myDate []

# Supplementary Material

###### Contents

  1. S1 Computational design framework
    1. S1.1 SAT-assembly design of pyrochlore lattice
    2. S1.2 Patchy particle simulations
    3. S1.3 OxDNA simulations
  2. S2 Experimental methods and materials
    1. S2.1 DNA origami and sequence design
    2. S2.2 DNA origami annealing and purification
    3. S2.3 Fabrication of pyrochlore superlattices
    4. S2.4 Measurement of the melting profile
    5. S2.5 Silicification and SEM imaging
    6. S2.6 AuNP functionalization and incorporation
    7. S2.7 Grid preparation and imaging with TEM and STEM
    8. S2.8 SAXS measurements and modeling
      1. S2.8.1 Representation of DNA origami for SAXS analysis
      2. S2.8.2 SAXS Data Analysis
      3. S2.8.3 Small-Angle X-Ray Scattering (SAXS) Data Acquisition of DNA Origami Lattices
      4. S2.8.4 SAXS modeling
  3. S3 Additional experimental graphs and figures
  4. S4 DNA Sequences
    1. S4.1 Sequence design
    2. S4.2 Icosahedral DNA origami
      1. S4.2.1 Staple sequences
      2. S4.2.2 Handle sequences
    3. S4.3 Octahedral DNA origami
      1. S4.3.1 Staple sequences
      2. S4.3.2 Functionalization sequence
      3. S4.3.3 Handle sequence

##  S1 Computational design framework

###  S1.1 SAT-assembly design of pyrochlore lattice

We use the SAT-assembly framework to design nanostructures that self-assemble
into the target lattice. We use the design framework introduced in Ref. [1, 2]
that formulates the inverse design problem as a Boolean Satisfiability problem
(SAT) in terms of binary variables and logic clauses. SAT problems can be
efficiently solved using available tools such as MiniSAT [3].

For completeness, we list here all the variables and clauses that were used to
find the solution that forms pyrochlore lattice. The color interaction is
given by binary variables $x^{\rm int}_{c_{i},c_{j}}$ which are 1 if color
$c_{i}$ is compatible with color $c_{j}$ and 0 otherwise. The patch coloring
for each PP species is described by binary variables $x^{\rm pcol}_{s,p,c}$
which are 1 if patch $p$ of species $s$ has color $c$ and 0 otherwise. The
arrangement of the particle species in the lattice is described by
$x^{L}_{l,s,o}$ which is 1 if the position $l$ is occupied by a PP of species
$s$ in the specific orientation $o$. The variable $x^{A}_{l,k,c}$ is 1 if slot
$k$ of lattice position $l$ is occupied by a patch with color $c$ and 0
otherwise. The clauses and variables are defined for all possible combinations
of colors $c\in[1,N_{c}]$, patches $p\in[1,N_{p}]$, slots $k\in[1,N_{p}]$, PP
species $s\in[1,N_{s}]$, orientations $o\in[1,N_{o}]$, and lattice positions
$l\in[1,L]$. For each particle orientation $o$, we assign a mapping
$\phi_{o}$. The mapping $\phi_{o}(k)=p$ for a given orientation $o$ means that
PP’s patch $p$ overlaps with slot $k$ in a given lattice position, for example
$\phi_{1}=(1,2,3,4,5,6)\rightarrow(2,3,1,5,6,4)$. For a particle with 6
patches, there are $N_{o}=12$ such orientations.

As an input for the SAT solver, the problem has to be formulated in terms of
clauses $C_{j}$, each of them containing variables $x_{i}$ connected by OR
clauses. The final SAT problem corresponds to all respective clauses $C_{j}$
connected by AND clauses. To conform with this input format, the Boolean
clauses introduced in Table 1 in the main text can be all reformulated as
detailed below (we use symbols ”$\land$”, ”$\lor$”, and ”$\neg$” to denote
AND, OR, and NOT operations respectively):

  1. 1.

Each color $c_{i}$ can only bind to one other color $c_{j}$ (we exclude self-
complementary colors):

$\forall c_{i}<c_{j}<c_{k}\in[1,N_{c}]:C^{\rm int}_{c_{i},c_{j},c_{k}}=\neg
x^{\rm int}_{c_{i},c_{j}}\lor\neg x^{\rm int}_{c_{i},c_{k}}.$ (S1)

  2. 2.

Each patch $p$ of each PP species $s$ is assigned exactly one color:

$\forall s\in[1,N_{s}],p\in[1,N_{p}],c_{l}<c_{k}\in[1,N_{c}]:C^{\rm
pcol}_{s,p,c_{k},c_{l}}=\neg x^{pcol}_{s,p,c_{k}}\lor\neg x^{\rm
pcol}_{s,p,c_{l}}.$ (S2)

  3. 3.

Each lattice position $l$ is only assigned exactly one PP species with exactly
one assigned orientation:

$\forall
l\in[1,L],s_{i}<s_{j}\in[1,N_{s}],o_{i}<o_{j}\in[1,N_{o}]:C^{L}_{l,s_{i},o_{i},s_{j},o_{j}}=\neg
x^{L}_{l,s_{i},o_{i}}\lor\neg x^{L}_{l,s_{j},o_{j}}.$ (S3)

  4. 4.

For all pairs of slots $k_{i}$ and $k_{j}$ that are in contact in neighboring
lattice positions $l_{i},l_{j}$ (as given by the unit cell topology listed in
Table S2), the patches that occupy them need to have complementary colors.

$\forall c_{i}\leq c_{j}\in[1,N_{c}]:C^{\rm
lint}_{l_{i},k_{i},l_{j},k_{j},c_{i},c_{j}}=\left(x^{A}_{l_{i},k_{i},c_{i}}\land
x^{A}_{l_{j},k_{j},c_{j}}\right)\implies x^{C}_{c_{i},c_{j}},$

which can be equivalently rewritten as

$C^{\rm lint}_{l_{i},k_{i},l_{j},k_{j},c_{i},c_{j}}=\neg
x^{A}_{l_{i},k_{i},c_{i}}\lor\neg x^{A}_{l_{j},k_{j},c_{j}}\lor
x^{C}_{c_{i},c_{j}},$ (S4)

  5. 5.

The slot of lattice position $l$ is colored with the same color as the patch
of the PP species occupying it:

$\forall
l\in[1,L],k\in[1,N_{p}],o\in[1,N_{o}],s\in[1,N_{s}],c\in[1,N_{c}]:C^{\rm
LS}_{l,s,o,c,k}=x^{L}_{l,s,o}\implies\left(x^{A}_{l,k,c}\iff x^{\rm
pcol}_{s,\phi_{o}(k),c}\right),$

which can be equivalently rewritten as

$C^{\rm LS}_{l,s,o,c,k}=\left(\neg x^{L}_{l,s,o}\lor\neg x^{A}_{l,k,c}\lor
x^{\rm pcol}_{s,\phi_{r}(p),c}\right)\land\left(\neg x^{L}_{l,s,o}\lor
x^{A}_{l,k,c}\lor\neg x^{\rm pcol}_{s,\phi_{o}(k),c}\right)$ (S5)

  6. 6.

All $N_{s}$ PP species have to be used at least once in the assembled lattice:

$\forall s\in[1,N_{s}]:C^{\rm all\,spec.}_{s}=\bigvee_{\forall
l\in[1,L],o\in[1,N_{o}]}x^{L}_{l,s,o},$ (S6)

where for each $s$, the conditions are connected by OR clause over all lattice
positions and orientations.

  7. 7.

Each color $c$ of $N_{c}$ total number of colors is assigned to at least one
patch of one of the PP species:

$\forall c\in[1,N_{c}]:C^{\rm all\,cols.}_{c}=\bigvee_{\forall
s\in[1,N_{s}],p\in[1,N_{p}]}x^{\rm pcol}_{s,p,c}$ (S7)

  8. 8.

Finally, we introduced an additional set of clauses that ensure that any pair
of particles (of the same or different species) cannot bind by more than one
bond at a time: $\forall
s_{i},s_{j}\in[1,N_{s}],c^{1}_{i},c^{2}_{i},c^{1}_{j},c^{2}_{j}\in[1,N_{c}]:$

$C^{\rm
no\,two}_{s_{i},s_{j},p^{i}_{1},p^{i}_{2},p^{j}_{1},p^{j}_{2},c^{1}_{i},c^{2}_{i},c^{1}_{j},c^{2}_{j}}=\neg\left(x^{\rm
pcol}_{s_{i},p^{i}_{1},c^{1}_{i}}\land x^{\rm
pcol}_{s_{i},p^{i}_{2},c^{2}_{i}}\land x^{\rm
pcol}_{s_{j},p^{j}_{1},c^{1}_{j}}\land x^{\rm
pcol}_{s_{j},p^{j}_{2},c^{2}_{j}}\land x^{\rm int}_{c^{1}_{i},c^{1}_{j}}\land
x^{\rm int}_{c^{2}_{i},c^{2}_{j}}\right),$ (S8)

where $p^{i}_{1},p^{i}_{2},p^{j}_{1},p^{j}_{2}$ are all possible pairs of
patches on PP of type $s_{i}$ and $s_{j}$ respectively for which there is a
possible orientation so that they can both bind if they have compatible
colors.

  9. 9.

We furthermore require that in the identified solution, no particle species
has a patch that would be able to bind to any other patch on the same
particle. This additional constraint is introduced due to constraints with DNA
origami preparation, as each DNA origami with specific staple strands
corresponding to patches is prepared separately, and we aim to avoid formation
of dimers or unused staple strands binding to formed origami:

$\forall s\in[1,N_{s}],p_{i},p_{j}\in[1,N_{p},],c_{k},c_{l}\in[1,N_{c}]:C^{\rm
no\,self\,binding}_{s,p_{i},p_{j},c_{k},c_{l}}:\neg x^{\rm
pcol}_{s,p_{i},c_{k}}\lor\neg x^{\rm pcol}_{s,p_{j},c_{l}}\lor\neg x^{\rm
int}_{c_{k},c_{l}}$ (S9)

PP species | Patch Coloring
---|---
I: | (A,1) | (B,2) | (C,3) | (D,4) | (E,5) | (F,6)
II: | (A,7) | (B,8) | (C,9) | (D,10) | (E,11) | (F,12)
III: | (A,13) | (B,14) | (C,15) | (D,16) | (E,17) | (F,18)
IV: | (A,19) | (B,20) | (C,21) | (D,22) | (E,23) | (F,24)
Color interactions
(1,15), (2,8), (12,17), (13,20), (16,23), (3,21), (4,18), (5,11), (6,24),
(7,19), (9,14), (10,22)
Table S1: Pyrochlore crystal lattice patchy particle design with 4 patchy
particle species and 24 colors. The six patches on each species are labeled
A-F respectively. Patch Coloring column shows colors (labeled 1-24) assigned
to each patch and Color interactions show which colors are compatible.
Compatible colors correspond to complementary DNA overhang strands in the DNA
origami designs.

The smallest solution in terms of number of different particle species $N_{\rm
s}$ that satisfies all the clauses listed above, as identified with MiniSAT
solver [3], requires use of four distinct particle species. We chose species
with maximum number of colors ($N_{\rm c}=6N_{\rm s}$), which are specified in
Table S1.

Position $l_{i}$ |  Slot $s_{i}$ |  Position $l_{j}$ |  Slot $s_{j}$
---|---|---|---
0 | 0 | 7 | 0
0 | 1 | 4 | 3
0 | 2 | 1 | 5
0 | 3 | 9 | 1
0 | 4 | 6 | 4
0 | 5 | 3 | 2
10 | 1 | 12 | 1
1 | 0 | 12 | 4
10 | 3 | 11 | 1
1 | 1 | 13 | 3
11 | 5 | 14 | 2
1 | 2 | 2 | 5
12 | 5 | 13 | 5
13 | 0 | 15 | 0
1 | 3 | 7 | 1
14 | 4 | 15 | 4
1 | 4 | 4 | 4
2 | 0 | 14 | 0
2 | 1 | 11 | 3
2 | 2 | 3 | 5
2 | 3 | 12 | 3
2 | 4 | 13 | 4
3 | 0 | 9 | 0
3 | 1 | 6 | 3
3 | 3 | 14 | 1
3 | 4 | 11 | 4
4 | 0 | 5 | 4
4 | 1 | 15 | 3
4 | 2 | 14 | 5
4 | 5 | 7 | 2
5 | 0 | 12 | 0
5 | 1 | 6 | 1
5 | 2 | 10 | 2
5 | 3 | 14 | 3
5 | 5 | 15 | 5
6 | 0 | 10 | 0
6 | 2 | 12 | 2
6 | 5 | 9 | 2
7 | 3 | 8 | 1
7 | 4 | 10 | 4
7 | 5 | 11 | 2
8 | 0 | 11 | 0
8 | 2 | 10 | 5
8 | 3 | 13 | 1
8 | 4 | 9 | 4
8 | 5 | 15 | 2
9 | 3 | 15 | 1
9 | 5 | 13 | 2
Table S2: Topology of the unit cell of a pyrochlore

###  S1.2 Patchy particle simulations

The patchy particle simulations were used to test solutions obtained from the
SAT-solvers algorithm and probe their assembly into a target lattice. In
patchy-particle simulations of pyrochlore lattice assembly, each particle is
represented by a sphere covered by 6 patches at distance $d_{\rm p}=0.5$
distance units (d.u.) from the center of the sphere. To mimic the icosahedral
DNA wireframe origami design, the positions of the patches correspond to the
selected six vertices of an icosahedron. These positions, defined in terms of
the orthonormal base associated with the patchy particle, are

$\mathbf{p}_{1}=a\left(0,1,\xi\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{2}=a\left(0,-1,\xi\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{3}=a\left(\xi,0,1\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{4}=a\left(0,-1,-\xi\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{5}=a\left(0,1,-\xi\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{6}=a\left(-\xi,0,-1\right),$
(S10)

where $\xi=(1+\sqrt{5})/2$ and $a=d_{\rm p}/\sqrt{1+\xi^{2}}$.

