Particle detection and tracking with DNA
Ciaran A. J. O’Hare,1, 2, ∗ Vassili G. Matsos,2 Joseph Newton,2 Karl Smith,2 Joel Hochstetter,2 Ravi Jaiswar,2 Wunna Kyaw,3 Aimee McNamara,4 Zdenka Kuncic,2 Sushma Nagaraja Grellscheid,5 and Celine´ Bœhm1, 2 1ARC Centre of Excellence for Dark Matter Particle Physics, The University of Sydney, NSW, Australia 2School of Physics, Physics Road, The University of Sydney, NSW 2006 Camperdown, Sydney, Australia 3Garvan Institute of Medical Research, NSW 2010, Darlinghurst, Australia 4Department of Radiation Oncology, Massachusetts General Hospital, Harvard Medical School, Boston, MA, USA 5Computational Biology Unit, Department of Biological Sciences, University of Bergen, Thormohlensgt 55, Bergen N-5008, Norway We present the first proof-of-concept simulations of detectors using biomaterials to detect particle interac- tions. The essential idea behind a “DNA detector” involves the attachment of a forest of precisely-sequenced single or double-stranded nucleic acids from a thin holding layer made of a high-density material. Incoming par- ticles break a series of strands along a roughly co-linear chain of interaction sites and the severed segments then fall to a collection area. Since the sequences of base pairs in nucleic acid molecules can be precisely amplified and measured using polymerase chain reaction (PCR), the original spatial position of each broken strand inside the detector can be reconstructed with nm precision. Motivated by the potential use as a low-energy directional particle tracker, we perform the first Monte Carlo simulations of particle interactions inside a DNA detector. We compare the track topology as a function of incoming direction, energy, and particle type for a range of ionising particles. While particle identification and energy reconstruction might be challenging without a sig- ◦ nificant scale-up, the excellent potential angular and spatial resolution (. 25 axial resolution for a keV-scale particles and nm-scale track segments) are clear advantages of this concept. We conclude that a DNA detector could be a cost-effective, portable, and powerful new particle detection technology. We outline the outstanding experimental challenges, and suggest directions for future laboratory tests.
I. INTRODUCTION features that we will discuss shortly. The general idea consists of strands of DNA attached to a thin gold sheet. Dark matter In the search for signatures of new physics, fresh exper- particles from our galaxy would enter the detector, scatter off imental ideas are always desired. Ultrahigh energy cosmic a gold nucleus, and send it on a recoil through the DNA forest, rays [1], weakly-interacting particles orbiting the galaxy [2– breaking a sequence of strands in a characteristic pattern. The 4], light species emitted by the Sun [5–10], or even the search broken segments would be encouraged to fall down to a col- for relics of the Big Bang [11], are just a few of the fron- lecting area with the use of magnetic beads attached to their tiers in particle physics which would greatly benefit from ends. After that, they would be transported to devices that per- new technologies. Recently there has been substantial ac- form polymerase chain reaction (PCR) to amplify the strand tivity in the community towards the repurposing of interdis- segments. Then, by studying the precise sequences of bases ciplinary science. Ideas leveraging cutting edge research in in the collected strand segments, one could infer the original condensed matter physics [12–18], nuclear magnetic reso- spatial positions in the detector at which each strand was sev- nance [19, 20], nanomaterials [21–23] and even microscopy ered, thereby reconstructing complete particle tracks. of ancient rocks [24–33] have all been proposed in the context Since the original DNA detector proposal, state-of-the-art of new particle detection techniques. dark matter detectors [2–4] have exceeded the ton-scale in This study follows a similar spirit, but instead seeks to size—providing a level of sensitivity that is difficult for en- use technologies from the biosciences. From proton ther- tirely new technologies to compete with. Therefore the pri- apy to medical imaging, particle physics techniques have re- mary benefit of such a DNA detector in the context of dark peatedly proven their use in biological applications since the matter right now would be the ability to perform directional 1950s [34]. Here we propose to return the favour, by asking measurements of low-energy recoils. Indeed, dark matter how we might leverage advances in biotechnology to answer signals are expected to be strongly directional [39], a phe- fundamental questions in particle physics. nomenon generated by the orbit of the solar system through The concept of a DNA-based particle detector was origi- the dark matter halo that envelopes our galaxy [40]. A search arXiv:2105.11949v1 [physics.ins-det] 25 May 2021 nally proposed in articles by Drukier et al. [35, 36] to help for recoil tracks aligning with the direction of our galactic ro- elucidate the answer to one of those questions: The nature of tation would permit a convincing test of the veracity of any po- dark matter—a mysterious substance that is supposed to fill tential dark matter signal [39, 41–46], but would also allow it the galaxy in which we live [37]. The basic detector concept to be cleanly distinguished from sources of background noise is shown in Fig.1. We follow the essential features of the such as cosmic rays, radioactive decays, and neutrinos [47– original design of Ref. [38], but incorporate some additional 50]. The reconstruction of particle tracks is challenging at the low energies relevant for a dark matter search. Hence, di- rectional information is usually not sought after in the most ∗ [email protected] competitive experiments, instead requiring more specialised 2
Incoming
t
✓
II. RATIONALE
In most of the widely-used low-energy particle detectors, 2000 bases even a hypothetical reconstruction of three-dimensional recoil track vectors is difficult to imagine. In dedicated directional detectors, like gas-based detectors, the solution is to drift the L
Recoil
y
x
L = L Currently, the basic DNA detector concept shown in Fig.1
has no theoretical or experimental validation, but it has t
Sugar phosphate ogy techniques. Adeniner =0Adenine.5nm bases bases
Ultimately, our aim is to make the first quantitative anal- Sugar phosphater =0r =0.5nm.5nm
bases
Ref. [35]. To achieve this, we perform Monte Carlo sim-
ulations based on the widely-used particle interaction soft- z r
structed with the Geant4 front-end software TOPAS [84] and
the TOPAS-nBio radiobiology toolkit [85]. r
III. DETECTOR SETUP FIG. 2. Closeup of DNA strand model setup constructed in TOPAS and which is used to count incoming particle interactions with Geant4. The model shown here is a simplification of a dou- A large number of factors would need to be taken into con- ble stranded DNA molecule. The central yellow cylinder with radius sideration when constructing a detector with a level of com- 0.5 nm represents the sequence of base pairs, which for simplicity plexity like this. Therefore, as a starting point, we follow the we assume are all composed of adenine. The winding sugar phos- baseline configuration proposed in Ref. [35] where the detec- phate backbones (red/blue) each are made of cylindrical segments tor is comprised of a holder made of a thin film of high-density with heights in the z-direction of 0.34 nm. Since we assume a 2000 material (in their case gold), from which long strands of sin- base-long DNA strand, the total height of the detector Lz = 680 nm. Though this is not in any way a biologically accurate model of a DNA gle or double-stranded nucleic acids are hung. As shown in strand, it does still reflect the basic geometry and broad composition, Fig.1, it is assumed that a particle (either a primary particle which is what is important for our simulation. incident on the DNA, or a secondary product of an interaction taking place elsewhere in the detector) will break a sequence of strands in a roughly straight line that correlates with its di- rection of travel. A. The strands We begin by orienting a Cartesian coordinate system where the x y plane is parallel to the holder, and the z direc- Each strand of DNA is built individually using the model tion is− parallel to the strands. The resolution in the plane is shown in the closeup of Fig.2. A more realistic model of a given by ∆x, which we will refer to as the interstrand spac- DNA strand would be prohibitively complex for these simu- ing. The total volume of the detector is given by V = A L lations, but it is also not obvious that it would change any of · z where A is the area of the holder, and Lz is the length of each our results substantially. Instead, we use this simplified model strand. Before placing the strands, the box is a vacuum. Ide- to represent the basic composition and geometry. Each strand ally, we would simulate detectors with side lengths larger than consists of a central cylinder representing the bases, with ei- µm. However, due to rapid increases in computational cost ther one or two sugar phosphate backbones made of quarter in∼ building a detector event counter with such a high spatial cylinders wrapping around the bases. We find no quantitative granularity we are limited in the overall size we can simulate difference in results by using single or double-stranded mod- to around 10 µm3. Furthermore, due to the low density of els up to an increase in interaction rate for the latter, which we the detector, it will generally be the case that incident parti- utilise in all later results. We fix a total strand length of 680 cles are unlikely to be stopped completely inside V . This is nm, which corresponds to 2000 of these bases. This repre- also likely to be true of a real experiment which will proba- sents a long, but computationally feasible length that would bly need to consist, for practical reasons, of several smaller also be around the longest strand that could be sequenced detector modules. While there should be many additional ob- cheaply in the lab with naturally-occurring DNA, or PCR by- servables that can be extracted from particle tracks extending products. The bases are crudely modelled using only a sin- across multiple smaller units, we defer this kind of analysis to gle nucleobase, adenine, with molecular ratio 4:5:5 (H:C:N) a future study building on the present one. Here we seek to and a mean excitation energy of 72 eV, whereas the backbone understand the signals present at the nanoscale, since that is is modelled as a custom material with a 2.26:0.44:5.59:1.35 one of the claimed advantages of this concept. (C:H:N:P) molecular ratio and the same mean excitation en- We now briefly discuss the important details of the principal ergy. components of the detector: the strands, the holder, and the An essential assumption we must make is how much en- readout. ergy deposition is needed to break a DNA molecule. Exper- 4 imental and theoretical studies, e.g. Refs. [86, 87], show that ently across the nucleus (see e.g. Ref. [88]). So while gold a DNA strand can be broken by ionising radiation depositing is