt of the energy landscape and enters the switching-yield model.
gamma_r (rotational friction) = 0.24 kBT s (1 pN nm s)
Assumed from previous DNA origami rotor measurements [18,19]; used in Kramers escape-rate prefactor and in drift-time estimate.

assumptions (6)

domain assumption The two observed clusters of tip localizations correspond to the two designed mechanical states of the bistable switch, and the projected angle phi is the relevant reaction coordinate.
Load-bearing for all state assignment and energy landscape analysis; introduced in Fig. 2 and Methods.
ad hoc to paper The quartic double-well form E(phi) = A phi^4 - B phi^2 + C adequately represents the mechanical energy landscape, including the unsampled barrier region.
Introduced in 'Comparison to theoretical estimations' and SI Section 3; the barrier height 13.6 kBT is an extrapolation of this assumed shape, not a measured quantity.
domain assumption The electric field exerts a torque on the negatively charged DNA lever arm with coupling xi, tilting the energy landscape as xi V0 cos(alpha - phi).
Used in SI Section 3 to compute switching probabilities and the optimal angle alpha = pi/2; the effective charge and electrode distance are merged into xi.
standard math Kramers escape-rate theory in the overdamped limit describes thermally activated transitions between the two states.
Used to estimate state lifetime of about 6 h; requires the barrier to be much larger than kBT, which holds in the fit.
standard math Boltzmann inversion E(phi) = -kBT ln p(phi) + C is valid for the sampled regions near the minima.
Used to obtain the local energy landscape from localization counts; assumes thermal equilibrium sampling in each well.
domain assumption The 6HB DNA bundles can be treated as semi-flexible beams with persistence length scaling L_N^p = N L_p (1 + 2 sin^2(pi/N)).
Used in SI Section 3 mechanical considerations to estimate bending and buckling energies; this is an approximate continuum treatment of DNA origami.

how reviews work

0 comments

Cite this review

Pith. "Pith review of High-endurance mechanical switching in a DNA origami snap-through mechanism." pith.science (2026). https://pith.science/paper/LRLWR5YE

@misc{pith2026250510544,
  author       = {Pith},
  title        = {Pith review of: High-endurance mechanical switching in a DNA origami snap-through mechanism},
  year         = {2026},
  howpublished = {\url{https://pith.science/paper/LRLWR5YE}},
  note         = {Machine review of arXiv:2505.10544}
}

read the original abstract

Switchable elements are key components of dynamic technological and biological systems, enabling reversible transitions between well-defined states. Here, we present a DNA origami-based, mechanically bistable snap-through mechanism that can be electrically controlled. This nanoscale switch exhibits long-term stability in both states in the absence of external stimuli, while achieving millisecond-scale switching times upon application of an electric field. Individual devices sustain hundreds of thousands of switching cycles over several hours, offering a powerful platform for systematically studying the endurance and failure mechanisms of biomolecular nanoswitches. Functionalization with a gold nanorod further allows polarization-dependent optical modulation, opening avenues for applications in plasmonics. This versatile electromechanical interface has potential uses in molecular information processing, optical nanodevices, and the dynamic control of chemical reactions.

Discussion (0). Continue with ORCID to comment.

Reference graph

Works this paper leans on

44 extracted references · 42 canonical work pages

[1]

Howell, L. L. Compliant mechanisms, 189–216 (Springer, 2013)

work page 2013
[2]

& Cao, C

Cao, Y ., Derakhshani, M., Fang, Y ., Huang, G. & Cao, C. Bistable structures for advanced functional systems. Advanced Functional Materials 31, 2106231 (2021)

work page 2021
[3]

Chi, Y . et al. Bistable and multistable actuators for soft robots: Structures, materials, and functionalities. Advanced Materials 34, 2110384 (2022)

work page 2022
[4]

Cherry, J. L. & Adler, F . R. How to make a Biological Switch. Journal of Theoretical Biology 203, 117–133 (2000). 16

work page 2000
[5]

S., Cantor, C

Gardner, T . S., Cantor, C. R. & Collins, J. J. Construction of a genetic toggle switch in Escherichia coli. Nature 403, 339–342 (2000)

work page 2000
[6]

& Ferrell Jr, J

Xiong, W. & Ferrell Jr, J. E. A positive-feedback-based bistable ‘memory module’that governs a cell fate decision. Nature 426, 460–465 (2003)

work page 2003
[7]

Ferrell Jr, J. E. Self-perpetuating states in signal transduction: positive feedback, double- negative feedback and bistability. Current opinion in cell biology 14, 140–148 (2002)

work page 2002
[8]

K., T yson, J

Verdugo, A., Vinod, P . K., T yson, J. J. & Novak, B. Molecular mechanisms creating bistable switches at cell cycle transitions. Open Biology 3, 120179 (2013)

work page 2013

Show all 44 references

[9]