To model the octahedral wireframe DNA origami designs, we position the patches
on the surface of the particle in cubic arrangement:

$\mathbf{p}_{1}=d_{\rm p}\left(0,0,1\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{2}=d_{\rm
p}\left(1,0,0\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{3}=d_{\rm
p}\left(0,1,0\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{4}=d_{\rm
p}\left(0,0,-1\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{5}=d_{\rm
p}\left(-1,0,0\right),\,\mathbf{p}_{6}=d_{\rm p}\left(0,-1,0\right),\,$ (S11)

The position of patch $i$ in the simulation box coordinate system is given by

$\mathbf{r}_{p_{i}}=\mathbf{r}_{\rm
cm}+{\mathrm{p}_{i}}_{x}\mathbf{e}_{1}+{\mathrm{p}_{i}}_{y}\mathbf{e}_{2}+{\mathrm{p}_{i}}_{z}\mathbf{e}_{3}$
(S12)

where $\mathbf{r}_{\rm cm}$ is the position of the center of mass of the
patchy particle, and $\mathbf{e}_{1,2,3}$ are the x, y, and z orthonormal base
vectors associated with the patchy particle’s orientation.

The interaction potential between a pair of patches on two distinct particles
is

$V_{\rm
patch}(r_{p})=\begin{cases}-1.001\delta_{ij}\exp{\left[-\left(\frac{r_{p}}{\alpha}\right)^{10}\right]}-C&\text{if
$r_{p}\leq r_{\rm pmax}$}\\\ 0&\text{otherwise}\end{cases}$ (S13)

where $\delta_{ij}$ is 1 if patch colors $i$ and $j$ can bind and 0 otherwise,
$r_{p}$ is the distances between a pair of patches. The constant $C$ is set so
that for $V_{\rm patch}(r_{pmax})=0$, $r_{\rm pmax}=0.18\,\rm{d.u.}$ (distance
units). The parameter $\alpha=0.12$ d.u. sets the patch width, where patches
do not strongly interact if they are separated by distances larger than
$\alpha=0.12$. We approximately set the patch width based on oxDNA model
simulations [4, 5, 6] of the DNA origami monomers (Sec. S1.3 and Fig. S3),
where we measure the distribution of the distance between the last and the
first bases of the single-stranded overhang. In order to capture the fact that
single-stranded overhang can reach longer distances than its typical end-to-
end distance, we approximately take the patch width $\alpha$ to be the mean
plus standard deviation of the overhang length values measured in oxDNA
molecular dynamics simulations at $25^{\circ}$C (ran for $10^{9}$ steps with
time step $10$ fs). To convert this length from oxDNA to distance units of the
patchy particle simulations, we divide it by the diameter of the wireframe
origami, which we define as twice the mean distance from the center of mass of
the DNA origami to the first base of the single-stranded overhang, as measured
in the oxDNA simulations.

The patchy particles further interact through excluded volume interactions
ensuring that two particles do not overlap:

$V_{\rm exc}(r,\epsilon,\sigma,r^{\star})=\begin{cases}V_{\rm
LJ}(r,\epsilon,\sigma)&\text{if $r<r^{\star}$},\\\ \epsilon V_{\rm
smooth}(r,b,r^{c})&\text{if $r^{\star}<r<r^{c}$},\\\
0&\text{otherwise}.\end{cases}$ (S14)

where $r$ is the distance between the centers of the patchy particles, and
$\sigma$ is set to $2R=0.8$, twice the desired radius of the patchy particle.
The choice of a radius ($R=0.4$ distance units) smaller than $d_{\rm p}$ has
been done to mimic wireframe DNA origami, which are flexible and not
spherical. In particular, we wanted the patchy model to be able to capture the
fact that two faces of the icosahedral DNA origami, each with three patches,
can be aligned in a way that can form up to three bonds with a second origami
if patch coloring allows for it. Such states have been identified to lead to
misassembly, and we use the SAT framework to avoid them. The repulsive
potential is a piecewise function, consisting of Lennard-Jones potential
function

$V_{\rm
LJ}(r,\sigma)=8\left[\left(\frac{\sigma}{r}\right)^{12}-\left(\frac{\sigma}{r}\right)^{6}\right].$
(S15)

that is truncated using a quadratic smoothening function

$V_{\rm smooth}(x,b,x^{c})=b(x^{c}-x)^{2},$ (S16)

with $b$ and $x_{c}$ are set so that the potential is a differentiable
function that is equal to $0$ after a specified cutoff distance $r^{c}=0.8$.

The patchy particle systems are simulated using rigid-body Molecular Dynamics
with an Andersen-like thermostat [7]. During the simulation, each patch was
only able to be bound to one other patch at the time, and if the binding
energy between a pair of patches, as given by Eq. (S13), is smaller than 0,
none of the patches can bind to any other patch until their pair interaction
potential is again 0.

To verify designs obtained from SAT-assembly, we ran for each designed systems
the patchy particle simulations (consisting of 2048 particles, 512 of each
species) at a range of temperatures (from $0.1$ to $0.125$ in simulation
units) at number density $0.1$ to identify an optimal temperature where the
system nucleates and grows into a pyrochlore lattice (Fig. S1). We found that
at given density, the icosahedral patchy particle design nucleates into a
pyrochlore lattice in a range of tested temperatures ($0.116$ to $0.123$). At
lower temperatures, it forms quenched glassy state, and at higher temperatures
remains in gas phase. For the octahedral patchy particle design, we found that
the system successfully nucleated at temperatures $0.118$ and $0.119$. For
larger temperatures that we considered (Fig. S1b), the systems did not
successfully nucleate a crystal, and it misassembled at lower temperatures.

Besides the model outlines above, we have further implemented an additional
model to represent icosahedral origami designs: a rigid-body icosahedron
model. The interactions between patches remain the same, given by Eq. (S13).
We however replace the excluded volume interaction by a new potential

$V_{\rm
rigid\,b.}(\mathbf{r}_{i},\mathbf{r}_{j},\mathbf{\Omega}_{i},\mathbf{\Omega}_{j})=\begin{cases}\infty&\text{if
icosahedrons $i$ and $j$ overlap},\\\ 0&\text{otherwise},\end{cases}$ (S17)

which we calculate for icosahedral particles $i$ and $j$ positioned at
$\mathbf{r}_{i}$ ,$\mathbf{r}_{j}$ respectively, with their orientation given
by $\mathbf{\Omega}_{i}$ and $\mathbf{\Omega}_{j}$. Each particle is
represented in this rigid body model as an icosahedron with distance from
center of mass to its vertex equal to $R=0.5$ distance units. Given the non-
continuous nature of this potential, we use Monte Carlo simulations (with
translations and rotations) to simulate these systems. Any move that would
result in two icosahedral-shaped particles to overlap is always rejected, as
it would result in infinite energy. We confirmed that the kinetically trapped
state present for 1-species solution in the spherical system is also present
in the rigid body icosahedron simulation. Similarly, we verified with the
rigid body simulation that the solutions that are designed to avoid the state
where one particle can bind to another one by two bonds at the same time
eventually assemble into a pyrochlore lattice. The typical configurations
identified in single-species systems that we studied are shown in Fig. S2.

Finally, we have also explored the role of number of colors when the number of
particle species is fixed. The SAT clauses listed above have a two-species
solution (which was also shown to form pyrochlore [1]) if we leave out the
conditions listed in Eqs. S9. For the two-species case, we have also tried
solutions with number of colors equal to 6, 8, 10, and 12 respectively. We
observed that solutions with $N_{c}=10$ and $N_{c}=8$ also assembled well into
a pyrochlore, but took longer to nucleate than the $N_{c}=12$ case. We also
carried out simulations for a solution with $N_{c}=6$ at a range of
temperatures ranging from $0.12$ to $0.138\,k_{\rm B}/\epsilon$, but we only
observed either gas state or glassy state formations and we did not observe
successful pyrochlore nucleation in the simulation running time (up to
$3\times 10^{9}$ MD steps, corresponding to about 3 weeks of CPU running
time). Hence, we focused only on the solution with maximum possible number of
colors ($6\times$ the number of species).

Figure S1: Energy per particle (in simulation energy units $\varepsilon$) as a
function of simulation time units for different simulation temperatures (in
units of $k_{\rm B}/\varepsilon$) for icosahedral patchy particle (a) and
octahedral patchy particle (b). We show a snapshot of the last state of the
simulation at temperature $T=0.122\,k_{\rm B}/\varepsilon$ for icosahedral
patchy particles (c) and at $T=0.118\,k_{\rm B}/\varepsilon$ octahedral patchy
particles (d).  Figure S2: Snapshots from equilibrated final states of patchy
particle simulations with a single particle species. At low temperature (a),
the particles assemble into disordered quenched state. At intermediate
temperature range, the particles assemble into alternative free-energy minima
of a sheets where pairs of interacting particles interact through two patches
(shown in (c) for spherical patchy simulation and in (b) for rigid body with
icosahedral shape simulation). At high temperature, the system remains in gas
state (d).

###  S1.3 OxDNA simulations

The nucleotide-level simulations of DNA nanostructures have been carried out
using the oxDNA2 parametrization of the coarse-grained model of DNA [6, 5, 8].
All simulations were performed at 1 M salt concentration, with time-step of 15
fs and temperature $25^{\circ}$C unless stated otherwise. We used Andersen-
like thermostat [7] for molecular dynamics simulations. The simulations were
performed using GPU implementation [9, 10] of the simulation code. The
simulations of monomers and fourmers (Figs. S3 and S4) were setup using oxView
design tool [11, 12], which was also used to interactively set the lengths of
the single-stranded overhangs connecting the respective origamis. The
simulations of the 2x2x2 unit cell cluster was setup by using the assembled
part of the crystal from patchy particle simulation, where each DNA origami
monomer were docked onto the position of the patchy particle and spring
potential forces were applied to connect complementary DNA overhangs that
represent the patches. The system was relaxed using Monte Carlo simulations
and oxDNA relaxation potential, following the protocol from [12], before the
production run of the crystal cluster was run.

Figure S3: DNA origami design for the self-assembly of lattices. a) Origami
design visualized in oxView [12] with blue strands representing the handle
strands. b) Schematics showing the origami design. For each handle strand,
poly-T spacers are placed before the sticky end sequence for binding, allowing
flexibility for the recognition and binding of the sticky end pairs in lattice
annealing.  Figure S4: Tetramer in the topology of tetrahedron assembled with
octahedron and icosahedron DNA origami, visualized in oxView. Tetrahedral
assemblies stack on each other with the designed pathway forms further the
pyrochlore lattice. The existence of scaffold loop in the octahedral DNA
origami (one of them is highlighted in red square) could affect inter-particle
connection due to the spatial proximity while icosahedral origami-based
lattice design does not have such concern.

##  S2 Experimental methods and materials

###  S2.1 DNA origami and sequence design

Octahedral DNA origami (ODO), originally designed and reported by Tian el al
[13] is adapted and used here. Icosahedral DNA origami (IDO) was first
introduced by Zhang et al [14] and further adapted and used here. For both
structures, each edge is composed of at least 4 helices to ensure the
structural rigidity. The handles for directional bonding are placed on the
vertices of the polyhedral shape and are properly distributed for even
connection.

The sequence of handles are carefully designed so that the melting temperature
difference between each pair of sticky ends are minimized and also the binding
between each sequence pair is orthogonal to each other to prevent cross-talk.
NUPACK[15] is used for the sequence design, with customized scripts.

###  S2.2 DNA origami annealing and purification

Octahedral DNA origami are folded by mixing 20 nM M13mp18 scaffold, 200 nM of
each designed staples, including the one designed to bind gold nanoparticles,
and specifically 400 nM of each of the handle (sticky end strands) making the
connection in 1 X TAE $\rm Mg^{2+}$ buffer (40 mM Tris, 20 mM acetic acid, 1
mM EDTA, 12.5 mM $\rm Mg^{2+}$ pH 8.0). The mixed solution is then annealed by
cooling from 75°C to 20 °C slowly to obtain the target DNA structure with the
following program: from 75 °C to 65 °C at a rate of 0.1 °C per $0.5$ min, from
65 °C to 40 °C at a rate of $0.1$ °C per 4 min, from 40 °C to 20 °C at $0.1$
°C per 2 min, then held at 20 °C at the end of the cycle. Excess of the staple
strands of the origami are purified through amicon ultrafiltration. Briefly,
100 kD amicon columns are passivated with fresh buffer and then annealed
sample is loaded along with buffer to fill the column. The centrifugation is
done with a rate between 2k rcf to 2.5k rcf followed by refilling the column
with more buffer. Such procedure is done for overall 5 to 8 times, with higher
loading amount taking more iterations to be purified.