certainly attractive from this point of view, such a require- energies above 10 eV. In principle, this energy scale sets the ment may not be so necessary for all applications, like for absolute minimum threshold for registering a strand breakage, studying cosmic rays or radioactive backgrounds. Rather, the though other energy scales required for detection will almost consequently higher density could be detrimental. A rough certainly be larger than this. So we implement 10 eV as a min- Lindhard-Ziegler stopping power calculation [89] suggests imum threshold for registering a strand break site, although it that a 10 nm thickness of gold foil would generally stop the is generally the case that the majority of primary interactions majority of nuclear recoils below around 20 keV. Even for deposit sufficient energy. recoils scattering slightly above this, the typical final ener- To get the strands to fall to the readout plane, it is envis- gies will be low and harder to detect, and the scattering angles aged that the free end of each strand that is not attached to would be much wider than the angle of the initial recoil gener- the holder would be fitted with a magnetic bead. The mag- ated inside the foil. Therefore a good balance for other appli- netic pull would then act to keep the strands in place, prevent cations may be a lower density material like copper. Copper is them from curling up, and would attract the severed segments a commonly used material in particle detectors requiring low towards the bottom of the detector to be collected. Several background materials. Screening of copper for the NEXT- complications may arise with this strategy, that we will dis- 100 neutrinoless double beta decay experiment, for example, cuss in Sec.VI. But for now, we simply need to specify a revealed ultralow-background levels of .0.08 mBq/kg ( U, K value for ∆x. Ensuring that the strands fall and arrive at the and Th) [90]. High-purity copper nanofoils with thicknesses readout will place a restriction on ∆x since we must ensure down to around 10 nm are commercially available. How- that, subject to the magnetic pull, the strands fall to the read- ever, as the holder makes up the majority of the target mass of out plane without connecting to their neighbouring strands the detector, a highly radiopure material is likely to be non- in some way. We also need to ensure that the strands can negotiable. For instance, ideally this copper would be stored be attached to the holder at regular intervals of ∆x. Since in underground conditions as much as possible to avoid cos- this optimisation will require experimental investigation we mogenic activation [91] of 60Co. Ultimately, while this strat- do not vary ∆x from the baseline value of 10 nm suggested egy may be reasonable in the context of copper, it may be by Ref. [35]. Importantly, for the small-scale simulations we more difficult to achieve with gold foils. employ here, varying ∆x does not meaningfully change our results. Since the energy depositions, dE/dx, are still rela- The final major requirement of the holder material men- tively low, a larger value of ∆x merely amounts to a rescaling tioned above is to act as a substrate to attach the strands to. of the total track lengths by the same factor. We also do not This is relatively common practice in DNA nanotechnology. explore non-rectangular grids for the strands, though this is Another motivation behind gold in this context is that gold- also something that could be investigated and would enhance DNA attachment is readily achievable via the use of a sulfur- the density of the detector. based thiol group [92]. The experimental challenge that this presents is how to ensure the strands are arranged in a regular pattern with precisely known positions. Several options are B. Holder available, but will need experimental investigation. One could be to use geometric nanowells arranged in a zig-zag like pat- In Ref. [35] the holder layer was assumed to be made from tern to create preferential positions for the thiol attachment, as gold, and for the sake of having a benchmark, we use this in Ref. [93]. Alternatively, the substrate could be pre-prepared material in our simulation as well. However, we note that gold with DNA origami nanostructures to which the strands would is not the only feasible choice for the holder material, and the then attach [94, 95]. majority of our results either do not depend on this choice, or could be qualitatively mapped on to any other relatively dense For the detector to achieve its claimed nm-precise posi- material. tion reconstruction, the positions at which strand are placed The main requirements of the holder material are: 1) that need to be known to the same precision. We note in passing it provides a high-density source of nuclear recoil events, 2) however, that is not the same as requiring that the strands are that it can be manufactured to nm-scale thicknesses, and 3) placed at specific locations to nm-precision: it is our knowl- that it can function as a substrate for the attachment of DNA. edge of where the strands are that needs to be nm-precise. A more informed selection of the holder material would there- Therefore, a setup in which a substrate was prepared with fore require more optimisation, and this would depend upon a DNA origami structures arranged roughly in a grid, then pre- specific purpose to be chosen for the detector. We outline how cisely imaged using some form of microscopy (e.g. the nm- such an argument could be made below. precise technique called DNA-PAINT [96]), would work just The first requirement is to enhance the rate of nuclear re- as well. coils, which would be particularly attractive in the context of searches for dark matter in the form of weakly interacting For our simulation, we make no assumptions about exactly massive particles. These searches benefit from heavier nuclei, how the strands are attached to the holder. We simply simulate since spin-independent dark matter cross sections would scale the holder as a square layer of gold with a constant density of with the mass number squared when the DM interacts coher- 19.32 g cm−3, area A = 1µm2, and thickness t = 10 nm. 5
C. Readout gorithmically sequencing the strands to cover even large vol- umes is not anticipated to be problematic. For example, a par- The precise readout and reconstruction process is not the ticular terminal sequence of bases appended to the very end of the strand (before the magnetic bead) would mark the x y subject of this study, however we make a few comments to − add some clarity about how this stage could work in theory. position, and then the rest of the z-extent of the strand could In broad terms, the envisioned readout will consist of a layer be identical throughout the whole detector. A combination using microfluidics to transport the fallen strands in a chrono- of many marker sequences could then be used to arrange the logical order out of the detector volume. Batches of strands strands inside each smaller unit to construct a larger detector. would then be amplified and read-out using a host of PCR In the current detector design, we can only assume that each machines. strand is able to detect a single interaction. Once a strand is PCR machines are widely used across many fields, from broken by an interaction, the part of the strand that remains biomedical research to archaeology, whenever DNA samples attached to the holder will no longer be stretched out by the are needed to be amplified to detectable levels. A conven- magnetic force which kept the bottom end in place prior to tional PCR machine performs a sequence of chemical pro- the interaction. Therefore it is highly likely that this strand cesses which, when repeated many times, results in the ex- segment will begin to curl up. While it is possible for an inter- ponential replication of an initial input DNA strand template. action to sever part of the curled strand, it may be undesirable There are three basic stages to PCR: first, the DNA sample to use this information in analysis because the reconstructed is heated to 95–98◦C causing it to denature into its single bases would no longer correspond to the z-position of the in- strands; then, the sample is cooled to allow specially chosen teraction. Ultimately this means that the detector has a finite complementary ‘primer’ strands to anneal to the ends of the lifetime, with an effective target mass that diminishes with the single strands; then in the final step, an enzyme called DNA number of interactions it measures. Determining this lifetime polymerase is used to elongate the annealed strands result- would require additional input that is outside of the focus here: ing in two copies of the initial template DNA. The process including the background conditions of the detector, as well as can then be repeated on the copied templates to achieve ex- the typical exposure that would be needed for some particular ponential multiplication of the DNA. To optimise the process, science goal. the sample must be heated and cooled to facilitate the three An added benefit of nm-scale position reconstruction temperature-dependent reactions. This is achieved with an in- within the detector, is that this style of experiment is naturally strument known as a thermocycler which has recently been bestowed with an obvious strategy for fiducialization. This adapted for use in microfluidic devices [97]. refers to the ability to define a volume within the interior of the The PCR machine would effectively act as an amplification detector bulk where the rate of background events is expected stage (in analogy to a gas electron multiplier or other similar to be significantly lower. This is typically because rare or non- technologies used in conventional directional detectors) and background events are equally likely to scatter anywhere in will allow the sequence of bases that make up each strand to the detector volume, whereas background events, e.g. from be reconstructed. The main limitation here is on the length radioimpurities, are more likely to occur close to the edges of of the DNA strands Lz that can be amplified both efficiently the detector. In many dark matter experiments, for instance, and accurately. This will limit the maximum dimension of fiducialization of the detector volume is an important design the detector unit in the z direction. We fix Lz to 680 nm in consideration [98]. Especially in gas-based directional detec- this study which corresponds to around 2000 bases and a total tors, which drift tracks of ionisation from the point of depo- volume of 0.69 µm3. We anticipate that a full-size detector sition to the readout, absolute position localisation along the would consist of a coordinated array of these smaller units. drift direction often places requirements on the type of gas and The PCR output can then be sequenced using high throughput readout used [99, 100]. As mentioned above, we do not per- approaches, such as Illumina or Nanopore sequencing, fol- form any background studies here, but simply remark that the lowing well-established protocols used in genomics research. precise position reconstruction brings additional advantages that are not the focus of this work.
