Skip to main content
. Author manuscript; available in PMC: 2016 Nov 1.
Published in final edited form as: Nat Protoc. 2016 Oct 20;11(11):2287–2299. doi: 10.1038/nprot.2016.137

TABLE 3.

Comparison of polymer brush–coated AuNPs and amphiphilic block co-polymer–encapsulated AuNPs.

Amphiphilic polymer brush attached to the AuNP surface Amphiphilic block co-polymer encapsulation of AuNPs
Conjugation method Covalent gold–thiol (Au–S) bond Hydrophobic–hydrophobic interactions41,47
Advantages Stable in organic solvent or water Polymer thickness can be easily tuned
Both hydrophilic and hydrophobic polymer brushes can be attached to the AuNP surface The polymer layer can cover the whole AuNP
Can be self-assembled into various nanostructures, such as dimers and vesicles Only amphiphilic block co-polymers are needed to encapsulate AuNPs
The ratio of hydrophilic to hydrophobic polymer brushes can be easily tuned
Limitations The polymer graft density is limited because of the steric hindrance of the polymer brush The AuNPs should be modified with hydrophobic ligand first before encapsulation by the polymer
The reaction method needs longer time to grow hydrophobic polymer brushes The AuNPs cannot disperse in solvents that can dissolve the hydrophobic polymer