Icosahedral DNA origami is annealed with the same program with the octahedral
origami but usually in a higher concentration (40 - 50 nM) for further
purification. It is noted that the yield of correctly formed monomer
icosahedral origami is lower than the octahedral one and requires more
attention and care in purification to afford clean monomers for lattice
assembly. Rate zonal centrifugation, originally reported by Lin et al [16], is
used to purify the monomers which guarantees higher yield compared to gel band
excision and extraction. Briefly, in a 3.5 ml thick-wall ultracentrifuge tube,
a glycerol gradient is created by adding
$400\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ of different percentage of
glycerol solution in 1 x TAE $\rm Mg^{2+}$ buffer layer by layer. For overall
7 layers, the 45% glycerol solution is added the first and therefore at the
bottom layer and the 5% glycerol solution is at the bottom with 5%
concentration decrement per layer in between.
$200\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ of annealed icosahedral DNA
origamis are then applied on the top. Without waiting overnight for a quasi-
continuous gradient, the tube is loaded onto the swinging-bucket rotor
(Beckman SW 55 Ti) and spun at 50000 rpm for 1 hour at 4 °C. The
centrifugation program is set to be ”Slow” for acceleration and ”No brake” for
deceleration, allowing for slow and smooth rate transition for a better
separation of the sample. Afterwards, fractions
($200\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ per fraction) are taken out and
placed in individual tubes which are further evaluated with agarose gel
electrophresis (AGE). The fractions corresponding to monomers, ideally with no
or limited contamination of multimers/malformed structure which appear above
the monomer band in AGE, are collected and concentrated as well as buffer
exchanged through amicon ultrafiltration. The buffer washing step in amicon
ultrafiltration is done for 6 times with 2400 rcf to remove the leftover
glycerol which could affect the diffusion of DNA origamis in solution if not
completely filtered.

For both DNA origami species, the concentration after purification is
determined through Nanodrop based on the absorbance on 260 nm. Unused samples
are stored at 4 °C refrigerator until further processing.

###  S2.3 Fabrication of pyrochlore superlattices

For each origami species there are 4 particle types with 6 corresponding
sticky end sets to map the interaction matrix for the assembly of pyrochlore
lattices. Purified origami monomers, namely 4 individual particle species, are
mixed together with equal ratio (1:1:1:1) and the final monomer concentration
is set to be 10 nM. The mixed samples are annealed with a customized protocol
based on the melting temperature of the superlattices.

For the pyrochlore lattice assembled with octahedral DNA origami, the
annealing protocol is as follows: 55 °C for 2 hours, 54 to 52 °C with 0.1 °C
per 8 hours, 52 °C for 24 hours, and then incubated at RT for forever.

For the pyrochlore lattice assembled with icosahedral DNA origami, the
annealing protocol is as follows: 45 °C for 2 hours, 43 to 41 °C with 0.1 °C
per 8 hours and then incubated at RT for forever.

For the screening of the nucleation temperature for the pyrochlore lattice
with icosahedral building blocks, the mixed solution is incubated at 45 °C for
2 hours followed by incubation at the designated temperatures (41.1 °C, 41.3
°C, 41.4 °C, 41.5 °C, 41.7 °C, 41.9 °C) and finally incubated at RT for
forever.

The thermal annealing of mixed solutions are done in thermocyclers above. The
mix-and-anneal strategy is done through a customized set-up in which PCR tubes
containing the sample are fixed to shaker and the devices are placed in a
thermal incubator. Particularly, unless noted, all the SEM images shown are
annealed with thermocyclers. The annealing protocol set in thermal incubators
is as follows: 45 °C for 2 hours, 43 to 41 °C with 0.2 °C per 24 hours and the
system is then allowed to cool down to RT before being harvested for
characterization.

The fabricated lattices are stored in 4 °C after annealing. From our
experience the assembled lattices are stable in fridge for more than 6 months
- no visual differences are spotted with SEM examination after silica
embedding for freshly annealed samples and fridge stored samples. Batch to
batch difference exists and it is largely caused by pipeting and therefore
stoichiometry accuracy, which leads to the change of average size of the
lattices as visualized by SEM.

###  S2.4 Measurement of the melting profile

Melting profile is used to customize the annealing protocol for the
superlattices. It is measured by monitoring the aggregate size for a range of
temperature through Dynamic Light Scattering (DLS, Malvern Zetasizer Nano).
Specifically, the temperature ramps down from 55 °C to 30 °C with a ramping
rate of 0.2°C per 240 seconds. Disposable
$40\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ Cuvette is used after cleaning and
kept capped during the measurement to reduce the evaporation of water.
$100\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ of sample, pre-mixed with purified
all 4 particle species, is loaded so that the melting profile would be similar
to the one associated to lattice annealing.

###  S2.5 Silicification and SEM imaging

To preserve the structure of under EM conditions, a thin layer of silica was
coated on the DNA origami superlattices with the method originally described
by Wang et al[17] and further adapted by us. Briefly, the annealed sample is
buffer exchanged through gently removing the supernatant and replace with
fresh buffer of 1xTAE 12.5mM $\mathrm{Mg^{2+}}$. [$\mathrm{Mg^{2+}}$] reaches
to the expected level after several times of pipetting, along with the amount
of monomer and oligomer which would potentially affect the imaging quality of
SEM. Samples are lightly centrifuged (1k rpm, 1min) to ensure the fabricated
lattices are deposited at the bottom of the tube. TMAPS (50% in Methanol,
TCI), diluted with methanol, is then added to the sample with microsyringe and
the solution mix is subjected to shaking (800rpm, 30min, 4°C) to facilitate
the diffusion and therefore even binding of TMAPS to the DNA phosphate
backbone. Subsequently, TEOS (Sigma-Alrich) is added to the solution after
dilution with methanol and the same shaking protocol is executed for the
sample. Notably, to embed silica onto large lattices elongated mixing (up to
2h) is needed to ensure the diffusion of silanes into the internal part of the
lattice, as also indicated by Lewis et al [18]. A direct result of
insufficient mixing is the collapse of lattice upon drying as shown in Fig.
S13. The molar ratio of nucleotide: TMAPS : TEOS is 1:9:18 for the production
of a thin layer of silica. The sample mixed with silanes is then incubated at
RT for 12 hours undisturbed, wrapped within an aluminum foil. White cloudy
precipitants are visible afterwards, indicating the successful formation of
silica coated substances. Fresh ultrapure water is finally added to fill the
tube to 2ml for the purpose of quenching the reaction, followed by light
pipeting, centrifuging and supernatant removal to get rid of the excess
silanes and silica particles. The washing process is done for at least 3 times
with water, followed by one last washing step with isopropanol.

$10\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ embedded sample is taken from the
bottom of the tube and further dropped cast on a silicon wafer cleaned with
ethanol. The droplet is then dried in room temperature to expose the silicated
superlattices to the air. SEM images are obtained through Auiga (Zeiss) and
Helios 5 UX (ThermoScientific). Accelerating voltages, currents and other
imaging parameters are adjusted to minimize the charging effect.

Cross-section of the silicated sample is created with Focused Ion Beam (FIB)
installed on Helios 5 UX. A sacrificial layer of Platinum is deposited to the
top of the sample to avoid unintended milling. For ion beam imaging, 30 kv and
7 pA is used to reduce the charging with charge neutralizer switched on while
the current is increaed to 41 pA for the creation of cross-section to
accelerate the process.

###  S2.6 AuNP functionalization and incorporation

10nm AuNP (Nanopartz) is functionalized with DNA through the salt aging
method, adapted from Tian et al[19]. Briefly, thiolated DNA is synthesized by
IDT and reduced with TCEP (tris[2-carboxyethyl] phosphine) to be prepared for
the conjugation onto AuNP. With a ratio of 1:100, excess TCEP is added to the
solution of thiolated DNA and the mixture is shaked at room temperature for an
hour with 800rpm. Desalting column (G-25, GE Healthcare) is used to remove the
remaining TCEP along with the reduced side-product. The purified product is
further added into the AuNP solution in a ratio of 1:300 and another hour is
given to the mixture for initial DNA attachment. Phosphate buffer is then
added until 10 mM concentration is reached. After 1 hour, 2 M Nacl solution is
mixed with the solution from the previous step gradually to reach a final
concentration of 300 mM over the course of 5 hours, sonication up to 30
seconds is allowed after the addition of NaCl. The solution is finally aged at
room temperature for at least 18 hours. Excess DNA is removed from the
functionalized AuNP through repeating the process of centrifugation at 15000
rcf and buffer exchange (1 x PBS, remove the supernatant and add fresh
buffer). The concentration of AuNP is determined by measuring the absorbance
at 520 nm.

To incorporate the AuNP into the pyrochlore lattice, annealed sample is mixed
with functionalized AuNP for 2 times excess. After gentle pipetting, the
solution is annealed from 45 to 30 °C with a rate of 0.2 °C/hour.

###  S2.7 Grid preparation and imaging with TEM and STEM

Carbon coated copper grids are glow discharged for 30 seconds and incubated at
room temperature for 5 min before the following operation. To image the
individual DNA origami building blocks for the assembly of the superlattice,
$5\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ solution of purified origami is
dropcasted on the grid, followed by incubation for 5 min. Excess liquid is
then blotted with a piece of filter paper and the grid is then negatively
stained with $5\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ solution of 2% uranyl
acetate for 90 s, afterwhich the grid is blotted thoroughly with filter paper
and allowed to air dry for at least 20 min. To image the lattices,
$5\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolMicro L}$ of silicated lattices, after
thorough washing with water, is taken from the bottom of the tube and added to
the glow discharged grid. Silicated lattice is used here to ensure the
structural integrity. 20 min of incubation in the humid chamber is allowed for
the lattice sample to sediment and the grid is blotted with filter paper
afterwards. The grid is then allowed to air dry without further staining for
EM imaging.

TEM imaging is done on Talos L120C (TFS), operated at an accelerating voltage
of 120 kV.

STEM images are taken using a Titan 300/80 (FEI) in high-angle annular dark
field (HAADF) mode, operated at an accelerating voltage of 300 kV.

###  S2.8 SAXS measurements and modeling

####  S2.8.1 Representation of DNA origami for SAXS analysis

For the SAXS analysis, we approximate the DNA origami wireframe structures as
ideal polyhedrons. We extrapolate edges as lines from the center of
cylindrical dsDNA bundles that will meet at the vertices of the ideal
polyhedron, as shown in Fig. S5. This ideal polyhedron is used to model the
spatial arrangements of the bundles for SAXS data analysis, in particular the
form factor, of a given DNA wireframe. The analysis of the SAXS data in this
work uses the parameters listed in Table S3.

Figure S5: A 2D cartoon depicting how the junction between DNA bundles (blue
rectangles) results in a truncated polyhedron, but that their spatial
arrangement can be described mathematically via the extrapolated edge lengths
(dashed lines)

Frame Geometry | Bundle Length (nm) | Truncated Diagonal (nm) | Extrapolated Edge Length (nm) | Extrapolated Diagonal (nm) | Lattice Parameter (nm) | Nearest Neighbor (nm) | Inter-vertex Distance (nm)
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---
Octahedron | 27.79 | 39.30 | 38.34 | 54.22 | 156.4 | 55.30 | 16.00
Icosahedron | 21.42 | 40.74 | 27.86 | 53.0 | 159.1 | 56.26 | 15.52

Table S3: Parameters of the DNA origami wireframe structures and their
extrapolated ideal polyhedral shapes.

The bundle length can be estimated by multiplying the number of base pair
steps in the bundle by $0.34$ nm, the length of a base pair in the ideal
B-form helix. From this bundle length, a truncated diagonal can be determined
through geometric relations for a given frame geometry. The extrapolated edge
length and diagonal are empirically determined from SAXS data through fitting
the form factor of the DNA origami. After the unit cell is determined from
SAXS data, the lattice parameter and nearest neighbor distances are used to
estimate the inter-vertex distance between two bound vertices. The inter-
vertex is the distance from the outer edge of one frame to another, which is
the nearest neighbor distance subtracted by the truncated diagonal and is
physically determined by the spacer and sticky end sequences of the binding
patches on the frames.

The parameters used to model the octahedron origami are in line with those
used for prior SAXS analysis. The bundle length, 21.42 nm, used for the
icosahedron origami comes from the design reported in the by Zhang et al [14].
There is a slight discrepancy between our estimate of the truncated diagonal,
$40.74$ nm, and their reported truncated diagonal, $43$ nm, possibly due to
the fact that their estimate might be based on negative TEM staining, which
could have deformed the structures.