D. Event reconstruction IV. SIMULATION After the readout stage and the sequences of each broken strand have been reconstructed, this information must then be Simulations were performed using the TOPAS-nBio radio- converted back into the (x, y, z) positions of each break site. biology extension [85] of TOPAS version 3.3 [84], which To reconstruct a track from breakage sites both the initial lo- uses Geant4 version 10.6 [82, 83]. The interaction types cations of each strand on the holder (x, y), and the particu- simulated consist of multiple scatters, coupled transporta- lar base at which each strand was cut must be measured pre- tion, and ionisation. The Geant4 physics models used in- cisely. It is relatively safe to assume that once the sequence clude: low energy electromagnetic physics (Livermore model, of bases of each cut strand is known (via amplification at the g4em-lowep), stopping physics (g4stopping) and ion physics PCR stage) the three coordinates can be determined precisely. (g4ion). We did not use Geant4-DNA models [101] as the This must be enabled by sequencing each individual strand in negligible effect on these simulations did not warrant the ad- the detector with a unique, and precise, pattern of bases. Al- ditional computational overhead. Instead, the simulations are 6
101 ingly small (even if the incident particle enters vertically). Put Proton Carbon Electron together, we end up with a minimum x y resolution given Alpha Gold Gamma by ∆x = ∆y = 10 nm, and a z-resolution− ∆z = 0.34 nm. 100 The primary particles from which all the Monte Carlo sam- ples originate is referred to as the “beam”. From the symmetry of our setup, we need only specify incoming particles with a 1 10− vector defined by one angle, i.e. cos θin), where an incidence angle θin = 0 corresponds to a particle travelling perpendic- 000 ular to the DNA and parallel to the holder. We will generally DNA
P 2 show results for three scenarios: a beam incident from the top- 10− ◦ down directly onto the holder θin = 90 , a beam incident onto ◦ the holder at an angle θin = 45 , and a beam incident directly side-on to the strands with θ = 0◦. Unless otherwise stated, 3 in 10− the incident particles originate outside the detector.
4 10− 2 1 0 1 2 3 4 B. Events 10− 10− 10 10 10 10 10 Energy [keV] We perform simulations across a wide range of input pa- rameters describing the beam: varying beam energies between FIG. 3. Probability of particle-DNA interaction depositing an en- ◦ ergy larger than 10 eV in a single component volume of the DNA, Ein = 100 eV to 10 GeV; θin between 0 and 90 ; and beam when the beam was fired directly at a strand. This is a proxy for particles including protons, alphas, heavy ions, electrons and the particle-DNA cross-section for severing a strand. The spurious photons. We do not explicitly simulate the production of gold threshold effects around 0.1 keV for electrons and 1 keV for ions are recoils from the holder, or carbon recoils from the strands. In- due to limitations of the available electromagnetic physics models. stead, to have more control over our results, we included gold Hence we will not perform in depth analysis of particles energies and carbon nuclei as primary particle types; with the intent of very close to these thresholds and even remove counts that behave in interpreting their behaviour as if they were generated by some this way. other earlier interaction, for example a heavy dark matter par- ticle or cosmic ray generating a nuclear recoil. To first provide a general qualitative description of how more sensitive to the set energy threshold for DNA damage. these events appear in the detector, example visualisations are We fix a hard threshold of 10 eV below which interactions presented in Figs.4 and5. Recall that events shown in these are not counted. If an interaction deposits more than 10 eV figures are thresholded to energy depositions above 10 eV. into a component volume of the strand then we consider the We show a more complete set of these visualisations across strand to be severed at that point. This threshold is slightly the full range of particle types, energies, and orientations in higher than the energy required to break DNA strands ob- App.A. served experimentally [86] and is consistent with the Geant4- Figure4 shows proton and carbon nuclei events and their DNA physics models [102]. We show the probability of mea- subsequent breakage patterns for E = 30 keV and 70 keV and ◦ suring an interaction defined in this way in Fig.3, for a range θin = 45 . A side-on (y z) view is shown, with individual of incident particles. This figure demonstrated the ranges of example tracks highlighted− as lines and events indicated by energy and particle types that we are able to study. the filled circles. These tracks are a random sample of the total for 104 primary particles. In these examples, we have drawn a line connecting the chronological sequence of breakage sites, A. Setup however in our analysis we do not assume that the order of this sequence is known2. In the case of ions with relatively straight tracks, this lack of information is not problematic, however Similarly to the way the strands are expected to be arranged for lower momenta particles, such as low energy electrons, inside the detector, in our simulation, we also assign each and very low energy ions, the scattering angles between each strand a unique ID. We assume that the only measurable in- break site can become large, meaning a straight line fit will be formation is the ID of the strand and the z position at which much less well-correlated with the incident beam direction. it was cut. Primary and secondary tracks are distinguished in our processing of the data, and our visualisations. However, for our analysis of the tracks, we assume this distinguishing information is not known, unless it can be gleaned somehow 2 Recall that it is the chronological order of the set of tracks that our mi- from the track topology. Furthermore, if a single strand was crofluidics stage is supposed to provide, not the chronological order of the break sites making up each individual track. Since the timescale over which broken in multiple places by a single track, we only assume a single particle track is deposited will be extremely short compared to the we can reconstruct the position with the lowest z (as discussed time it will take for the strand segments to fall down, we cannot assume in Sec. III D). However, the number of instances of multiple that we will be able to determine the chronological order of the break sites breakage sites on a given strand for a single track is vanish- in a single track. 7
200 200 Proton Proton 100 Beam energy = 30 keV 100 Beam energy = 500 keV
0 0
100 100 − −
200 200 − −
[nm] 300 [nm] 300
z − z −
400 400 − −
500 500 − −
600 600 − −
700 700 − 400 200 0 200 400 − 400 200 0 200 400 − − − − y [nm] y [nm] 200 200 Carbon Carbon 100 Beam energy = 70 keV 100 Beam energy = 500 keV
0 0
100 100 − −
200 200 − −
[nm] 300 [nm] 300
z − z −
400 400 − −
500 500 − −
600 600 − −
700 700 − 400 200 0 200 400 − 400 200 0 200 400 − − − − y [nm] y [nm]
FIG. 4. Distribution of DNA breakage sites for 30 and 500 keV protons (top row), and 70 and 500 keV carbon nuclei (bottom row) incident on the holder (gold layer at z = 0) at an angle of 45◦. The faint vertical gray lines represent DNA strands. Green and grey thick lines represent a random sample (out of a total of 104 primary particles per beam) of 40 proton and carbon primary tracks, respectively, determined as ‘measurable’ in that they break a sequence of more than three unique strands. Corresponding thinner dashed lines (most evident for 500 keV protons) denote secondary and tertiary particles which are also energetic enough to break strands. The positions of every counted breakage site (i.e. interactions above a cutoff of 10 eV) in the set of 104 histories is represented by the black points.
Figure5 shows six examples of the breakage pattern for C. Tracks alpha particles, corresponding to three beam angles and two beam energies. The primary beam energy 500 keV (bottom row) is above the threshold for which secondary electrons gen- Figures4 and5, together with the additional figures shown erated by interactions between the detector components and in App.A, demonstrate that typically, measurable ion tracks the beam have sufficient energy to break DNA strands on their exhibit interaction sites that are coarsely spaced relative to own. These secondaries are marked as dashed lines, connect- the inter-strand spacing, i.e. there is typically a distance of ing them to the primary track that produced them. As before, (few ∆x) between each strand break. Occasionally, par- we can detect each of these vertices, but the lines between Oticularly× for heavier ions that are more densely ionising, a se- them are only for display purposes. quence of neighbouring strands may be broken. This is evi- dent for carbon ions in the lower panels of Fig.4, particularly for the lower beam energy (70 keV). These simulations con- firm that for the energies considered, primary ion tracks are 8
— — — θ = 90 (top-down) θin = 0◦ (side-on) θin = 45◦ in ◦ 200 200 200 Alpha Interaction rate = 69% Interaction rate = 100% Interaction rate = 100% Measureable rate = 19% Measureable rate = 6% 100 Beam energy = 70 keV Measureable rate = 29% 100 100
0 0 0
100 100 100 − − −
200 200 200 − − − [nm] [nm] [nm] 300 300 300 z z z − − −
400 400 400 − − −
500 500 500 − − −
600 600 600 − − −
700 700 700 − 400 200 0 200 400 − 400 200 0 200 400 − 400 200 0 200 400 − − − − − − y [nm] y [nm] y [nm] — — — θ = 90 (top-down) θin = 0◦ (side-on) θin = 45◦ in ◦ 200 200 200 Alpha Interaction rate = 86% Interaction rate = 100% Interaction rate = 100% Measureable rate = 45% Measureable rate = 24% 100 Beam energy = 500 keV Measureable rate = 43% 100 100
0 0 0
100 100 100 − − −
200 200 200 − − − [nm] [nm] [nm] 300 300 300 z z z − − −
400 400 400 − − −
500 500 500 − − −
600 600 600 − − −
700 700 700 − 400 200 0 200 400 − 400 200 0 200 400 − 400 200 0 200 400 − − − − − − y [nm] y [nm] y [nm]