A., Tolman, K

Zirbel, S. A., Tolman, K. A., Trease, B. P . & Howell, L. L. Bistable mechanisms for space applications. PloS one 11, e0168218 (2016)

2016
[10]

Kota, S. et al. Design and application of compliant mechanisms for surgical tools. Journal of Biomechanical Engineering (2005)

2005
[11]

E., Su, H.-J

Zhou, L., Marras, A. E., Su, H.-J. & Castro, C. E. Dna origami compliant nanostructures with tunable mechanical properties. ACS nano 8, 27–34 (2014)

2014
[12]

Pumm, A.-K. et al. A DNA origami rotary ratchet motor. Nature 607, 492–498 (2022)

2022
[13]

Kopperger, E. et al. A self-assembled nanoscale robotic arm controlled by electric ﬁelds. Science 359, 296–301 (2018)

2018
[14]

E., Su, H.-J

Zhou, L., Marras, A. E., Su, H.-J. & Castro, C. E. Direct design of an energy landscape with bistable dna origami mechanisms. Nano letters 15, 1815–1821 (2015)

2015
[15]

E., Zhou, L., Su, H.-J

Marras, A. E., Zhou, L., Su, H.-J. & Castro, C. E. Programmable motion of dna origami mechanisms. Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences 112, 713–718 (2015)

2015
[16]

Jensen, B. D. & Howell, L. L. Identiﬁcation of Compliant Pseudo-Rigid-Body Four-Link Mecha- nism Conﬁgurations Resulting in Bistable Behavior. Journal of Mechanical Design 125, 701–708 (2003)

2003
[17]

& Borkovec, M

Hänggi, P ., T alkner, P . & Borkovec, M. Reaction-rate theory: ﬁfty years after Kramers. Reviews of Modern Physics 62, 251–341 (1990)

1990
[18]

Vogt, M. et al. Storage of mechanical energy in dna nanorobotics using molecular torsion springs. Nature Physics 19, 741–751 (2023). 17

2023
[19]

& Simmel, F

Rothﬁscher, F ., Vogt, M., Kopperger, E., Gerland, U. & Simmel, F . C. From brownian to deterministic motor movement in a dna-based molecular rotor. Nano Letters 24, 5224–5230 (2024)

2024
[20]

J., Campolongo, M

T an, S. J., Campolongo, M. J., Luo, D. & Cheng, W. Building plasmonic nanostructures with DNA. Nature 6, 268 – 276 (2011)

2011
[21]

Kuzyk, A. et al. DNA-based self-assembly of chiral plasmonic nanostructures with tailored optical response. Nature 483, 311–314 (2012). URL http://dx.doi.org/10.1038/nature10889

2012 doi
[22]

Kuzyk, A. et al. Reconﬁgurable 3d plasmonic metamolecules. Nature materials 13, 862–866 (2014)

2014
[23]

& Liu, N

Xin, L., Zhou, C., Duan, X. & Liu, N. A rotary plasmonic nanoclock. Nature Communications 10, 5394 (2019)

2019
[24]

Doricchi, A. et al. Emerging Approaches to DNA Data Storage: Challenges and Prospects. ACS Nano 16, 17552–17571 (2022)

2022
[25]

& Fan, C

Wang, S., Mao, X., Wang, F ., Zuo, X. & Fan, C. Data Storage Using DNA. Advanced Materials e2307499 (2023)

2023
[26]

B., Pardatscher, G., Kuzyk, A

Scheible, M. B., Pardatscher, G., Kuzyk, A. & Simmel, F . C. Single Molecule Characterization of DNA Binding and Strand Displacement Reactions on Lithographic DNA Origami Microarrays. Nano Letters 14, 1627–1633 (2014)

2014
[27]

& Rothemund, P

Gopinath, A., Miyazono, E., Faraon, A. & Rothemund, P . W. K. Engineering and mapping nanocavity emission via precision placement of DNA origami. Nature 535, 401–405 (2016)

2016
[28]

Gopinath, A. et al. Absolute and arbitrary orientation of single-molecule shapes. Science 371 (2021)

2021
[29]

Rosier, B. J. et al. Proximity-induced caspase-9 activation on a dna origami-based synthetic apoptosome. Nature catalysis 3, 295–306 (2020)

2020
[30]

Douglas, S. M. et al. Rapid prototyping of 3D DNA-origami shapes with caDNAno. Nucleic Acids Research 37, 5001–5006 (2009). URL https://doi.org/10.1093/nar/gkp436

2009 doi
[31]

G., Praetorius, F

Stahl, E., Martin, T . G., Praetorius, F . & Dietz, H. Facile and scalable preparation of pure and dense dna origami solutions. Angewandte Chemie 126, 12949–12954 (2014)

2014
[32]

Büchl, A. et al. Energy landscapes of rotary dna origami devices determined by ﬂuorescence particle tracking. Biophysical Journal (2022). 18

2022
[33]

T ., Schlichthaerle, T ., Schueder, F

Schnitzbauer, J., Strauss, M. T ., Schlichthaerle, T ., Schueder, F . & Jungmann, R. Super- resolution microscopy with dna-paint. Nature protocols 12, 1198–1228 (2017). 19 High-endurance mechanical switching in a DNA origami snap-through mechanism Supplementary Information Flo...