####  S2.8.2 SAXS Data Analysis

The SAXS data analysis consists of three steps: 1) modelling the building
block (DNA origami) used in the self-assembly, 2) arranging the building
blocks into the expected unit cell, and 3) simulating the SAXS pattern from
the model unit cell and fitting the pattern to the data. This process is
described in greater detail in Section S2.8.4. For DNA origami frames, the
helix bundles that serve as the edges of the frames are represented as single
cylinders. The bundle length and thickness are used as the cylinder height and
diameter respectively. The cylinders are then rotated and translated such that
the edge corresponding to the extrapolated polyhedron runs through the center
of the cylinder, continuing until the frame is fully constructed. The
icosahedron has 30 edges and therefore consists of 30 cylinders, whereas the
octahedron has 12 edges and consists of 12 cylinders. For gold nanoparticles
which are attached inside octahedral DNA origami, the known form factor of a
sphere is used. Therefore, a form factor is fit to the data corresponding to
systems with gold nanoparticles, such as the pyrochlore lattice made out of
octahedral DNA origami with gold nanoparticles inside. When modelling the gold
nanoparticle (AuNP), it is important to account for size polydispersity to
better match the data as this can have a profound effect on the form factor of
a sphere.

Once the building blocks are modelled, they need to be placed into the sites
corresponding to the unit cell of the expected lattice. In this analysis, the
sites corresponding to the pyrochlore lattice are determined through the
Crystalmaker software (from CrystalMaker Software Ltd, Oxford, England
(www.crystalmaker.com)), and exported as fractional coordinates that need to
be scaled by the physical lattice parameters. Theoretical Bragg peaks
corresponding to the pyrochlore are generated with the software
CrystalDiffract.

The lattice parameters are extracted from the experimental data by converting
the first peak position from q-space to real space and accounting for the peak
indices, using the following formula:

$q_{hkl}=\frac{2\pi}{a}\sqrt{h^{2}+k^{2}+l^{2}}$ (S18)

Where $q_{hkl}$ is the $q$ position of any given peak, $a$ is the lattice
parameter of a cubic lattice, and $h$, $k$, and $l$, are the crystallographic
indices for the peak. The first peak in the SAXS data used to determine the
lattice parameter in the pyrochlore lattices corresponds to the [1 1 1] peak.
From this formula, the octahedron origami pyrochlore lattice has a lattice
parameter of $156.4$ nm and the icosahedron origami pyrochlore lattice has a
lattice parameter of $159.1$ nm. The unit cell and building blocks are then
appropriately scaled to fit the SAXS data. Fine tuning of other parameters,
such as peak shape and Debye-Waller factor, a thermal disorder parameter,
further improves the fitting of the model.

The icosahedron origami pyrochlore lattice data shows good agreement with the
I(q) model, as shown in Figure S6, and agrees with most of the model in terms
of peak height ratios. The model departs in terms of relative peak intensity
at the peaks around $0.28$ nm-1 and diverges when approaching the high q space
data, due to instrument limitations. The scattering data from the pyrochlore
constructed with icosahedra origami is left as $I(q)$ because of the
difficulty in deconvoluting the form factor of an empty icosahedral frame from
the structure factor of the pyrochlore. The analytical form factors of the
different objects are shown in Figure S8. From the SAXS data, the icosahedron
origami frames have an extrapolated diagonal of $53.0$ nm. The icosahedron
pyrochlore lattice parameter is $159.1$ nm, and the nearest neighbor distance
is $56.26$ nm.

The structure factor data is in good agreement with the modelled structure
factor for the pyrochlore of octahedron loaded with gold nanoparticles (AuNP),
as shown in Figure S7. The data is presented as structure factor data because
the AuNPs provide a simple measurable form factor to remove from the data. The
S(q) data show a small peak around $0.15$ nm-1 that does not appear in either
the model structure factor or the Bragg peaks from the pyrochlore, which can
be due possible defects in the crystal. The data eventually diverges in the
high q space, due to instrument limitations. The octahedron origami pyrochlore
has a lattice parameter of $156.4$ nm, which results in a nearest neighbor
distance of $55.30$ nm.

The complexity of the form factor contribution to scattering intensity is
dependent upon the complexity of the object. A polydisperse AuNP has low
complexity and is therefore easier to deconvolute from the scattering
intensity data of the octahedron pyrochlore. However, it is more difficult to
deconvolute the icosahedron form factor’s contribution to the scattering
intensity because of its more complex features. It is challenging to determine
the capability of the instrument to measure the complex features of the
icosahedral form factor. Therefore, the data from the icosahedral pyrochlore
is displayed as I(q) rather than S(q).

Figure S6: Scattered intensity, I(q), of the pyrochlore lattice constructed
with icosahedral DNA origami, where the blue and black curves correspond to
the experimental data and modelling respectively. The red lines correspond to
the Bragg peak positions of a pyrochlore lattice. Figure S7: Structure factor,
S(q), data from the pyrochlore of octahedral origami loaded with gold
nanoparticles, where the blue and black curves correspond to the experimental
data and modelling respectively. The red lines correspond to the Bragg peaks
of the pyrochlore lattice.  Figure S8: Modelled form factor, P(q), profiles
for the different origami frames and gold nanoparticles.

####  S2.8.3 Small-Angle X-Ray Scattering (SAXS) Data Acquisition of DNA
Origami Lattices

Origami assemblies were measured in solution at the Complex Materials
Scattering (CMS, 11-BM) beamline at the National Synchrotron Light Source II
(NSLS-II), Brookhaven National Laboratory (BNL). The photon energy of the beam
at CMS is $13.5$ keV with a beam size of $200$ $\mu$m $\times$ $200$ $\mu$m
with an approximate flux of $1011$ photons/sec. The sample-to-detector
distance was set at $5.05$ m. The detector used for the measurements was a
Pilatus $1$M with a pixel size of $172$ $\mu$m $\times$ $172$ $\mu$m. Samples
were loaded into borosilicate glass capillaries that were then sealed with
glue or wax. The bottom of the capillaries were then probed at the bottom of
the capillary where origami lattices had settled. Two-dimensional scattering
patterns were captured on are detectors downstream of the sample. The two-
dimensional scattering patterns were then converted into one-dimensional
scattering intensity profiles ($I(q)$) via azimuthal integration, as a
function of the scattering vector $q$, where
$q=\frac{4\pi}{\lambda}\sin\left(\frac{\theta}{2}\right)$. $\lambda$ and
$\theta$ are the wavelength of the incident x-rays and the full scattering
angle, respectively. The resulting I(q) curves spanned from around 0.04 nm–1
to 1 nm–1 with a resolution of 0.002 nm–1, in reciprocal space.

####  S2.8.4 SAXS modeling

SAXS modeling was primarily performed using ScatterSim software, a python
software package for simulating the 1D curves associated with crystalline
superlattices built from arbitrary nano-objects [20].

Modeling Polydisperse Gold Nanospheres: The model for polydisperse AuNP was
built using “PolydisperseNanoObject” in the ScatterSim package [20]. This
generates a specified object while varying a key parameter of the object. In
this case, “PolydisperseNanoObject” was given a gold sphere generated by
“SphereNanoObject”. We used ($r_{\rm AuNP}$) must be supplied and here,
$r_{\rm AuNP}$ = $4.99$ nm. This radius was determined by analytically fitting
the underlying form factor of intensity data gathered at the beamtime with
spheres of different size. “PolydisperseNanoObject” requires an additional
parameter, $\sigma_{r}$, which accounts for the standard deviation of the
sphere. In this work, the $\sigma_{r}$ of the AuNP was found by a fit to be
0.483 nm. The scattering length density (SLD) of the aqueous environment was
$SLD_{\rm water}=9.43\times 10^{-6}$ Å-2 and the SLD of gold is $SLD_{\rm
gold}=119.16\times 10^{-6}$ Å-2. With these parameters, the form factor of
AuNP can be calculated using:

$F_{\rm
sphere}\left(q,R,\rho^{\prime}\right)=\frac{4\pi}{3}R^{3}\rho\frac{sin(qR)-qRcos(qR)}{(qR)^{3}}$
(S19)

where $\rho^{\prime}$ is the scattering contrast $SLD_{\rm gold}-SLD_{\rm
water}$. We then applying polydispersity dependent on radius $r$ with average
value $\overline{r}$ with its standard deviation $\sigma_{r}$

$\langle F(q)\rangle_{r}=\int P\left(h,\overline{r},\sigma_{r}\right)F_{\rm
sphere}(q,h,\rho^{\prime})dh$ (S20)

and

$\langle\left|F(q)\right|^{2}\rangle_{r}=\int P(h)\left|F_{\rm
sphere}(q,h,\rho^{\prime})\right|^{2}dh$ (S21)

and where the Gaussian distribution is

$P(r,\overline{r},\sigma_{r})=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2\pi\sigma^{2}_{r}}}e^{\frac{{-(r-\overline{r})^{2}}}{2\sigma_{r}^{2}}}.$
(S22)

In ScatterSim this is accomplished by randomly creating spheres with radii
that are sampled from the corresponding probability distribution and averaging
their resultant form factor amplitudes or intensities ($F(q)$ and $|F(q)|^{2}$
respectively).

Modeling Octahedral DNA origami: The octahedron model was built using
“OctahedronCylindersNanoObject in the ScatterSim package. This generates an
octahedral DNA frame where each of six helix bundles (6HB) at the 12 edges of
the octahedron frame is approximated as a cylinder with a specified radius
($r_{\rm 6HB}$) and height ($h_{\rm 6HB}$). The parameters used in this work
were as follows: $r_{\rm 6HB}=4.156$ nm, $h_{\rm 6HB}=27.79$ nm. Additionally,
an extrapolated edge length ($L_{\rm octahedron}$ ) of the DNA octahedron must
be supplied, since the true shape of the origami is a truncated octahedron. In
this work, the edge length was $L_{\rm octahedron}=38.34$ nm. The SLD of 6HB
is approximated as that of double stranded DNA (dsDNA), $SLD_{\rm
dsDNA}=11\times 10^{-6}$ Å-2. These parameters agree with both the design and
known physical features of the octahedron design as well as previous work [19,
21]. The octahedral DNA origami loaded with a polydisperse gold nanoparticle
(Octa-AuNP) was treated as a non-overlapping “composite” object of the two
different components. This is possible to model in ScatterSim as a
“CompositeNanoObject”, where the interference between sub-components is
accounted for. The SAXS modeling with these objects did not include
distortions of the octahedron shapes and polydispersity of their constituent
cylinder components. Adding these distortions introduces many additional
parameters, increases model complexity, and increases calculation times.
Additionally, the resulting model has negligible improvement in fit over the
results shown in this work.

Modeling Icosahedral DNA origami: The icosahedral model was built using
“CylinderNanoObject” in ScatterSim to generate each individual four helix
bundle (4HB) at each edge of the icosahedron. Each cylinder was then rotated
and translated to the positions corresponding to the edge positions of the
icosahedron. All 30 cylinders were then combined through
“CompositeNanoObject”. Each cylinder was set with a specified radius and
height of $r_{\rm 4HB}=2.5$ nm, $h_{\rm 4HB}$ = 21.42 nm. The extrapolated
edge length of the icosahedron was set to $L_{\rm icosahedron}=27.86$ nm.
These parameters are aligned with the dimensions simulated via oxDNA and the
previously reported design [14]. The SLD of the 4HB is approximated as
SLDdsDNA.

Modeling Crystal Lattices of DNA origami: To model the pyrochlore lattices of
DNA origami, the Octa-AuNP or icosahedron composites were used as simple
objects for the construction of the pyrochlore unit cell using ScatterSim.
Once the unit cell is properly organized, the scattering intensity profile can
be calculated via:

$I(q)=cZ_{0}(q)G(q)+P(q)(1-\beta(q)G(q))$ (S23)

where c is an overarching scaling factor, P(q) is the form factor contribution
of the composite object which contains all objects in the lattice to the
signal intensity, and the lattice factor is:

$Z_{0}(q)=\frac{1}{q^{2}}\sum_{hkl}^{m_{hkl}}\left|\sum_{j=1}^{N}\left\langle
F_{j}(q_{hkl})\right\rangle_{\epsilon}e^{2\pi
i(x_{j}h+y_{j}k+z_{j}l)}\right|^{2}L(q-q_{hkl})$ (S24)

where $L(q-q_{hkl})$ is a peak shape function. Lattice structure and symmetry
were taken into account through sampling over the correspondent Miller indices
$q_{hkl}$. $G(q)$ is the Debye-Waller factor which accounts for thermal
vibrations within the lattice and is defined as:

$G(q)=e^{-q^{2}\sigma^{2}_{\rm Drms}},$ (S25)

where $\sigma^{2}_{\rm Drms}$ is the rms displacement of lattice elements.
Finally

$\beta(q)=\frac{\left|\langle
F(q)\rangle_{\epsilon}\right|^{2}}{\left\langle|F(q)|^{2}\right\rangle_{\epsilon}}$
(S26)

which comes from any polydispersity in parameter $\epsilon$. When thermal
vibrations increase, the Debye-Waller factor, $G(q)$, results in reduced
ordered scattering from $Z_{0}(q)$ and nd increased diffuse scattering from
unordered elements. In this work, the effect of $\beta(q)$ was only considered
for the radius of the AuNP. SAXS modeling of lattice scattering is then
carried out as follows: First, given certain lattice components, we used
morphological and scattering parameters as described by designs and informed
by those obtained from single-particle form factor analysis. This includes
parameters like size, shape, and SLD. Next, we built lattice components and
calculated P(q) and $\beta(q)$. The lattice components were then arranged into
the unit cell of a pyrochlore lattice, and lattice constants were extracted by
fitting the primary peak of the experimental data with the constructed lattice
model. Finally, $G(q)$ , peak shape, scaling factors, and background were
adjusted to best match modeled scattering with experimental measurements. In
this work, no direct non-linear least squares fitting of intensity profiles
was conducted because convergence of such fitting is limited due to the
contribution to scattering of diffuse scattering elements and the time
required by the complex architecture of a collection of composite objects.