FIG. 5. Distribution of DNA breakage sites for alpha particles for two incident energies, 70 keV (top row) and 500 keV (bottom row), and ◦ ◦ ◦ for three different incident beam angles: θin = 0 (left), θin = 45 (middle), and θin = 90 (right). As in Fig.4, breakage sites are denoted by filled circles and primary particle tracks by thick lines. Dashed lines (most evident for the 500 keV case) represent tracks of secondaries. A random sub-sample of 40 histories are shown out of a total of 104 primary alphas. As in the previous figure the underlying black points show the distribution of all interaction sites. straight and well-correlated with the incident beam direction, Figure6 informs us that the heavier ions (carbon and gold with increasing divergence from the incident beam direction nuclei) are much more likely generate tracks inside this small with decreasing energy. detector module, with only a small suppression in the limit- ing case that an incoming particle strikes the holder directly For a track to be considered measurable, the bare minimum from above. In the case of incident electrons, the probabil- we could require is for three or more unique strands to be ity of measurable track production is significantly reduced broken. To determine how likely these tracks are for differ- because of the attenuation in the holder (corresponding to ent beam particles and energies, we calculate the probability the middle and bottom panels). Even for side-on incidence P as the fraction of all primary particles simulated that track (θ = 0◦), electron tracks are much less correlated with the result in a measurable track defined in this way. in incident beam direction due to their propensity for wide scat- This probability as a function of energy, particle type, and tering angles (cf. Fig. 10 in App.A), which reduces their over- for three orientations, is shown in Fig.6. We notice that the all capacity for measurable track production. Photons are ab- energy dependence of Ptrack is similar for the side-on and an- sorbed, and only create tracks when secondary electrons are gled beams (top and middle panels), both resembling the en- excited with enough energy to break strands. Photons with ergy dependence of the particle-DNA interaction probability, energies between 1 and 100 keV pass through the holder unob- as shown in Fig.3. However, the case for the top-down beam structed. The highest event rate is observed for the top-down is slightly different. This is because for this latter case, the beam because in this case the photons pass through the largest incoming beam has to scatter by a certain amount to register detector mass — around 700 nm of a single strand — as op- more than one strand break. If the particle travelled through posed to a much smaller∼ amount in the other two cases. This the holder and continued straight down, it would only break a maximises the probability of generating secondary electrons, single strand. So the structures seen in the shape of Ptrack(E) and explains why the probability of having three or more in- are due to the energies needed to scatter the particle to a neigh- teraction sites is higher than in the other two panels. bouring strand, without overshooting it and escaping out of the bottom of the detector. In the following section, we compare the properties of the 9 1000 Proton Alpha Carbon Gold Electron Gamma
1.0 ✓
0.4 500
0.2 250 ° 1.0 θin = 90◦ (top-down)
0.8 500 Beam
−1 θax = cos ( qˆin qˆfit ) . (1) | · | A. Particle identification and energy reconstruction We assume that no head/tail information will be present in the breakage pattern which is why we take the modulus of the dot Since we only have position measurements to work with, product of the beam and track angles. If, for example, these any discrimination between impinging particle types and their two vectors were completely uncorrelated then the mean axial energies will have to be done on a limited basis using only the 10
Beam angle: θin = 0◦ (side-on) Beam angle: θin = 45◦ Beam angle: θin = 90◦ (top-down) 100 101 102 103 100 101 102 103 100 101 102 103 10103 0 100 100 3 3
10 Proton Protonf 10 Protonf f ( ( ( L L L
0 1 T 1 T 1 T 1010− ) 10− ) 10− ) 100 max / 100 max / max / [nm] [nm] [nm]
T T 2 T 2 2 103 − 10− 10− L 3 L 10 L 3 10− − f 10− f f
3 3 3 10− 10− 10− 10103 0 100 100 3 3
10 Alpha Alphaf 10 Alphaf f ( ( ( L L L
0 1 T 1 T 1 T 1010− ) 10− ) 10− ) 100 max / 100 max / max / [nm] [nm] [nm]
T T 2 T 2 2 103 − 10− 10− L 3 L 10 L 3 10− − f 10− f f
3 3 3 10− 10− 10− 10103 0 100 100 3 3
10 Carbon Carbonf 10 Carbonf f ( ( ( L L L
0 1 T 1 T 1 T 1010− ) 10− ) 10− ) 100 max / 100 max / max / [nm] [nm] [nm]
T T 2 T 2 2 103 − 10− 10− L 3 L 10 L 3 10− − f 10− f f
3 3 3 10− 10− 10− 10103 0 100 100 3 3
10 Gold Goldf 10 Goldf f ( ( ( L (GeneratedL L 0 (Generated1 T 1 T 1 T 1010− ) 10under− ) holder) 10− ) 100 under max / holder) 100 max / max / [nm] [nm] [nm]
T T 2 T 2 2 103 − 10− 10− L 3 L 10 L 3 10− − f 10− f f
3 3 3 10− 10− 10− 10103 0 100 100 3 3
10 Electron Electronf 10 Electronf f ( ( ( L L L
0 1 T 1 T 1 T 1010− ) 10− ) 10− ) 100 max / 100 max / max / [nm] [nm] [nm]
T T 2 T 2 2 103 − 10− 10− L 3 L 10 L 3 10− − f 10− f f
3 3 3 10− 10− 10− 100 101 102 103 100 101 102 103 100 101 102 103 Beam energy [keV] Beam energy [keV] Beam energy [keV]
FIG. 8. Distributions of transverse track dimension f(LT ) as a function of incident beam energy for different incident beam angles. The colour-scale shows the value of the distribution, normalised by its maximum value at each energy. The four panels from top to bottom correspond to different incident particles: protons, alphas, carbon nuclei, gold nuclei, and electrons. Results are shown for gold nuclei in the ◦ θin = 0 case for completeness and to help understand the differences between particles, despite the fact that gold nuclei recoiling from the gold holder with this incidence angle are not probable. Solid and dashed curves in each plot indicate the mean and 68% containment of the distribution around the median.
topology of their tracks. As discussed above, the low density large increase in the typical value of LT is evident due to the of the detector causes the tracks of primary particles to be production of secondary particles. We also notice the struc- generally straight over the scales we simulate here. However, ture of the distributions, which are noticeably multimodal at for higher energies, the generation of secondary particles can higher energies, forming distinct bands in the plots of Fig.8. be a source of noise (see the dashed lines in Fig.5). These bands are also associated with the production of secon- We present one approach that could be used to distinguish daries, however the structures here are due to the discrete na- particle types in Fig.8, where we show the probability distri- ture of the possible interaction sites, which are only allowed at integer values of ∆x. Therefore when a secondary particle bution of the transverse track dimension f(LT ) as a function of beam energy, for five different beam particles, and three is produced, it must be generated in a direction where it will different orientations (the same as shown in Fig.5). The dis- eventually encounter a strand and not just pass through gaps in tinguishing features between the tracks left by the different between the strands. Thus, some values of LT are less likely, particles shown here are primarily related to the momentum because they correspond to distances away from the primary of the particle and the energy scale at which secondaries are track axis that are in between rows of strands. produced with high enough energies to break strands. For in- We emphasise that while we display the distributions of LT stance, for low energy protons, alphas, carbon ions, and gold on a logarithmic scale. Values smaller than 0.5 nm are ∼ ions, the mean value of LT decreases with increasing energy likely not measurable. Also the upper tails of the distribu- because the tracks are straighter when the particle has a higher tions cut off at around 1 µm due to the finite size of the box. momentum. However, at a particular energy—e.g. at around Fortunately, almost all of each distribution is contained well 50 keV for protons incoming from the side (top left panel)—a within 200 nm or so. Also note that we have shown the size 11 of the distributions on a logarithmic colour scale too, which example is more sensitive to the bias we have introduced in also emphasises additional structure. Some of this may be the requirement that a track is formed from more than three relatively rarely occurring, e.g. 0.001 times less likely than interaction sites on different strands. For this to occur for top- the most likely value, which is where we cut off the colour- down beams, the particle has to scatter at least a small amount scale. The majority of these distributions are concentrated to reach a different strand from the one it is incident upon. around a small range of values, close to their mean (shown as a solid line). We enclose 68% of the distribution within the two dashed lines. VI. DIRECTIONS FOR FUTURE EXPERIMENTAL We conclude from these distributions that some level of par- INVESTIGATION ticle ID may be achievable, but it will be strongly correlated with energy. At the most minimal level, it should be possible Having shown that there is potentially interesting informa- to say for an individual track whether the particle that caused tion, particularly good directional information, that can be it had a high momentum or low momentum. Depending on the gained from this kind of detector, we now want to highlight expected rate of different incoming particles, this may be use- the outstanding challenges in realising this ambitious idea ex- ful information for performing some low-level discrimination, perimentally. The first stage to demonstrate the feasibility in a or at least for selecting some candidate events. practical setting would be to perform preliminary experiments As for the reconstruction of the particle’s energy, this too on smaller scale analogues of each stage of the detection pro- will be challenging for a single one of these small detector cess. For steps that require the precise placement of DNA units. As with particle ID, we can see that only a relatively strands we will also require some method of validating that small quantity of information about particle energy is stored the DNA has been arranged as desired. While various mi- in the breakage pattern on these small scales. Therefore if this croscopy techniques are available, we highlight the nm-scale information is to be reconstructed on an event-by-event ba- imaging well below the diffraction limit of light enabled by sis, this must be done on larger scales in a detector comprised DNA-PAINT [96] as a particularly interesting and flexible ap- of many smaller units. In fact, such a technique for particle proach. ID and energy reconstruction could be rather conventional: for instance, by studying the differences in the amplitude and profiles of the dE/dx along the recoil tracks. A. PCR/readout
B. Directional tracking Since we have discussed the basic feasibility of the con- cept, we may now proceed to a more detailed design study for a prototype experiment that can validate the results of this We now finally evaluate the directional or angular perfor- study and test various options for basic operation. With the ad- mance of the detector based on the simulated tracks. Using ditional design clarity provided by laboratory studies, it will the same SVD fit of the track direction, we parameterise the then become more feasible to evaluate the potential cost of angular resolution associated with a particular particle type such a detector. Fast, cheap and portable PCR machines for and energy by constructing a probability distribution of axial instance are highly-sought after for point-of-care medical di- scattering angles f(θ ), where θ is measured with respect ax ax agnostics. Examples of cm-scale pocket-size PCR machines to the incident beam direction as in Eq.(1). are already on the market at the scale of $10 per unit. Detec- Figure9 shows the distribution of θ as a function of par- ax tion ideas based on biotechnology in general can benefit from ticle type, energy and for three different beam orientations. a much higher level of economic and market support, when For θ = 0◦ (side-on), the distributions for protons, alphas in compared with many technologies used in experimental parti- and carbon ions decrease with energy up to a threshold en- cle physics. So we suggest it is not unwarranted at this stage to ergy above which secondary electrons are produced with suf- imagine a potentially low-cost full-scale experiment, despite ficient energy to break DNA strands. These secondary elec- the high level of complexity involved. trons scatter at wider angles away from the primary track, thus increasing the effective angular dispersion. Overall, θax is generally well-correlated with the incident particle direction, and for some ranges of energy it is ex- B. Testing DNA breakage in the lab tremely well-correlated, with the full distribution of axial an- gles contained within 10 degrees. We also point out that even Another uncertainty that must be addressed is the physics though the logarithmically coloured distributions extend to of DNA strand breakage by ionising radiation when ar- much wider angles for higher energy beams, the mean scat- ranged in the complex setup envisaged for this detec- tering angle (shown by the solid lines) is still relatively small tor. This physics could also be tested directly in the lab. ◦ ◦ for most particles for the θin = 0 (side-on) and 45 cases. DNA origami—structures of hybridised DNA arranged into ◦ For θin = 90 , we note that some scattering angles are typi- nanoscale shapes—have already been used as rudimentary ra- cally much wider than, and in some cases anti-correlated with, diometers to test UV damage on DNA [103]. Similar studies the beam direction (implied by angular distributions weighted could be done with a much wider range of particle sources. towards angles greater than 57.3◦). However, this particular Most interestingly, would be if we can employ high-intensity 12