2017
[34]

DNA origami design details 3 Dimensions and design ﬁles 3 Scaﬀold versions 8 8,064 scaﬀold 8 7,249 scaﬀold 11 Staple sequences 15
[35]

oxDNA switching simulations 24
[36]

Theoretical considerations 25 Quartic potential 25 Kramers escape rate 25 External potential 26 Combined potential 27 Escape rate as a function of voltage 28 Mechanical considerations for snap-through mechanism 30 Beam-bending 30 Buckling 31 Force-induced melting 31 References 32 3
[37]

Key dimensional parameters of the structure are sho wn in Supplemental Figure S1

DNA ORIGAMI DESIGN DETAILS Dimensions and design ﬁles The full bistable switch structure consists of three design par ts, which are folded in two separate folding reactions. Key dimensional parameters of the structure are sho wn in Supplemental Figure S1. The design shown in S...

1901
[38]

OXDNA SWITCHING SIMULATIONS To gain deeper insight into the possible switching mechanism of ou r bistable switch structure, we performed oxDNA simulations under applied external forces. FIG. S6. Visualization of the applied force on the rotor arm. The eﬀective force was distri...
[39]

THEORETICAL CONSIDERATIONS In the following, we present a semi-quantitative analysis of th e bistable switching behavior observed in our system. Several model parameters are only approximately kno wn—most notably, the coupling factor ξ, which accounts for the conversion of app...
[40]

Kopperger, E. et al. A self-assembled nanoscale robotic arm controlled by electr ic ﬁelds. Science 359, 296–301 (2018)

2018
[41]

Vogt, M. et al. Storage of mechanical energy in dna nanorobotics using mole cular torsion springs. Nature Physics 19, 741–751 (2023)

2023
[42]

& Si mmel, F

Rothﬁscher, F., Vogt, M., Kopperger, E., Gerland, U. & Si mmel, F. C. From brownian to deterministic motor movement in a dna-based molecular rotor. Nano Letters 24, 5224–5230 (2024)

2024
[43]

Vogt, M. et al. Electrokinetic torque generation by dna nanorobotic arms s tudied via single-molecule ﬂuctuation analysis. The Journal of Physical Chemistry B 127, 10710–10722 (2023)

2023
[44]

& Marko, J

Yan, J. & Marko, J. F. Localized single-stranded bubble m echanism for cyclization of short double helix dna. Phys. Rev. Lett. 93, 108108 (2004). URL https://link.aps.org/doi/10.1103/PhysRevLett.93.108108

2004 doi

Pith tools

Reviewed August 15, 2026 · model on record in the stance chip above.

[1] [1]

Howell, L. L. Compliant mechanisms, 189–216 (Springer, 2013)

work page 2013

[2] [2]

& Cao, C

Cao, Y ., Derakhshani, M., Fang, Y ., Huang, G. & Cao, C. Bistable structures for advanced functional systems. Advanced Functional Materials 31, 2106231 (2021)

work page 2021

[3] [3]

Chi, Y . et al. Bistable and multistable actuators for soft robots: Structures, materials, and functionalities. Advanced Materials 34, 2110384 (2022)

work page 2022

[4] [4]

Cherry, J. L. & Adler, F . R. How to make a Biological Switch. Journal of Theoretical Biology 203, 117–133 (2000). 16

work page 2000

[5] [5]

S., Cantor, C

Gardner, T . S., Cantor, C. R. & Collins, J. J. Construction of a genetic toggle switch in Escherichia coli. Nature 403, 339–342 (2000)

work page 2000

[6] [6]

& Ferrell Jr, J

Xiong, W. & Ferrell Jr, J. E. A positive-feedback-based bistable ‘memory module’that governs a cell fate decision. Nature 426, 460–465 (2003)

work page 2003

[7] [7]

Ferrell Jr, J. E. Self-perpetuating states in signal transduction: positive feedback, double- negative feedback and bistability. Current opinion in cell biology 14, 140–148 (2002)

work page 2002

[8] [8]

K., T yson, J

Verdugo, A., Vinod, P . K., T yson, J. J. & Novak, B. Molecular mechanisms creating bistable switches at cell cycle transitions. Open Biology 3, 120179 (2013)

work page 2013