##  S3 Additional experimental graphs and figures

Figure S9: Negative stain TEM images of the octahedral DNA origami, purified
with ultrafiltration. Figure S10: Negative stain TEM images of the icosahedral
DNA origami, purified with rate zonal purification and therefore free from the
malformed multimers that would potentially affect the lattice growth.

Figure S11: Agarose gel result on the synthesis and purification of IDO. a)
Raw IDO from annealing shows a mixture of targeted structure with unwanted
multi-mer/malformed structures above the targeted gel band. b) Purification of
the annealed IDO with rate zonal centrifugation: gel result on all the
fractions collected after the ultra-centrifugation. Batch to batch differences
exist for the purification and in this case, only fraction 10 and 11 are
collected for further assembly process.

Figure S12: DLS spectrum of the self-assembly systems involved at different
conditions. DLS measures the change of Z-average (intensity weighted mean
hydrodynamic size of the ensemble) against temperature. In a typical
experiment, the cuvette is equilibrated at the starting temperature for at
least 5 min before the execution of program, which when initiated decreases
the temperature at a rate of $0.2\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolCelsius}$ per 4
min. In the figure the spectra corresponding to a) icosahedron and b)
octahedron building blocks are shown, with varied concentration of $\rm
Mg^{2+}$ and the assembling unit themselves. Note in b) the data points are
connected with dashed lines for better differentiation. A qualitative
comparison shows that the concentration increase of either the units or $\rm
Mg^{2+}$ increase the melting temperature and shrink the ”annealing window”
(the temperature starting from origamis just bind to each other to the point
no further increasing of the assembly size is observed). It is noted that for
the spectra of the lattice assembly with octahedron origami, the initial size
is much higher than the one shown in panel a and also the expected monomer
size. We reason that it is because of the strong binding strength of the
handle to connect octahedron units, as the melting temperature of the lattice
is close to $54\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolCelsius}$ and incubation of the
system at $55\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolCelsius}$ for limited time does not
dissociate all the connected units into dispersed monomers. In the meantime,
the starting temperature can only be set at
$55\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolCelsius}$ or lower as higher temperature will
dissolve the origami itself. While we elongated the incubation time of the
system at $55\text{\,}\mathrm{\SIUnitSymbolCelsius}$ for up to 2 hours, we
suspect still not all the building blocks will stay mono-dispersed for the
assembly and may contribute to the final inferior quality of the pyrochlore
lattice assembled with the octahedron origami.

Figure S13: Typical examples showing the distorted/collapsed lattice imaged
with SEM, with suboptimal silica coating being the major reason.

Figure S14: Isothermal annealing of the pyrochlore lattice with the
icosahedral building blocks. The mixed samples are incubated at a higher
temperature for the dissociation of the interactions and then allowed to be
incubated at the specified temperature for a week. The temperature series in
this figure is 41.5 °C,41.7 °C and 41.9 °C.

Figure S15: Isothermal annealing of the pyrochlore lattice with the
icosahedral building blocks. The temperature series in this figure is 41.1
°C,41.3 °C and 41.4 °C.

Figure S16: TEM imaging the silicated pyrochlore lattice assembled with
icosahedron DNA origami. Despite the lack of negative staining, due to the
elevated sample height and silica embedding, it is straightforward to identify
and therefore examine the assembled lattices in low magnification mode. On the
other hand, it becomes nearly impossible for the electron beam to penetrate
through the superlattice, except for the small grains or the peripheral
regions with reduced sample height. The images shown are taken based on such
principle for the purpose of examining the result of the programmed assembly.

Figure S17: STEM imaging the silicated pyrochlore lattice assembled with
icosahedron DNA origami in HAADF mode. While at a higher acceleration voltage
and better contrast with STEM-HAADF, similar issues as mentioned with TEM
imaging exist. Images are taken on a sample assembled in a less optimal
condition in this case, in which small grains are more abundant to be imaged
and examined.

Figure S18: Additional figures for the ODO pyrochlore lattices with zoomed-in
and out views and cross-sections of the lattices generated by FIB. The blur of
the edges and boundary are likely caused by the charging effect and possibly
slightly overcoating of the silica.

Figure S19: Additional figures for the IDO pyrochlore lattices annealed with
thermocycler and embedded in silica with zoomed-in views and zoomed-out view
(bottom right). Charging effect is observed as no metal was sputtered onto the
surface.

Figure S20: Additional figures for the IDO pyrochlore lattices annealed within
a thermal incubator while actively mixed and further embedded in silica with
zoomed-in views and zoomed-out view (bottom right). Charging effect is
observed as no metal was sputtered onto the surface.

##  S4 DNA Sequences

###  S4.1 Sequence design

In order to find a set of 24 sequences (12 complementary pairs) for the design
consisting of 4 particle species, each with 6 unique patches, we have first
enumerated all possible duplex sequences of length 7. We have then selected a
subset which had nearly the same binding-free energy according to the
SantaLucia nearest-neighbor model [22]. We removed any sequences that would be
predicted to form a stable secondary structure. We then considered all
possible pairs of the overhang sequences (which were not complementary to each
other) and used NUPACK [15] to find the lowest free energy of binding that
these non-complementary sequences can form. We have then selected a subset of
12 pairs of sequences so that the lowest free-energy of a duplex formed
between two non-complementary sequences was as high as possible across the
pairs considered. The resulting handle sequences have been incorporated into a
staple strand with poly-T overhangs. All these sequences have been placed at
the 3’ end of the staple strands. The sequences are listed as Handles” in the
following tables, that list all the sequences that compose each DNA origami
particle. The staple strands used in all the DNA origami species are the same
except for the staples sequences that include the handles.