Beam angle: θin = 0◦ (side-on) Beam angle: θin = 45◦ Beam angle: θin = 90◦ (top-down) 100 101 102 103 100 101 102 103 100 101 102 103 100 100 100
75 Proton 75 Protonf 75 Protonf f ( ( ( θ θ θ
1 ax 1 ax 1 ax
10− ) 10− ) 10− ) 50 50 max / 50 max / max / [deg.] [deg.] [deg.] 2 2 2
ax ax 10− ax 10− 10− θ θ θ 25 25 f 25 f f
3 3 3 0 0 10− 0 10− 10− 100 100 100
75 Alpha 75 Alphaf 75 Alphaf f ( ( ( θ θ θ
1 ax 1 ax 1 ax
10− ) 10− ) 10− ) 50 50 max / 50 max / max / [deg.] [deg.] [deg.] 2 2 2
ax ax 10− ax 10− 10− θ θ θ 25 25 f 25 f f
3 3 3 0 0 10− 0 10− 10− 100 100 100
75 Carbon 75 Carbonf 75 Carbonf f ( ( ( θ θ θ
1 ax 1 ax 1 ax
10− ) 10− ) 10− ) 50 50 max / 50 max / max / [deg.] [deg.] [deg.] 2 2 2
ax ax 10− ax 10− 10− θ θ θ 25 25 f 25 f f
3 3 3 0 0 10− 0 10− 10− 100 100 100
75 Gold 75 Goldf 75 Goldf f ( ( ( θ θ θ
(Generated1 ax (Generated1 ax 1 ax
under10− holder)) under10− holder)) 10− ) 50 50 max / 50 max / max / [deg.] [deg.] [deg.] 2 2 2
ax ax 10− ax 10− 10− θ θ θ 25 25 f 25 f f
3 3 3 0 0 10− 0 10− 10− 100 100 100
75 Electron 75 Electronf 75 Electronf f ( ( ( θ θ θ
1 ax 1 ax 1 ax
10− ) 10− ) 10− ) 50 50 max / 50 max / max / [deg.] [deg.] [deg.] 2 2 2
ax ax 10− ax 10− 10− θ θ θ 25 25 f 25 f f
3 3 3 0 0 10− 0 10− 10− 100 101 102 103 100 101 102 103 100 101 102 103 Beam energy [keV] Beam energy [keV] Beam energy [keV]
FIG. 9. As in Fig.8 but now for the probability distributions of the axial scattering angle f(θax). beams on arrays of DNA nanostructures to systematically pa- These can be thought of like punch cards made up of DNA: rameterise the effects of common sources of background in devices in which information is stored in some way on syn- rare-event searches. thetic DNA strands that can be later extracted and read. Com- pared with conventional hard drive technology, storing infor- mation in base pair content is considered impractical because C. Detector construction and strand configuration it is slow and potentially error-prone. However, Ref. [111] de- scribe a way to encode information not in the base content but via “nicks” in the sugar phosphate backbone, which can be Next, we must also decide whether to use single or double- created in an accurate and parallel way using specially cho- stranded DNA, or whether to opt for RNA instead. While sen enzymes. Speed and accuracy are essential when com- the choice of DNA over RNA should have no impact on paring DNA storage with more traditional technologies like the detection capabilities of this concept, the double-stranded hard-drives, but for our initial detector concept this may not molecules would likely be preferable due to increased stabil- be so important. We should keep this possibility in mind if ity and reduced cross-reactivity between strands. However, we wish to scale the detector up. In this context, the nick this would need to be contrasted against the lower cost of us- sites would essentially encode the exact (x, y, z) positions in ing RNA. binary, meaning the arrangement and reconstruction of the Another major practical consideration that should be inves- strands is almost trivial. At a larger scale, a nicking approach tigated is the details of how the strands and their base con- could greatly improve the efficiency since it circumvents the tent should be synthesised, arranged, and sequenced. We bottleneck of initially synthesising the strands with a precise have framed this study around the assumption that the posi- sequence of bases. So if, for example, individual modules of tions would be encoded in the precise sequence of base pairs, a larger detector needed to be replaced at a frequent rate, this however this is not the only option. In many ways, the meth- could be a way to facilitate that. ods that we could employ to arrange the strand network will share features with synthetic DNA storage systems [104–110]. 13
D. Stability multiples of inter-strand spacings up to a factor of 10. This means that in order to prevent many overlapping recoil events The final requirement of this detector that we are yet to from scrambling each other, some separation in time will be touch upon is stability. We have implicitly assumed through- crucial. Moreover, a transportation system would also provide out that the detector is actually able to achieve long-enough a way to retain precise and chronologically ordered event time exposures to observe a sizeable event rate of particles under information, making it more suitable to detect astrophysical low-background conditions. We do not fix any required sta- sources of particles such as dark matter or neutrinos [75]. bility here, but follow-up experimental tests should at least While only a limited quantity of particle ID information is be able to check if the detector is unstable to a degree that stored in the nanoscale breakage patterns, we do find trends makes it unusable. There are several reasons why this may in the various types of track topology that correlate with the be a concern. Possibly the most crucial of these will be the particle momentum. Heavy particles occasionally break se- requirement that we keep the DNA strands straight. The pro- quences of neighbouring strands in a characteristic way as posed technique of attaching magnetic beads to each strand to they slow down. Electrons on the other hand generally cre- ensure the strands fall to the readout, should also act to keep ate tracks with no clear direction, meaning they would not be the strands straight. However, for the detector to be stable, the easily reconstructable and would likely be a source of noise. strands must be able to support themselves against this pull A veto on events without three or more co-linear breakage until they are severed. sites should be sufficient to discriminate electrons from other Another issue regarding stability involves shielding. This sources of particle. It it is likely that further discrimination detector concept is peculiar in the sense that the act of detec- between particle types will be possible for a larger detector, tion essentially destroys part of the detector. Ensuring that so this study will need to be conducted next to find out. the detector is constructed quickly and in a low background While the tracking of the expected keV-scale tracks is read- environment will therefore be optimal. As long as the event ily achievable with existing detectors, combining good track- rate per detector unit was kept low (e.g. if the detector was ing capabilities, sensitivity to low-energy recoils and, most constructed from the µm3-scale units we simulate here), then importantly, scalability to high target masses are all notori- there should be no issues. Assuming that any broken strands ously difficult [46]. This is why the most sensitive dark matter appearing before the official start of the experimental expo- experiments currently do not attempt to measure directional- sure, were flushed away and not counted. ity and instead opt for massive ton-scale target masses and ex- traordinarily low backgrounds to isolate a dark matter signal. We have shown here that the DNA detector can achieve good VII. CONCLUSIONS directionality, since the axial angles of the simulated tracks are generally well-correlated with the incoming particle that We have performed the first comprehensive simulations of caused them. This may eventually mean that this design could the DNA-based detector concept outlined several years ago in work as a dark matter detector, however we need not restrict Ref. [35]. While a large number of practical details remain to ourselves to this option. be studied and experimentally verified, we have shown here For instance, many detector technologies are already able to at the very least that the basic idea is feasible: DNA strand reconstruct the incoming directions of cosmic rays, however breakage patterns can be used to reconstruct axial information usually only at higher energies than our focus here. This is the about incoming particle directions. case for instance in semiconductor detectors [74, 112, 113], The precise nm-scale recoil vertex position reconstruction such as DAMIC [113], which can detect ionisation energies in is evidently the key advantage of this detector, but this comes silicon as low as 50 eV, using 25µm 25µm readout pixels. × at the cost of limited to no particle ID and energy reconstruc- The precision in dE/dx that this capability implies means that tion performance. On these small scales the differences in the DAMIC is able to access directional information. However track topologies is minor and highly correlated. So any con- it is diffusion-limited for low-energy recoils whose physical vincing particle ID and energy reconstruction would have to track lengths are shorter than 15µm. Neutrino detectors are be performed by using the tracks left in multiple smaller units another example of experiments that gain directional informa- analysed in parallel. tion. IceCube [114] for instance, with its 2400 m long strings Additional advantages of such a detector compared to other set 125 m apart has been particularly successful in reconstruct- directional technologies are, for instance, the complete cir- ing the directions of ultra-high-energy neutrinos coming from cumvention of diffusion, straightforward fiducialization along astrophysical sources. There is a neat coincidence in concepts, all detector dimensions, and potentially a relatively low cost comparing IceCube to the detector that we envision here. The per unit mass, however this remains to be investigated. Fur- design of the DNA detector is a similar concept to IceCube thermore, we have proposed here that the previous detector only on a miniaturised scale, and targeting much lower energy design be extended to include a strategy of real-time DNA interactions. strand transportation via microfluidics. This step is likely to Therefore, with the many potential uses of this detector for be crucial if the device is used in conditions that generate particle physics, and with the fundamental challenges that this many events per unit detector volume. This is because we concept presents to bio- and nanotechnology, we believe that typically find that the vertices of particle tracks are not along we have collected a compelling case for pursuing this idea neighbouring strands, but are typically separated by several further. We hope that this first explorative study will inspire 14 imminent experimental investigation to resolve many of the and SNG suggested the possibility to detect cosmic rays with outstanding issues we have laid out, and that future simulation this kind of detector and started this investigation. CB, SNG, studies can be better informed by the experimental realities ZK also guided the overall scope of the paper, devised direc- involved. tions for future experimental validation, and helped write the manuscript.
AUTHOR CONTRIBUTIONS
CAJO performed the simulations and analysis leading ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS to the results presented here, and led the writing of the manuscript. JH, RJ, WK, VM, JN and KS assisted in the We thank Giuseppina Simone, Katie Freese and George setting up and running of the simulations as part of short- Church for discussions during the early stages of this project. term undergraduate projects. ZK provided setup files that fa- CAJO and CB and greatly appreciate support from the Univer- cilitated in the initial creation of the simulations. AM pro- sity of Sydney. SNG gratefully acknowledges TMS funding vided a TOPAS-nbio extension file for the DNA detector. CB (BFS2017TMT01).
[1]P IERRE AUGER Collaboration, A. Aab et al., The Pierre Production, Phys. Rev. D 95 (2017) 056019[ 1611.06228]. Auger Cosmic Ray Observatory, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 798 [15] R. Budnik, O. Chesnovsky, O. Slone and T. Volansky, Direct (2015) 172[ 1502.01323]. Detection of Light Dark Matter and Solar Neutrinos via [2] M. Battaglieri et al., US Cosmic Visions: New Ideas in Dark Color Center Production in Crystals, Phys. Lett. B 782 Matter 2017: Community Report, in U.S. Cosmic Visions: (2018) 242[ 1705.03016]. New Ideas in Dark Matter College Park, MD, USA, March [16] S. Hertel, A. Biekert, J. Lin, V. Velan and D. McKinsey, 23-25, 2017, 2017, 1707.04591, Direct detection of sub-GeV dark matter using a superfluid http://lss.fnal.gov/archive/2017/conf/fermilab-conf-17-282- 4He target, Phys. Rev. D 100 (2019) 092007[ 1810.06283]. ae-ppd-t.pdf. [17] D. J. Marsh, K.-C. Fong, E. W. Lentz, L. Smejkal and M. N. [3] M. Schumann, Direct Detection of WIMP Dark Matter: Ali, Proposal to Detect Dark Matter using Axionic Concepts and Status, J. Phys. G 46 (2019) 103003 Topological Antiferromagnets, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) [1903.03026]. 121601[ 1807.08810]. [4] T. Marrodan Undagoitia and L. Rauch, Dark matter [18] S. M. Griffin, Y. Hochberg, K. Inzani, N. Kurinsky, T. Lin direct-detection experiments, J. Phys. D 43 (2016) 013001 and T. Chin, Silicon carbide detectors for sub-GeV dark [1509.08767]. matter, Phys. Rev. D 103 (2021) 075002[ 2008.08560]. [5] G. G. Raffelt, Particle physics from stars, Ann. Rev. Nucl. [19] D. Budker, P. W. Graham, M. Ledbetter, S. Rajendran and Part. Sci. 49 (1999) 163[ hep-ph/9903472]. A. Sushkov, Proposal for a Cosmic Axion Spin Precession [6] K. van Bibber, P. M. McIntyre, D. E. Morris and G. G. Experiment (CASPEr), Phys. Rev. X 4 (2014) 021030 Raffelt, A Practical Laboratory Detector for Solar Axions, [1306.6089]. Phys. Rev. D 39 (1989) 2089. [20] N. Crescini et al., The QUAX-gp gs experiment to search for [7]CASTC OLLABORATION Collaboration, V. Anastassopoulos monopole-dipole Axion interaction, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A et al., New CAST Limit on the Axion-Photon Interaction, Nat. 842 (2017) 109[ 1606.04751]. Phys. 13 (2017) 584[ 1705.02290]. [21] G. Cavoto, E. Cirillo, F. Cocina, J. Ferretti and A. Polosa, [8] J. Redondo and G. Raffelt, Solar constraints on hidden WIMP detection and slow ion dynamics in carbon nanotube photons re-visited, JCAP 08 (2013) 034[ 1305.2920]. arrays, Eur. Phys. J. C 76 (2016) 349[ 1602.03216]. [9] XENON Collaboration, E. Aprile et al., Excess electronic [22] G. Cavoto, F. Luchetta and A. Polosa, Sub-GeV Dark Matter recoil events in XENON1T, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 072004 Detection with Electron Recoils in Carbon Nanotubes, Phys. [2006.09721]. Lett. B 776 (2018) 338[ 1706.02487]. [10] I. G. Irastorza and J. Redondo, New experimental approaches [23] Y. Hochberg, I. Charaev, S.-W. Nam, V. Verma, M. Colangelo in the search for axion-like particles, Prog. Part. Nucl. Phys. and K. K. Berggren, Detecting Sub-GeV Dark Matter with 102 (2018) 89[ 1801.08127]. Superconducting Nanowires, Phys. Rev. Lett. 123 (2019) [11] PTOLEMY Collaboration, E. Baracchini et al., PTOLEMY: 151802[ 1903.05101]. A Proposal for Thermal Relic Detection of Massive Neutrinos [24] E. Goto, H. Kolm and K. Ford, Search for Ferromagnetically and Directional Detection of MeV Dark Matter, Trapped Magnetic Monopoles of Cosmic-Ray Origin, Phys. 1808.01892. Rev. 132 (1963) 387. [12] Y. Hochberg, M. Pyle, Y. Zhao and K. M. Zurek, Detecting [25] R. Fleischer, H. Hart, I. Jacobs, P. Price, W. Schwarz and Superlight Dark Matter with Fermi-Degenerate Materials, F. Aumento, Search for magnetic monopoles in deep ocean JHEP 08 (2016) 057[ 1512.04533]. deposits, Phys. Rev. 184 (1969) 1393. [13] Y. Hochberg, Y. Zhao and K. M. Zurek, Superconducting [26] J. Kovalik and J. Kirschvink, New Superconducting Quantum Detectors for Superlight Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. Lett. 116 Interface Device Based Constraints on the Abundance of (2016) 011301[ 1504.07237]. Magnetic Monopoles Trapped in Matter: An Investigation of [14] S. Knapen, T. Lin and K. M. Zurek, Light Dark Matter in Deeply Buried Rocks, Phys. Rev. A 33 (1986) 1183. Superfluid Helium: Detection with Multi-excitation 15
[27] J. Collar and I. Avignone, F.T., Nuclear tracks from cold dark for directional dark matter detection beyond the neutrino matter interactions in mineral crystals: A Computational background, Phys. Rev. D 92 (2015) 063518 study, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. B 95 (1995) 349 [1505.08061]. [astro-ph/9505055]. [50] C. A. J. O’Hare, Can we overcome the neutrino floor at high [28] D. P. Snowden-Ifft and A. J. Westphal, Unique signature of masses?, Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 063024[ 2002.07499]. dark matter in ancient mica, Phys. Rev. Lett. 78 (1997) 1628 [51] G. Sciolla and C. J. Martoff, Gaseous dark matter detectors, [astro-ph/9701215]. New Journal of Physics 11 (2009) 105018. [29] D. Snowden-Ifft, E. Freeman and P. Price, Limits on dark [52] S. Ahlen et al., The case for a directional dark matter matter using ancient mica, Phys. Rev. Lett. 74 (1995) 4133. detector and the status of current experimental efforts, Int. J. [30] A. K. Drukier, S. Baum, K. Freese, M. Gorski´ and P. Stengel, Mod. Phys. A 25 (2010) 1[ 0911.0323]. Paleo-detectors: Searching for Dark Matter with Ancient [53] J. B. R. Battat et al., Readout technologies for directional Minerals, Phys. Rev. D 99 (2019) 043014[ 1811.06844]. WIMP Dark Matter detection, Phys. Rept. 662 (2016) 1 [31] S. Baum, A. K. Drukier, K. Freese, M. Gorski´ and P. Stengel, [1610.02396]. Searching for Dark Matter with Paleo-Detectors, Phys. Lett. [54] D. Santos et al., MIMAC : A micro-tpc matrix for directional B 803 (2020) 135325[ 1806.05991]. detection of dark matter, EAS Publ. Ser. 53 (2012) 25 [32] R. Ebadi et al., Ultra-Heavy Dark Matter Search with [1111.1566]. Electron Microscopy of Geological Quartz, 2105.03998. [55] E. Baracchini et al., CYGNO: a gaseous TPC with optical [33] J. F. Acevedo, J. Bramante and A. Goodman, Old Rocks, New readout for dark matter directional search, JINST 15 (2020) Limits: Excavated Ancient Mica Searches ForDark Matter, C07036[ 2007.12627]. 