###  S4.2 Icosahedral DNA origami

####  S4.2.1 Staple sequences

Table S4: Staple sequence for the icosahedral DNA origami core_strand_5 |  ATTAAACCTTTTTATTAGCCCAATAGGAACCC
---|---
core_strand_10 |  GAAGTGTTTCTGTCCAGATAAGTCCTGAACAA
core_strand_17 |  ATCTAAAGTTTTCTGTCGAGCACGTATAACGT
core_strand_24 |  GAAAGCCGGAAAGGAGAAGTACGGTGTCTGGA
core_strand_31 |  AGCCCCAATTGTAAACACTACGTGAACCATCA
core_strand_39 |  AGGCGGATCCCGGAATGTAGCGACAGAATCAA
core_strand_50 |  TGACAACAGGATTAGGCTCAGCAGCGAAAGAC
core_strand_56 |  AAGCGAACTAGAGAGTAAAAAAAAGGCTCCAA
core_strand_63 |  ATACGTAAGAGGCAAACTTTACCCTGACTATT
core_strand_70 |  GCATTAACTAGACTGGTACCAAAAACATTATG
core_strand_76 |  ATAACCTGAAAAGGTGTCAGGTCATTGCCTGA
core_strand_83 |  ATCAAAATCCCTCAGATGGTAATAAGTTTTAA
core_strand_93 |  CAGACCAGTGATATTCTGCTCATTCAGTGAAT
core_strand_98 |  GCAACACTAACCAAAACCGCGACCTGCTCCAT
core_strand_105 |  CCTTATGCGAGCGGAACATTATTACAGGTAGA
core_strand_112 |  GTTGTAAACGTTATTATAAGTGTCCTTAGTGC
core_strand_118 |  ACTCCAGCGGTGAGAAGCGATCGGTGCGGGCC
core_strand_126 |  AGAGATAAGAACCACCAAGAAAAGTAAGCAGA
core_strand_136 |  ACAATAACAAAGTCAGAAGATGATGAAACAAA
core_strand_142 |  ACAACTAAAGGATTTACAAAATTATTTGCACG
core_strand_149 |  GAGTGAATAATTTTCCGAACCTCAAATATCAA
core_strand_156 |  CGCATTTCAACCACCACTCGATAAAGACGGAG
core_strand_162 |  CCGACAGTGGGCACGAGACCGTAATGGGATAG
core_strand_169 |  ATTACGCAAAGGTGGCTTATTTATCCCAATCC
core_strand_179 |  TTTCATCTTCAAGATTTTACTAGAAAAAGCCT
core_strand_184 |  GAAAGCGTGGCTATTATCCGGCTTAGGTTGGG
core_strand_191 |  AACAACGCCCAGTAATCAATCGTCTGAAATGG
core_strand_198 |  TTTCTTTTCCTGAGTAGCCCCAGCAGGCGAAA
core_strand_204 |  TTAAATTTAACGCCATACTGCCCGCTTTCCAG
core_strand_212 |  CCCAATAGATTCTAAGTCAACCGATTGAGGGA
core_strand_3 |  TGTAGCATCGCCACCCTAACACTGCCGCCACCGAGAACAA
core_strand_11 |  AATAATCGGACGACAAATATCCCAGTAATTCTCCACCGAG
core_strand_18 |  AAAGGGATACCACACCCGTTAGAACACGCTGCGACGTTAG
core_strand_25 |  GATTTAGTAGAGCTTATCCATATATTTTTGCGAGGAAGGG
core_strand_34 |  GGAACCCTAAGAACGTAAGTTTTTCAAGAGTCTAAGCAAA
core_strand_43 |  GGTCATAGCATTAGCATTAGCGTCCCAGTAGCGTTGATAT
core_strand_48 |  AAGACTTTTATTCGGTAACGAGGGAGAGGCTGAGACTCCT
core_strand_57 |  ATTTCTTAAGAAAGGATTTAATTGTCAGCGGATCCAACAG
core_strand_64 |  CCGAAAGACTCAAATGAAGCAAAGTATTCATTCCAACCTA
core_strand_71 |  TAAAAATTCAAAGAATATACTTTTCAGAGGGGGTAATAGT
core_strand_78 |  AGCATGTCAGCTGATAAGCAAACAGATATTCATTTGGGGC
core_strand_86 |  CCCCTGCCTGAATTTAGTGCCTTGTGGAAAGCACCACCGG
core_strand_91 |  TTGAGATGCAAGAGTACCCTGACGTGAGGCAGGTCAGACG
core_strand_99 |  GAACTGACCGCGAAACGCCGGAACCAGCGATTACCAGACG
core_strand_106 |  GATACATACCAGTCAGTCAGTTGAGCGGAACAAAGAAACC
core_strand_113 |  CTAATCTACAGGAGAACAACCTTACTCGTATTAAATCCTT
core_strand_121 |  GATTAAGTGCCGGAAAATTACGCCAATGTGTAGGTAAAGA
core_strand_129 |  ACGGAATAATAATAAGCAAAGTTACCACCACCCTCAGAGC
core_strand_134 |  ACCTTTTTCCAAGTTAAAACAAAAGAGAATTAACTGAACA
core_strand_143 |  GATGAATAATCCTGATAAATAAAGGCAATTCAATAGATAA
core_strand_150 |  AATTGAGGAACAGTGCTCAATATCTATTAACAATCGTCGC
core_strand_157 |  TTCCTGTGGACCTCCTGGTACCGACATCGCCATTAAAAAT
core_strand_164 |  TTGAGGGGTTAAATGTGGTGTAGACCAGCTTTTAAGCAAC
core_strand_172 |  CCTTTACACGCTAACGAACGATTTTCCTGAATAGAAAATA
core_strand_177 |  ACGCTCAAAATACCGATCATATGCTGCGGGAGGTTTTGAA
core_strand_185 |  AAGAACGCAAGAGTCACTATATGTAGATTAAGGACAATAT
core_strand_192 |  GGGACATTACCGCCAGCATTGGCATATCCAGACAGAGGCA
core_strand_199 |  CAAAAGAAATTGCCCTTGATGGTGTTTGATTAGTAATAAC
core_strand_207 |  CGGGGAGATGTAAAGCCCTGTCGTAGCCGGAATTTTTTAA
core_strand_215 |  ACCGTCACCACAATCAAAATATTGAATAAGTTAGAAGGCT
core_strand_6 |  ATGTACCGTCAGAACCCACTCATCCTCAGAACTCCACAGAGTTTAGTAAGTTTCGT
core_strand_12 |  GAAAAATATAAACAACCAGTGAGGGTCCAGACGCTGTCTTAAGGTAAATCCTAATT
core_strand_19 |  GCTTTCCTCGCCGCGCTCTTTCCAGCGTAACCTTTAGACAGTAGCGGTTCAGAGCG
core_strand_26 |  AGTTTCATATTGCTGAGGCGAGAAGATGGCTTTTGACCATAGAGGTCAACAGTTGA
core_strand_35 |  CCCAAATCGGACTCCAAGATTGTACACTATTAAAAGGGAGGTTTGGAATGGGGTCG
core_strand_42 |  GTTTGCCTAGGCCGGATCGAGAGGACCATTACCCCCCTTACAAAATCAAGACTGTA
core_strand_51 |  AGCATCGGCGCTGAGGCCACGCATAACCGATATTCATGAGAAGTATTATAGCAACG
core_strand_58 |  AAGGAGCCACAACTAAAAGCAAACGTGAGAATAACAGCTTCAACAGTTTATCGGTT
core_strand_65 |  ATAGTCAGCTTTAAACCGAAGGCAGAATCCCCCTTCAAATGTCATAAACGGATTGC
core_strand_72 |  ACCCTGTATAGCAAAAAATCATACAGGCAAGGTTTAGAACAGTTTTGCGCGGGAGA
core_strand_79 |  GAGTCTGGAATTAATGTATTTTCAACCGTTCTAATCATATATCAATATAGAGAATC
core_strand_85 |  CGGGGTCACCGTTCCACCAGAGCCGCAGTCTCTATTTCGGAGCCAGAAAGTAACAG
core_strand_94 |  AAGGCTTGATCTTGACGCTGGCTGACCTTCATGTTTAATTCAGGAGGTAGAAACAC
core_strand_100 |  GTTACTTAAAAGTACACCTCGTTTATACCAAGCAACTTTGTTGACCCCGAGGCGCA
core_strand_107 |  AAGATTCAGACGTTGGGAACTGGCTCATTATAACGCCAAAATCATTTTGATTTAGG
core_strand_114 |  TGAATTGTGCCAGGGTCAGTGCCAAGCTTTCTTTTACGCTTTCGACAATGACAATG
core_strand_122 |  TCTTCGCTCCAGGCAACGGCACCGCTTCTGGTTGGGTAACGCCTGAGTAGCTGGCG
core_strand_128 |  TAGCCGAAAGCAAGAAAATTGAGTTAAGCCCACCCAAAAGCCTCAGAGCCAGAAGG
core_strand_137 |  CATCAAGACAAAATCGCTGATTGCTTTGAATATAATGGAATTAGACGGTTAATTAC
core_strand_144 |  TAAAACAGTGTTTGGAAGCCGTCATCAATATATACAGTAAAGATGATGAAATTGCG
core_strand_151 |  ACCCTCAACACGCTGATTCTGTAACCGCCTGCAAGGTTATGCGGTCAGTGGTCAGT
core_strand_158 |  GATCCCCGGGTTGGTGCATTTCTCCGAACTCTTGAAATTGCCCTAAAAGCTCGAAT
core_strand_165 |  GTCACGTTGAGCGAGTGCCATCTGCATCAACAACGACGACTCCTGTAGTGGGCGCA
core_strand_171 |  AAATAAGAAGCGTCTTGCAAACGTCTTACCAAGAGAGAATCAATTTTATTTGTTTA
core_strand_180 |  GTTTAGTACCGTGTGAAAATTTAATGGTTTGACAGTAGGGTCCCGACTGTTATACA
core_strand_186 |  TTATATAAATAGTGAAGTGGCACAACGCTGAGGAGAAAACGATAGCTTAAATGCTG
core_strand_193 |  ATTATTTACCATTGCAAATTTAGGACAATATTCTGGCCAAGCTGGTAAGATTCACC
core_strand_200 |  ATCCTGTTTCACCGCCAGACGGGCAACAGCTGTAGCCCGAAATACTTCGTTCCGAA
core_strand_208 |  TCGGGAAACTGGGGTGTCAGCTCAGCATAAAGGGCGGTTTAACATACGGCCAGCTG
core_strand_214 |  GGGAAGGTATAGAAAATCAGATATTATTTTGTCGACTTGACACCACGGACGGAAAT
core_strand_4 |  GCAAGCCGAAGTACCGGCCACCCTCAGAGCCA
core_strand_13 |  TAAAAGAGTTTATAATATGTTCAGCTAATGCA
core_strand_20 |  TAAATGAATTTTGTCGTTAATGCGCCGCTACA
core_strand_27 |  AAGAAAGCGCGAACGTATATAATGCTGTAGCT
core_strand_36 |  TATTTAAAAAACAGGAACGTCAAAGGGCGAAA
core_strand_45 |  AAGTATAGAAGTGCCGAACGTCACCAATGAAA
core_strand_49 |  CAAGAGAAACCATCGCCTTGCAGGGAGTTAAA
core_strand_59 |  GTCAGGATCAGACCGGAGGAATTGCGAATAAT
core_strand_66 |  AAACGAAATGCCACTAAGTTCAGAAAACGAGA
core_strand_73 |  AAAATGTTATCCAATATTAAGCAATAAAGCCT
core_strand_80 |  GCGAGCTGTTTAGCTACCGGAGAGGGTAGCTA
core_strand_88 |  AACCGCCTCACCGGAAGTAAGCGTCATACATG
core_strand_92 |  ATTGGCCTGCGCATAGAAGAACCGGATATTCA
core_strand_101 |  ACGATAAAATCATAACACGGAGATTTGTATCA
core_strand_108 |  ACCAGAAGGATTTTAAGAAGAAAAATCTACGT
core_strand_115 |  TGCCCGAAACGACGGCGGATGTTCTTCTAAGT
core_strand_123 |  TTCAAAAGCAGCTTTCAGCGCCATTCGCCATT
core_strand_131 |  CGCCACCACCCACAAGACAATGAAATAGCAAT
core_strand_135 |  CCCTGAACGGATTCGCCGCAGAGGCGAATTAT
core_strand_145 |  TACATTTGTAGATTAGTTATACTTCTGAATAA
core_strand_152 |  TATTAATTAACCTTGCGAGCCAGCAGCAAATG
core_strand_159 |  ACCGAACGACATAAATTAATGAGTAAACAGGG
core_strand_166 |  TCGTCGGTGCGGCCCTAACAACCCGTCGGATT
core_strand_174 |  CATACATAGTATGTTATCCAGAGCCTAATTTG
core_strand_178 |  GCCTTAAATCTGACCTTAAATAAGGCGTTAAA
core_strand_187 |  TTTTGAATAAGAATACTTTATCAAAATCATAG
core_strand_194 |  TTTTCGAGCAACATGTACAGGAAAAACGCTCA
core_strand_201 |  ATCACTTGCACCAGTGTGGCCCTGAGAGAGTT
core_strand_209 |  CCAATAGGTTGTTAAACCTAATGAGTGAGCTA
core_strand_217 |  TATCCGGTCAAGCAAATTCATATGGTTTACCA
corner_strand_1 |  TATAATTTTTAGTACCGACAATCCTTATCATTTTTTTCCAAGAACGGGT
corner_strand_2 |  GCGCCAAAGACATTCAGGGATAGCATTCATCG
corner_strand_7 |  GGGCGCGTACTATACTACAACGCC
corner_strand_8 |  CCACCCTCATTTTAGAAACCAATC
corner_strand_14 |  ATCGGCAAAATTTTATCAACAATATCACGCA
corner_strand_15 |  GAACGCGCCTGTTGGAGGCCGATT
corner_strand_16 |  TCACCTTTTTGTACTCAGGAGCAGCCCTCATATTTTTGTTAGCGTAACG
corner_strand_22 |  TTTTTGAGAGATTGCGAACGAGTA
corner_strand_23 |  TTCCACCCCCGATTTATTTTTGAGCTTGACGGG
corner_strand_30 |  AGACATTTTTGTCAAATCACCGTACCCCGGTTTTTTTGATAATCAGAAA
corner_strand_33 |  CAACATGTTTTATAGCACTAAATC
corner_strand_37 |  ACTCACATTAATTGGGCGATGGCCCGTTAATA
corner_strand_38 |  GGGTTTTTTTTTGCTCAGTACC
corner_strand_41 |  AAAAGTTTTTAAACGCAAAGAGCCATTTGGGATTTTTATTAGA
corner_strand_44 |  GCTTTTGATGATTTCGGCATTTTC
corner_strand_47 |  CCATCGATAGCATGGGATCGTCACCATTAGCG
corner_strand_52 |  AATAATTTTTATCCTCATTAAAACCTATTATTTTTTTCTGAAA
corner_strand_53 |  ATGACCATAAATTTTTGAGGACTA
corner_strand_54 |  GGCCGCTTTTGCTTTTCGAGGTGA
corner_strand_55 |  CCAATTTTTTACTGCGGAATCATCGCGTTTTATTTTTATTCGAGCTTCA
corner_strand_61 |  AATTTTTTCACGTTAAGAGGAAGC
corner_strand_62 |  CATGAGAAGTTTCCATTTTTTTAAACGGGTAAA
corner_strand_67 |  GACGGTCAATCTCAAAAATCAGGTAGAATAC
corner_strand_68 |  AAAGGGGGATGTCAACGCAAGGA
corner_strand_69 |  TTCTATTTTTCTAATAGTAGTA
corner_strand_77 |  AACCGTCTATCATATCGTAAAACT
corner_strand_81 |  CAGAGCATAAAGTCTACAAAGGCTAGCATCAA
corner_strand_82 |  GCCAGTTAGCGTTTGCTTTTTCATCTTTTCATA
corner_strand_84 |  AAACCGAGGAATACAGGAGTGTACGCCGCCA
corner_strand_87 |  GCTACAGAGGCTACAGTTAATGC
corner_strand_89 |  ACTAATTTTTAACACTCATCTAAAGAGGACAGTTTTTATGAACGGTGTA
corner_strand_90 |  TGCCCGTATAATACGTAACAAAGCACAAACA
corner_strand_95 |  TAATAAAACGAATGTAAATTGGGC
corner_strand_96 |  TTACCCAAATCATATAAGGGAACC
corner_strand_97 |  AAGTTTTTTTTGAGTAACATTAGGAATTACGATTTTTGGCATAGTAAGA
corner_strand_102 |  AGCCTTTATTTTTTGTGTCGAAATTAGCGAG
corner_strand_103 |  TCGCCTGATAAATCAACTAATGCA
corner_strand_104 |  CCGCCTTTTTGCCAGCATTGATCAACTTTAATTTTTTCATTGTGAATTA
corner_strand_110 |  CTCCGTGGGAACTTAACCCCGCTT
corner_strand_111 |  GCAATGCCAGGGTTTTTTTTTCCCAGTCACGAC
corner_strand_116 |  AATACCACATTTATGCGCACGACTATTTTAA
corner_strand_117 |  AATTCTTTTTGCGTCTGGCCTAGTATCGGCCTTTTTTCAGGAAGATCGC
corner_strand_119 |  AGGCTTTTTTTTTGCAAAAGACCTCATATATTTTTTTTTAAAT
corner_strand_120 |  GGTTGTGAATTCTTGCTGCAAGGC
corner_strand_124 |  GATGAACGGTATCTGTTGGGAAGGAGGCCGG
corner_strand_125 |  TTGAGTTTTTCGCTAATATCAG
corner_strand_130 |  CCAGTTACAAAATACGCAATAATA
corner_strand_133 |  AGCTATCTTACCTCCTGAGCAAAAGAGGGTAA
corner_strand_139 |  AAAAATCTAAAGTTCATTTGAATT
corner_strand_140 |  TCATTTCAATTATGTTTAACGTCA
corner_strand_141 |  ATAAATTTTTACAGAGGTGAGCTAAAATATCTTTTTTTTAGGAGCACTA
corner_strand_147 |  TGGAAGGGTTAGTCAGTTGAAAGG
corner_strand_148 |  GCGCAACAGTACATAATTTTTATCAATATATGT
corner_strand_154 |  CATTAATGAATTGTCATAGCTGT
corner_strand_155 |  GGCCTTTTTTTGAATCGGCTGA
corner_strand_163 |  CAGGCTGCGCAATCATCTGCCAGT
corner_strand_167 |  CTTAAGCTACGTTAAACGGCGGATTATATAGG
corner_strand_168 |  CCCTCTTTTTAGAACCGCCACAACTGGCATGATTTTTTTAAGACTCCTT
corner_strand_170 |  TATTCATTAAATTAAACAGCCATAAACATAT
corner_strand_173 |  ATTTAACAATTTGAAAATAGCAG
corner_strand_176 |  ACGTCAAAAATTCCGGAATCATAAAGTTGCT
corner_strand_181 |  TGGAAATACCTATGTATAAAGCCA
corner_strand_182 |  TAAGAATAAACATATCGCAAGACA
corner_strand_183 |  TCAAATTTTTCTATCGGCCTTCAGAGATAGAATTTTTCCCTTCTGACCT
corner_strand_188 |  TCGTAATCATGTACCTTTTTAACCGTCTTTA
corner_strand_189 |  GTCTGAGAGACTTCAGTAATAAAA
corner_strand_190 |  GGCGTTTTTTTTTAGCGAACCCTTAATTGAGATTTTTATCGCCATATTT
corner_strand_195 |  TACGAGCATGTTCATTTTGACGCTAAGAGAA
corner_strand_196 |  AGGTGCCGTAATCCCTTATAAAT
corner_strand_197 |  CACACGCGTATTGGGCTTTTTGCCAGGGTGGTT
corner_strand_202 |  AGTCACACGACTCCACGCTGGTTTGAAGAAC
corner_strand_203 |  TTTTGTTTTTTTAAAATTCGCA
corner_strand_205 |  ATGCGTTTTTCGAACTGATAGTTATCCGCTCATTTTTCAATTC
corner_strand_206 |  GCAGCAAGCGGTTCGGCCAACGCG
corner_strand_210 |  TCGTAACCGTGTTGCGTTGCGCTCCAAAAAT
corner_strand_211 |  TAGGATTTTTATCATTACCGCG
corner_strand_213 |  AATTCTTACCATAAAGGGCGACATAACGCGA
corner_strand_216 |  GCGCGTTTTCATGGTGAATTATC