2105.06473. [56] DRIFT Collaboration, J. B. R. Battat et al., Low Threshold [34] M. Dosanjh, From particle physics to medical applications, Results and Limits from the DRIFT Directional Dark Matter in From Particle Physics to Medical Applications, 2399-2891, Detector, Astropart. Phys. 91 (2017) 65[ 1701.00171]. pp. 1–1 to 1–21. IOP Publishing, 2017. DOI. [57] R. Yakabe et al., First limits from a 3D-vector directional [35] A. Drukier, K. Freese, A. Lopez, D. Spergel, C. Cantor, dark matter search with the NEWAGE-0.3b’ detector, PTEP G. Church and T. Sano, New Dark Matter Detectors using 2020 (2020) 113F01[ 2005.05157]. DNA or RNA for Nanometer Tracking, 1206.6809. [58] S. Vahsen, H. Feng, M. Garcia-Sciveres, I. Jaegle, J. Kadyk, [36] A. K. Drukier, C. Cantor, M. Chonofsky, G. M. Church, R. L. Y. Nguyen, M. Rosen, S. Ross, T. Thorpe and J. Yamaoka, Fagaly, K. Freese, A. Lopez, T. Sano, C. Savage and W. P. The Directional Dark Matter Detector (D3), EAS Publ. Ser. Wong, New class of biological detectors for WIMPs, Int. J. 53 (2012) 43[ 1110.3401]. Mod. Phys. A 29 (2014) 1443007[ 1403.8154]. [59] S. Vahsen et al., CYGNUS: Feasibility of a nuclear recoil [37] G. Bertone and D. Hooper, History of dark matter, Rev. Mod. observatory with directional sensitivity to dark matter and Phys. 90 (2018) 045002[ 1605.04909]. neutrinos, 2008.12587. [38] A. Drukier and L. Stodolsky, Principles and Applications of a [60] S. K. Lee and A. H. G. Peter, Probing the Local Velocity Neutral Current Detector for Neutrino Physics and Distribution of WIMP Dark Matter with Directional Astronomy, Phys. Rev. D 30 (1984) 2295. Detectors, J. Cosmol. Astropart. Phys. 1204 (2012) 029 [39] F. Mayet et al., A review of the discovery reach of directional [1202.5035]. Dark Matter detection, Phys. Rept. 627 (2016) 1 [61] J. Billard, F. Mayet and D. Santos, Markov Chain Monte [1602.03781]. Carlo analysis to constrain Dark Matter properties with [40] D. N. Spergel, The Motion of the Earth and the Detection of directional detection, Phys. Rev. D 83 (2011) 075002 Wimps, Phys. Rev. D 37 (1988) 1353. [1012.3960]. [41] B. Morgan, A. M. Green and N. J. C. Spooner, Directional [62] C. A. J. O’Hare and A. M. Green, Directional detection of statistics for WIMP direct detection, Phys. Rev. D 71 (2005) dark matter streams, Phys. Rev. D 90 (2014) 123511 103507[ astro-ph/0408047]. [1410.2749]. [42] A. M. Green and B. Morgan, Consequences of statistical [63] R. Catena, Dark matter directional detection in sense determination for WIMP directional detection, Phys. non-relativistic effective theories, JCAP 1507 (2015) 026 Rev. D 77 (2008) 027303[ 0711.2234]. [1505.06441]. [43] J. Billard, F. Mayet, J. F. Macias-Perez and D. Santos, [64] B. J. Kavanagh, New directional signatures from the Directional detection as a strategy to discover galactic Dark nonrelativistic effective field theory of dark matter, Phys. Rev. Matter, Phys. Lett. B 691 (2010) 156[ 0911.4086]. D 92 (2015) 023513[ 1505.07406]. [44] A. M. Green and B. Morgan, The median recoil direction as a [65] B. J. Kavanagh and C. A. J. O’Hare, Reconstructing the WIMP directional detection signal, Phys. Rev. D 81 (2010) three-dimensional local dark matter velocity distribution, 061301[ 1002.2717]. Phys. Rev. D 94 (2016) 123009[ 1609.08630]. [45] J. Billard, F. Mayet and D. Santos, Assessing the discovery [66] C. A. J. O’Hare, C. McCabe, N. W. Evans, G. Myeong and potential of directional detection of Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. V. Belokurov, Dark matter hurricane: Measuring the S1 D 85 (2012) 035006[ 1110.6079]. stream with dark matter detectors, Phys. Rev. D 98 (2018) [46] S. E. Vahsen, C. A. J. O’Hare and D. Loomba, Directional 103006[ 1807.09004]. recoil detection, 2102.04596. [67] C. A. J. O’Hare, N. W. Evans, C. McCabe, G. Myeong and [47] J. Billard, Comparing readout strategies to directly detect V. Belokurov, Dark Shards: velocity substructure from Gaia dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 91 (2015) 023513[ 1411.5946]. and direct searches for dark matter, Phys. Rev. D 101 (2020) [48] P. Grothaus, M. Fairbairn and J. Monroe, Directional Dark 023006[ 1909.04684]. Matter Detection Beyond the Neutrino Bound, Phys. Rev. D [68] M. Leyton, S. Dye and J. Monroe, Exploring the hidden 90 (2014) 055018[ 1406.5047]. interior of the Earth with directional neutrino measurements, [49] C. A. J. O’Hare, A. M. Green, J. Billard, Nature Commun. 8 (2017) 15989[ 1710.06724]. E. Figueroa-Feliciano and L. E. Strigari, Readout strategies 16
[69] D. Aristizabal Sierra, B. Dutta, D. Kim, D. Snowden-Ifft and DNA geometries, Physica Medica 33 (2017) 207. L. E. Strigari, Coherent elastic neutrino-nucleus scattering [86] K. Baverstock and S. Will, Evidence for the Dominance of with the νBDX-DRIFT directional detector at next generation Direct Excitation of DNA in the Formation of Strand Breaks neutrino facilities, 2103.10857. in Cells Following Irradiation, International Journal of [70] E. Baracchini, W. Derocco and G. Dho, Discovering Radiation Biology 55 (1989) 563. supernova-produced dark matter with directional detectors, [87] D. Charlton, H. Nikjoo and J. Humm, Calculation of Initial Phys. Rev. D 102 (2020) 075036[ 2009.08836]. Yields of Single- and Double-strand Breaks in Cell Nuclei [71]NEWS DM COLLABORATION Collaboration, N. Agafonova from Electrons, Protons and Alpha Particles, International et al., Discovery potential for directional Dark Matter Journal of Radiation Biology 56 (1989) 1. detection with nuclear emulsions, Eur. Phys. J. C 78 (2018) [88] D. G. Cerdeno and A. M. Green, Direct detection of WIMPs, 578[ 1705.00613]. 1002.1912. [72] M. C. Marshall, M. J. Turner, M. J. H. Ku, D. F. Phillips and [89] J. F. Ziegler and P. Biersack, The Stopping and Range of Ions R. L. Walsworth, Directional detection of dark matter with in Matter. Pergamon Press, New York, 1985. diamond, Quantum Sci. Technol. 6 (2021) 024011 [90] V. Alvarez et al., Radiopurity control in the NEXT-100 double [2009.01028]. beta decay experiment: procedures and initial measurements, [73]DAMICC OLLABORATION Collaboration, J. Barreto et al., JINST 8 (2013) T01002[ 1211.3961]. Direct Search for Low Mass Dark Matter Particles with [91] S. Cebrian,´ Cosmogenic activation of materials, Int. J. Mod. CCDs, Phys. Lett. B 711 (2012) 264[ 1105.5191]. Phys. A 32 (2017) 1743006[ 1708.07449]. [74] SENSEI Collaboration, M. Crisler, R. Essig, J. Estrada, [92] B. Liu and J. Liu, Methods for preparing DNA-functionalized G. Fernandez, J. Tiffenberg, M. Sofo haro, T. Volansky and gold nanoparticles, a key reagent of bioanalytical chemistry, T.-T. Yu, SENSEI: First Direct-Detection Constraints on Anal. Methods 9 (2017) 2633. sub-GeV Dark Matter from a Surface Run, Phys. Rev. Lett. [93] M.-L. Visnapuu, T. Fazio, S. Wind and E. C. Greene, Parallel 121 (2018) 061803[ 1804.00088]. Arrays of Geometric Nanowells for Assembling Curtains of [75] C. A. J. O’Hare, B. J. Kavanagh and A. M. Green, DNA with Controlled Lateral Dispersion, Langmuir 24 Time-integrated directional detection of dark matter, Phys. (2008) 11293. Rev. D 96 (2017) 083011[ 1708.02959]. [94] M. Sajfutdinow, K. Uhlig, A. Prager, C. Schneider, B. Abel [76] W. W.-Y. Kam, A. L. McNamara, V. Lake, C. Banos, J. B. and D. M. Smith, Nanoscale patterning of self-assembled Davies, Z. Kuncic and R. B. Banati, Predicted ionisation in monolayer (SAM)-functionalised substrates with single mitochondria and observed acute changes in the molecule contact printing, Nanoscale 9 (2017) 15098. mitochondrial transcriptome after gamma irradiation: A [95] K. Busuttil, A. Rotaru, M. Dong, F. Besenbacher and K. V. Monte Carlo simulation and quantitative PCR study, Gothelf, Transfer of a protein pattern from self-assembled Mitochondrion 13 (2013) 736. DNA origami to a functionalized substrate, Chem. Commun. [77] D. E. Lea, The Action of Radiation on Living Cells. 49 (2013) 1927. Cambridge University Press, 1946. [96] J. Schnitzbauer, M. T. Strauss, T. Schlichthaerle, F. Schueder [78] K. H. Chadwick and H. P. Leenhouts, The Molecular Theory and R. Jungmann, Super-resolution microscopy with of Radiation Biology. Springer, 1981. DNA-PAINT, Nature Protocols 12 (2017) 1198. [79] D. T. Goodhead, The Initial Physical Damage Produced by [97] C. D. Ahrberg, A. Manz and B. G. Chung, Polymerase chain Ionizing Radiations, International Journal of Radiation reaction in microfluidic devices, Lab Chip 16 (2016) 3866. Biology 56 (1989) 623. PMID: 2573657. [98] P. M. Lewis, S. E. Vahsen, I. S. Seong, M. T. Hedges, [80] H. Nikjoo, R. Taleei, T. Liamsuwan, D. Liljequist and I. Jaegle and T. N. Thorpe, Absolute Position Measurement in D. Emfietzoglou, Perspectives in radiation biophysics: From a Gas Time Projection Chamber via Transverse Diffusion of radiation track structure simulation to mechanistic models of Drift Charge, Nucl. Instrum. Meth. A 789 (2015) 81 DNA damage and repair, Radiation Physics and Chemistry [1410.1131]. 128 (2016) 3. Radiation Physics and Chemistry of [99] D. P. Snowden-Ifft, Discovery of multiple, ionization-created Biomolecules. Recent developments. CS2 anions and a new mode of operation for drift chambers, [81] I. V. Mavragani, Z. Nikitaki, S. A. Kalospyros and A. G. Rev. Sci. Instrum. 85 (2014) 013303. Georgakilas, Ionizing Radiation and Complex DNA Damage: [100] N. S. Phan, R. Lafler, R. J. Lauer, E. R. Lee, D. Loomba, From Prediction to Detection Challenges and Biological J. A. J. Matthews and E. H. Miller, The novel properties of Significance, Cancers 11 (2019) 1789. SF6 for directional dark matter experiments, JINST 12 [82] S. Agostinelli et al., Geant4—a simulation toolkit, Nuclear (2017) P02012[ 1609.05249]. Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: [101] S. Incerti, M. Douglass, S. Penfold, S. Guatelli and E. Bezak, Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated Review of Geant4-DNA applications for micro and nanoscale Equipment 506 (2003) 250. simulations, Physica Medica 32 (2016) 1187. [83] J. Allison et al., Recent developments in geant4, Nuclear [102] P. Lazarakis, S. Incerti, V. Ivanchenko, I. Kyriakou, Instruments and Methods in Physics Research Section A: D. Emfietzoglou, S. Corde, A. Rosenfeld, M. Lerch, M. Tehei Accelerators, Spectrometers, Detectors and Associated and S. Guatelli, Investigation of track structure and Equipment 835 (2016) 186. condensed history physics models for applications in [84] J. Perl, J. Shin, J. Schumann, B. Faddegon and H. Paganetti, radiation dosimetry on a micro and nano scale in Geant4, TOPAS: An innovative proton Monte Carlo platform for Biomedical Physics & Engineering Express 4 (2018) 024001. research and clinical applications, Medical Physics 39 [103] W. Fang, M. Xie, X. Hou, X. Liu, X. Zuo, J. Chao, L. Wang, (2012) 6818. C. Fan, H. Liu and L. Wang, DNA Origami Radiometers for [85] A. McNamara, C. Geng, R. Turner, J. R. Mendez, J. Perl, Measuring Ultraviolet Exposure, Journal of the American K. Held, B. Faddegon, H. Paganetti and J. Schuemann, Chemical Society 142 (2020) 8782. PMID: 32311267. Validation of the radiobiology toolkit TOPAS-nBio in simple 17
[104] G. M. Skinner, K. Visscher and M. Mansuripur, [110] Y. Dong, F. Sun, Z. Ping, Q. Ouyang and L. Qian, DNA Biocompatible Writing of Data into DNA, 1708.08027. storage: research landscape and future prospects, National [105] G. M. Church, Y. Gao and S. Kosuri, Next-Generation Digital Science Review 7 (2020) 1092. Information Storage in DNA, Science 337 (2012) 1628. [111] S. K. Tabatabaei, B. Wang, N. B. M. Athreya, B. Enghiad, [106] N. Goldman, P. Bertone, S. Chen, C. Dessimoz, E. M. A. G. Hernand ez, C. J. Fields, J.-P. Leburton, D. Soloveichik, LeProust, B. Sipos and E. Birney, Towards practical, H. Zhao and O. Milenkovic, DNA punch cards for storing high-capacity, low-maintenance information storage in data on native DNA sequences via enzymatic nicking, Nature synthesized DNA, Nature 494 (2013) 77. Communications 11 (2020) 1742. [107] S. M. H. Tabatabaei Yazdi, Y. Yuan, J. Ma, H. Zhao and [112] R. Essig, J. Mardon and T. Volansky, Direct Detection of O. Milenkovic, A Rewritable, Random-Access DNA-Based Sub-GeV Dark Matter, Phys. Rev. D 85 (2012) 076007 Storage System, Scientific Reports 5 (2015) 14138. [1108.5383]. [108] R. N. Grass, R. Heckel, M. Puddu, D. Paunescu and W. J. [113] DAMIC Collaboration, A. Aguilar-Arevalo et al., Stark, Robust Chemical Preservation of Digital Information Measurement of radioactive contamination in the on DNA in Silica with Error-Correcting Codes, Angewandte high-resistivity silicon CCDs of the DAMIC experiment, Chemie International Edition 54 (2015) 2552. JINST 10 (2015) P08014[ 1506.02562]. [109] S. M. H. T. Yazdi, R. Gabrys and O. Milenkovic, Portable [114]I CECUBE Collaboration, M. G. Aartsen et al., Observation of and Error-Free DNA-Based Data Storage, Scientific Reports High-Energy Astrophysical Neutrinos in Three Years of 7 (2017) 5011. IceCube Data, Phys. Rev. Lett. 113 (2014) 101101 [1405.5303].
Appendix A: Additional breakage plots
In this appendix we display a larger set of a DNA breakage distributions for different particles, energies and orientations. We show only the y z projection of the distributions. These plots are here for completeness and to help further understand the behaviours described− in the main text in Sec.V. Figures 10, 11, 12, correspond to three beam angles, 0 ◦, 45◦ and 90◦, respectively. 18
200 Proton 10 keV 30 keV 70 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Alpha 10 keV 30 keV 70 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Carbon 10 keV 30 keV 70 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Gold 50 keV 100 keV 300 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Electron 0.5 keV 1 keV 5 keV 10 keV 50 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Gamma 0.05 keV 0.1 keV 0.5 keV 1 keV 5 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 y [nm]
FIG. 10. Additional detailed images of strand breakage from side-on beams. Each row corresponds to a different beam particle, and has five panels for different beam energies. The thick lines connected by circles correspond to the primary particle track, whereas the thinner dashed lines correspond to secondary particles generated by a primary interaction. 19
200 Proton 10 keV 30 keV 70 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Alpha 10 keV 30 keV 70 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Carbon 30 keV 70 keV 100 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Gold 50 keV 100 keV 300 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Electron 0.5 keV 1 keV 5 keV 10 keV 50 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Gamma 0.05 keV 0.1 keV 0.5 keV 1 keV 5 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 y [nm]
FIG. 11. Additional detailed images of strand breakage from top-down beams. Each row corresponds to a different beam particle, and has five panels for different beam energies. The thick lines connected by circles correspond to the primary particle track, whereas the thinner dashed lines correspond to secondary particles generated by a primary interaction. Those panels that show no interactions correspond to the cases where the incident particle is stopped inside the holder, or is not energetic enough to break a strand. The star denotes the entry position of the beam, note that we generate gold nuclei underneath the holder rather than above it. 20
200 Proton 10 keV 30 keV 70 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Alpha 10 keV 30 keV 70 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Carbon 30 keV 70 keV 100 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Gold 50 keV 100 keV 300 keV 500 keV 1000 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Electron 0.5 keV 1 keV 5 keV 10 keV 50 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 200 Gamma 0.05 keV 0.1 keV 0.5 keV 1 keV 5 keV 0
200
[nm] −
z 400 − 600 − 0 1000 2000 3000 4000 5000 y [nm]
FIG. 12. Additional detailed images of strand breakage from beams angled at 45◦ to the holder. Each row corresponds to a different beam particle, and has five panels for different beam energies. The thick lines connected by circles correspond to the primary particle track, whereas the thinner dashed lines correspond to secondary particles generated by a primary interaction. The star denotes the entry position of the beam, note that we generate gold nuclei underneath the holder rather than above it.