####  S4.2.2 Handle sequences

Table S5: Handle sequence for the icosahedral DNA origami Handle_A0_1 |  TTCCCAATTCTTTTGAAAATCTCCACCTTTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTGTGTC
---|---
Handle_A0_2 |  ATTGCTTTTTTCCTTTTGATATAGATACATTTTTTTTCGCAAATGGTCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTGTGTC
Handle_A0_3 |  ATCAAAAAGATTCTAAATCGGTTGATAGCGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTGTGTC
Handle_A1_1 |  TTTGCTTTTTTAAACAACTTTGATACCGATAGTTTTTTTGCGCCGACAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACATCGC
Handle_A1_2 |  TATCAGCTTGCTTGGTTGCTTTGAATGGGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACATCGC
Handle_A1_3 |  CACCAGTACAATGCACCGTAATCAAGGTGTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACATCGC
Handle_A2_1 |  TAGGGTTTTTCGCTGGCAAGTGGAACGGTACGTTTTTCCAGAATCCTGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTATGTCGC
Handle_A2_2 |  GGAGCTAAACATAATATGCAACTACGGGCGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTATGTCGC
Handle_A2_3 |  AATTATTTTTACCGTTGTAGCGATAGGGTTGATTTTTGTGTTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTATGTCGC
Handle_A3_1 |  ATTTTTTTTTGCACCCAGCTAAACATAAAAACTTTTTAGGGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCTTTCGGT
Handle_A3_2 |  ATGCAAATCCATCATCACCTTGCTCTTAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCTTTCGGT
Handle_A3_3 |  TCCTTTTTTTGAAAACATAGCTTTTTCAAATATTTTTTATTTTAGTTAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCTTTCGGT
Handle_A4_1 |  TCCCGCCAAAATAACCTACCATATGAAGTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGAGCTA
Handle_A4_2 |  TGGCAAATCAATGGTGCTTGTTACGCAGAAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGAGCTA
Handle_A4_3 |  TAGACTTTTTTTTACAAACAACGCCCTGGAGTTTTTTGACTCTATGATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGAGCTA
Handle_A5_1 |  TAGATTTTCAGTCTAACGGAACAATTATCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGAGGCA
Handle_A5_2 |  CAGAACGAGTATGAAGCCCTTTTTACCAGAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGAGGCA
Handle_A5_3 |  CATATTTTTTTCCTGATTATCCAGTACCTTTTTTTTTACATCGGGAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGAGGCA
Handle_B0_1 |  TTCCCAATTCTTTTGAAAATCTCCACCTTTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCTTGC
Handle_B0_2 |  ATTGCTTTTTTCCTTTTGATATAGATACATTTTTTTTCGCAAATGGTCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCTTGC
Handle_B0_3 |  ATCAAAAAGATTCTAAATCGGTTGATAGCGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCTTGC
Handle_B1_1 |  TTTGCTTTTTTAAACAACTTTGATACCGATAGTTTTTTTGCGCCGACAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGATGTA
Handle_B1_2 |  TATCAGCTTGCTTGGTTGCTTTGAATGGGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGATGTA
Handle_B1_3 |  CACCAGTACAATGCACCGTAATCAAGGTGTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGATGTA
Handle_B2_1 |  TAGGGTTTTTCGCTGGCAAGTGGAACGGTACGTTTTTCCAGAATCCTGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGGATTGT
Handle_B2_2 |  GGAGCTAAACATAATATGCAACTACGGGCGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGGATTGT
Handle_B2_3 |  AATTATTTTTACCGTTGTAGCGATAGGGTTGATTTTTGTGTTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGGATTGT
Handle_B3_1 |  ATTTTTTTTTGCACCCAGCTAAACATAAAAACTTTTTAGGGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGGAACAT
Handle_B3_2 |  ATGCAAATCCATCATCACCTTGCTCTTAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGGAACAT
Handle_B3_3 |  TCCTTTTTTTGAAAACATAGCTTTTTCAAATATTTTTTATTTTAGTTAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGGAACAT
Handle_B4_1 |  TCCCGCCAAAATAACCTACCATATGAAGTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCTCCA
Handle_B4_2 |  TGGCAAATCAATGGTGCTTGTTACGCAGAAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCTCCA
Handle_B4_3 |  TAGACTTTTTTTTACAAACAACGCCCTGGAGTTTTTTGACTCTATGATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCTCCA
Handle_B5_1 |  TAGATTTTCAGTCTAACGGAACAATTATCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACTTGACG
Handle_B5_2 |  CAGAACGAGTATGAAGCCCTTTTTACCAGAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACTTGACG
Handle_B5_3 |  CATATTTTTTTCCTGATTATCCAGTACCTTTTTTTTTACATCGGGAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACTTGACG
Handle_C0_1 |  TTCCCAATTCTTTTGAAAATCTCCACCTTTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCTCGTTGT
Handle_C0_2 |  ATTGCTTTTTTCCTTTTGATATAGATACATTTTTTTTCGCAAATGGTCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCTCGTTGT
Handle_C0_3 |  ATCAAAAAGATTCTAAATCGGTTGATAGCGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCTCGTTGT
Handle_C1_1 |  TTTGCTTTTTTAAACAACTTTGATACCGATAGTTTTTTTGCGCCGACAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACAATCCG
Handle_C1_2 |  TATCAGCTTGCTTGGTTGCTTTGAATGGGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACAATCCG
Handle_C1_3 |  CACCAGTACAATGCACCGTAATCAAGGTGTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACAATCCG
Handle_C2_1 |  TAGGGTTTTTCGCTGGCAAGTGGAACGGTACGTTTTTCCAGAATCCTGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACACACA
Handle_C2_2 |  GGAGCTAAACATAATATGCAACTACGGGCGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACACACA
Handle_C2_3 |  AATTATTTTTACCGTTGTAGCGATAGGGTTGATTTTTGTGTTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACACACA
Handle_C3_1 |  ATTTTTTTTTGCACCCAGCTAAACATAAAAACTTTTTAGGGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCGCTTTA
Handle_C3_2 |  ATGCAAATCCATCATCACCTTGCTCTTAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCGCTTTA
Handle_C3_3 |  TCCTTTTTTTGAAAACATAGCTTTTTCAAATATTTTTTATTTTAGTTAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCGCTTTA
Handle_C4_1 |  TCCCGCCAAAATAACCTACCATATGAAGTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGTCAAGT
Handle_C4_2 |  TGGCAAATCAATGGTGCTTGTTACGCAGAAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGTCAAGT
Handle_C4_3 |  TAGACTTTTTTTTACAAACAACGCCCTGGAGTTTTTTGACTCTATGATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGTCAAGT
Handle_C5_1 |  TAGATTTTCAGTCTAACGGAACAATTATCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACCGAAAG
Handle_C5_2 |  CAGAACGAGTATGAAGCCCTTTTTACCAGAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACCGAAAG
Handle_C5_3 |  CATATTTTTTTCCTGATTATCCAGTACCTTTTTTTTTACATCGGGAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACCGAAAG
Handle_D0_1 |  TTCCCAATTCTTTTGAAAATCTCCACCTTTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCAAGCTA
Handle_D0_2 |  ATTGCTTTTTTCCTTTTGATATAGATACATTTTTTTTCGCAAATGGTCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCAAGCTA
Handle_D0_3 |  ATCAAAAAGATTCTAAATCGGTTGATAGCGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCAAGCTA
Handle_D1_1 |  TTTGCTTTTTTAAACAACTTTGATACCGATAGTTTTTTTGCGCCGACAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACAACGAG
Handle_D1_2 |  TATCAGCTTGCTTGGTTGCTTTGAATGGGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACAACGAG
Handle_D1_3 |  CACCAGTACAATGCACCGTAATCAAGGTGTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTACAACGAG
Handle_D2_1 |  TAGGGTTTTTCGCTGGCAAGTGGAACGGTACGTTTTTCCAGAATCCTGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGACATA
Handle_D2_2 |  GGAGCTAAACATAATATGCAACTACGGGCGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGACATA
Handle_D2_3 |  AATTATTTTTACCGTTGTAGCGATAGGGTTGATTTTTGTGTTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGACATA
Handle_D3_1 |  ATTTTTTTTTGCACCCAGCTAAACATAAAAACTTTTTAGGGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTATGTTCCG
Handle_D3_2 |  ATGCAAATCCATCATCACCTTGCTCTTAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTATGTTCCG
Handle_D3_3 |  TCCTTTTTTTGAAAACATAGCTTTTTCAAATATTTTTTATTTTAGTTAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTATGTTCCG
Handle_D4_1 |  TCCCGCCAAAATAACCTACCATATGAAGTATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAAAGCGG
Handle_D4_2 |  TGGCAAATCAATGGTGCTTGTTACGCAGAAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAAAGCGG
Handle_D4_3 |  TAGACTTTTTTTTACAAACAACGCCCTGGAGTTTTTTGACTCTATGATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAAAGCGG
Handle_D5_1 |  TAGATTTTCAGTCTAACGGAACAATTATCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCCTCTA
Handle_D5_2 |  CAGAACGAGTATGAAGCCCTTTTTACCAGAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCCTCTA
Handle_D5_3 |  CATATTTTTTTCCTGATTATCCAGTACCTTTTTTTTTACATCGGGAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCCTCTA

###  S4.3 Octahedral DNA origami

####  S4.3.1 Staple sequences

Table S6: Staple sequence for the octahedral DNA origami  core_octa-1 |  TCAAAGCGAACCAGACCGTTTTATATAGTC
---|---
core_octa-2 |  GCTTTGAGGACTAAAGAGCAACGGGGAGTT
core_octa-3 |  GTAAATCGTCGCTATTGAATAACTCAAGAA
core_octa-4 |  AAGCCTTAAATCAAGACTTGCGGAGCAAAT
core_octa-5 |  ATTTTAAGAACTGGCTTGAATTATCAGTGA
core_octa-6 |  GTTAAAATTCGCATTATAAACGTAAACTAG
core_octa-7 |  AGCACCATTACCATTACAGCAAATGACGGA
core_octa-8 |  ATTGCGTAGATTTTCAAAACAGATTGTTTG
core_octa-9 |  TAACCTGTTTAGCTATTTTCGCATTCATTC
core_octa-10 |  GTCAGAGGGTAATTGAGAACACCAAAATAG
core_octa-11 |  CTCCAGCCAGCTTTCCCCTCAGGACGTTGG
core_octa-12 |  GTCCACTATTAAAGAACCAGTTTTGGTTCC
core_octa-13 |  TAAAGGTGGCAACATAGTAGAAAATAATAA
core_octa-14 |  GATAAGTCCTGAACAACTGTTTAAAGAGAA
core_octa-15 |  GGTAATAGTAAAATGTAAGTTTTACACTAT
core_octa-16 |  TCAGAACCGCCACCCTCTCAGAGTATTAGC
core_octa-17 |  AAGGGAACCGAACTGAGCAGACGGTATCAT
core_octa-18 |  GTAAAGATTCAAAAGGCCTGAGTTGACCCT
core_octa-19 |  AGGCGTTAAATAAGAAGACCGTGTCGCAAG
core_octa-20 |  CAGGTCGACTCTAGAGCAAGCTTCAAGGCG
core_octa-21 |  CAGAGCCACCACCCTCTCAGAACTCGAGAG
core_octa-22 |  TTCACGTTGAAAATCTTGCGAATGGGATTT
core_octa-23 |  AAGTTTTAACGGGGTCGGAGTGTAGAATGG
core_octa-24 |  TTGCGTATTGGGCGCCCGCGGGGTGCGCTC
core_octa-25 |  GTCACCAGAGCCATGGTGAATTATCACCAATCAGAAAAGCCT
core_octa-26 |  GGACAGAGTTACTTTGTCGAAATCCGCGTGTATCACCGTACG
core_octa-27 |  CAACATGATTTACGAGCATGGAATAAGTAAGACGACAATAAA
core_octa-28 |  AACCAGACGCTACGTTAATAAAACGAACATACCACATTCAGG
core_octa-29 |  TGACCTACTAGAAAAAGCCCCAGGCAAAGCAATTTCATCTTC
core_octa-30 |  TGCCGGAAGGGGACTCGTAACCGTGCATTATATTTTAGTTCT
core_octa-31 |  AGAACCCCAAATCACCATCTGCGGAATCGAATAAAAATTTTT
core_octa-32 |  GCTCCATTGTGTACCGTAACACTGAGTTAGTTAGCGTAACCT
core_octa-33 |  AGTACCGAATAGGAACCCAAACGGTGTAACCTCAGGAGGTTT
core_octa-34 |  CAGTTTGAATGTTTAGTATCATATGCGTAGAATCGCCATAGC
core_octa-35 |  AAGATTGTTTTTTAACCAAGAAACCATCGACCCAAAAACAGG
core_octa-36 |  TCAGAGCGCCACCACATAATCAAAATCAGAACGAGTAGTATG
core_octa-37 |  GATGGTTGGGAAGAAAAATCCACCAGAAATAATTGGGCTTGA
core_octa-38 |  CTCCTTAACGTAGAAACCAATCAATAATTCATCGAGAACAGA
core_octa-39 |  AGACACCTTACGCAGAACTGGCATGATTTTCTGTCCAGACAA
core_octa-40 |  GCCAGCTAGGCGATAGCTTAGATTAAGACCTTTTTAACCTGT
core_octa-41 |  CCGACTTATTAGGAACGCCATCAAAAATGAGTAACAACCCCA
core_octa-42 |  GTCCAATAGCGAGAACCAGACGACGATATTCAACGCAAGGGA
core_octa-43 |  CCAAAATACAATATGATATTCAACCGTTAGGCTATCAGGTAA
core_octa-44 |  AACAGTACTTGAAAACATATGAGACGGGTCTTTTTTAATGGA
core_octa-45 |  TTTCACCGCATTAAAGTCGGGAAACCTGATTTGAATTACCCA
core_octa-46 |  GAGAATAGAGCCTTACCGTCTATCAAATGGAGCGGAATTAGA
core_octa-47 |  ATAATTAAATTTAAAAAACTTTTTCAAACTTTTAACAACGCC
core_octa-48 |  GCACCCAGCGTTTTTTATCCGGTATTCTAGGCGAATTATTCA
core_octa-49 |  GGAAGCGCCCACAAACAGTTAATGCCCCGACTCCTCAAGATA
core_octa-50 |  GTTTGCCTATTCACAGGCAGGTCAGACGCCACCACACCACCC
core_octa-51 |  CGCGAGCTTAGTTTTTCCCAATTCTGCGCAAGTGTAAAGCCT
core_octa-52 |  AGAAGCAACCAAGCCAAAAGAATACACTAATGCCAAAACTCC
core_octa-53 |  ATTAAGTATAAAGCGGCAAGGCAAAGAAACTAATAGGGTACC
core_octa-54 |  CAGTGCCTACATGGGAATTTACCGTTCCACAAGTAAGCAGAT
core_octa-55 |  ATAAGGCGCCAAAAGTTGAGATTTAGGATAACGGACCAGTCA
core_octa-56 |  TGCTAAACAGATGAAGAAACCACCAGAATTTAAAAAAAGGCT
core_octa-57 |  CAGCCTTGGTTTTGTATTAAGAGGCTGACTGCCTATATCAGA
core_octa-58 |  CGGAATAATTCAACCCAGCGCCAAAGACTTATTTTAACGCAA
core_octa-59 |  CGCCTGAATTACCCTAATCTTGACAAGACAGACCATGAAAGA
core_octa-60 |  ACGCGAGGCTACAACAGTACCTTTTACAAATCGCGCAGAGAA
core_octa-61 |  CAGCGAACATTAAAAGAGAGTACCTTTACTGAATATAATGAA
core_octa-62 |  GGACGTTTAATTTCGACGAGAAACACCACCACTAATGCAGAT
core_octa-63 |  AAAGCGCCAAAGTTTATCTTACCGAAGCCCAATAATGAGTAA
core_octa-64 |  GAGCTCGTTGTAAACGCCAGGGTTTTCCAAAGCAATAAAGCC
core_octa-65 |  AATTATTGTTTTCATGCCTTTAGCGTCAGATAGCACGGAAAC
core_octa-66 |  AAGTTTCAGACAGCCGGGATCGTCACCCTTCTGTAGCTCAAC
core_octa-67 |  ACAAAGAAATTTAGGTAGGGCTTAATTGTATACAACGGAATC
core_octa-68 |  AACAAAAATAACTAGGTCTGAGAGACTACGCTGAGTTTCCCT
core_octa-69 |  CATAACCTAAATCAACAGTTCAGAAAACGTCATAAGGATAGC
core_octa-70 |  CACGACGAATTCGTGTGGCATCAATTCTTTAGCAAAATTACG
core_octa-71 |  CCTACCAACAGTAATTTTATCCTGAATCAAACAGCCATATGA
core_octa-72 |  GATTATAAAGAAACGCCAGTTACAAAATTTACCAACGTCAGA
core_octa-73 |  AGTAGATTGAAAAGAATCATGGTCATAGCCGGAAGCATAAGT
core_octa-74 |  TAGAATCCATAAATCATTTAACAATTTCTCCCGGCTTAGGTT
core_octa-75 |  AAAGGCCAAATATGTTAGAGCTTAATTGATTGCTCCATGAGG
core_octa-76 |  CCAAAAGGAAAGGACAACAGTTTCAGCGAATCATCATATTCC
core_octa-77 |  GAAATCGATAACCGGATACCGATAGTTGTATCAGCTCCAACG
core_octa-78 |  TGAATATTATCAAAATAATGGAAGGGTTAATATTTATCCCAA
core_octa-79 |  GAGGAAGCAGGATTCGGGTAAAATACGTAAAACACCCCCCAG
core_octa-80 |  GGTTGATTTTCCAGCAGACAGCCCTCATTCGTCACGGGATAG
core_octa-81 |  CAAGCCCCCACCCTTAGCCCGGAATAGGACGATCTAAAGTTT
core_octa-82 |  TGTAGATATTACGCGGCGATCGGTGCGGGCGCCATCTTCTGG
core_octa-83 |  CATCCTATTCAGCTAAAAGGTAAAGTAAAAAGCAAGCCGTTT
core_octa-84 |  CAGCTCATATAAGCGTACCCCGGTTGATGTGTCGGATTCTCC
core_octa-85 |  CATGTCACAAACGGCATTAAATGTGAGCAATTCGCGTTAAAT
core_octa-86 |  AGCGTCACGTATAAGAATTGAGTTAAGCCCTTTTTAAGAAAG
core_octa-87 |  TATAAAGCATCGTAACCAAGTACCGCACCGGCTGTAATATCC
core_octa-88 |  ATAGCCCGCGAAAATAATTGTATCGGTTCGCCGACAATGAGT
core_octa-89 |  AGACAGTTCATATAGGAGAAGCCTTTATAACATTGCCTGAGA
core_octa-90 |  AACAGGTCCCGAAATTGCATCAAAAAGATCTTTGATCATCAG
core_octa-91 |  ACTGCCCTTGCCCCGTTGCAGCAAGCGGCAACAGCTTTTTCT
core_octa-92 |  TCAAAGGGAGATAGCCCTTATAAATCAAGACAACAACCATCG
core_octa-93 |  GTAATACGCAAACATGAGAGATCTACAACTAGCTGAGGCCGG
core_octa-94 |  GAGATAACATTAGAAGAATAACATAAAAAGGAAGGATTAGGA
core_octa-95 |  CAGATATTACCTGAATACCAAGTTACAATCGGGAGCTATTTT
core_octa-96 |  CATATAACTAATGAACACAACATACGAGCTGTTTCTTTGGGG
core_octa-97 |  ATGTTTTGCTTTTGATCGGAACGAGGGTACTTTTTCTTTTGATAAGAGGTCATT
core_octa-98 |  CTTCGCTGGGCGCAGACGACAGTATCGGGGCACCGTCGCCATTCAGGCTGCGCA
core_octa-99 |  GATATTCTAAATTGAGCCGGAACGAGGCCCAACTTGGCGCATAGGCTGGCTGAC
core_octa-100 |  TGTCGTCATAAGTACAGAACCGCCACCCATTTTCACAGTACAAACTACAACGCC
core_octa-101 |  CGATTATAAGCGGAGACTTCAAATATCGCGGAAGCCTACGAAGGCACCAACCTA
core_octa-102 |  AACATGTACGCGAGTGGTTTGAAATACCTAAACACATTCTTACCAGTATAAAGC
core_octa-103 |  GTCTGGATTTTGCGTTTTAAATGCAATGGTGAGAAATAAATTAATGCCGGAGAG
core_octa-104 |  GCCTTGAATCTTTTCCGGAACCGCCTCCCAGAGCCCAGAGCCGCCGCCAGCATT
core_octa-105 |  CGCTGGTGCTTTCCTGAATCGGCCAACGAGGGTGGTGATTGCCCTTCACCGCCT
core_octa-106 |  ACATAACTTGCCCTAACTTTAATCATTGCATTATAACAACATTATTACAGGTAG
core_octa-107 |  TTATTTTTACCGACAATGCAGAACGCGCGAAAAATCTTTCCTTATCATTCCAAG
core_octa-108 |  TTTCAATAGAAGGCAGCGAACCTCCCGATTAGTTGAAACAATAACGGATTCGCC
core_octa-109 |  GGGCGACCCCAAAAGTATGTTAGCAAACTAAAAGAGTCACAATCAATAGAAAAT
core_octa-110 |  ATGACCACTCGTTTGGCTTTTGCAAAAGTTAGACTATATTCATTGAATCCCCCT
core_octa-111 |  TCCAAATCTTCTGAATTATTTGCACGTAGGTTTAACGCTAACGAGCGTCTTTCC
core_octa-112 |  GGGTTATTTAATTACAATATATGTGAGTAATTAATAAGAGTCAATAGTGAATTT

####  S4.3.2 Functionalization sequence

Table S7: Functionalization sequence for the octahedral DNA origami. The one named with ”AuNPhandle” is used to capture DNA functionalized AuNP while the one named with ”AnNPstaple” is just the staple without the handle for doing so. The one named as AuNP_conjugation is used to be conjugated to AuNPs. Oct_AuNPhandles_1 |  ATCCATCACTTCATACTCTACGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGGGGTGCCAGTTGAGACCATTAGATACAATTTTCACTGTGTGAAATTGTTATCC
---|---
Oct_AuNPhandles_2 |  ATCCATCACTTCATACTCTACGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTTCAGAGCTGGGTAAACGACGGCCAGTGCGATCCCCGTAGTAGCATTAACATCCA
Oct_AuNPhandles_3 |  ATCCATCACTTCATACTCTACGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTTTAGCGGTACAGAGCGGGAGAATTAACTGCGCTAATTTCGGAACCTATTATTCT
Oct_AuNPhandles_4 |  ATCCATCACTTCATACTCTACGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTTGATTATCAACTTTACAACTAAAGGAATCCAAAAAGTTTGAGTAACATTATCAT
Oct_AuNPhandles_5 |  ATCCATCACTTCATACTCTACGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTAGCGCCATTAAATTGGGAATTAGAGCGCAAGGCGCACCGTAATCAGTAGCGA
Oct_AuNPhandles_6 |  ATCCATCACTTCATACTCTACGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTAGCCGAAAGTCTCTCTTTTGATGATACAAGTGCCTTAAGAGCAAGAAACAATGA
Oct_AuNPhandles_7 |  ATCCATCACTTCATACTCTACGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTGGGAAATCATATAAATATTTAAATTGAATTTTTGTCTGGCCTTCCTGTAGCC
Oct_AuNPhandles_8 |  ATCCATCACTTCATACTCTACGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTGTTCCCACGCGCAAAATGGTTGAGTGTTGTTCGTGGACTTGCTTTCGAGGTGAATTT
Oct_AuNPstaples_1 |  GGGGTGCCAGTTGAGACCATTAGATACAATTTTCACTGTGTGAAATTGTTATCC
Oct_AuNPstaples_2 |  TCAGAGCTGGGTAAACGACGGCCAGTGCGATCCCCGTAGTAGCATTAACATCCA
Oct_AuNPstaples_3 |  TTAGCGGTACAGAGCGGGAGAATTAACTGCGCTAATTTCGGAACCTATTATTCT
Oct_AuNPstaples_4 |  TGATTATCAACTTTACAACTAAAGGAATCCAAAAAGTTTGAGTAACATTATCAT
Oct_AuNPstaples_5 |  GTAGCGCCATTAAATTGGGAATTAGAGCGCAAGGCGCACCGTAATCAGTAGCGA
Oct_AuNPstaples_6 |  AGCCGAAAGTCTCTCTTTTGATGATACAAGTGCCTTAAGAGCAAGAAACAATGA
Oct_AuNPstaples_7 |  GTGGGAAATCATATAAATATTTAAATTGAATTTTTGTCTGGCCTTCCTGTAGCC
Oct_AuNPstaples_8 |  CCCACGCGCAAAATGGTTGAGTGTTGTTCGTGGACTTGCTTTCGAGGTGAATTT
AuNP_conjugation |  TATGAAGTGATGGATGAT-SH

####  S4.3.3 Handle sequence

Table S8: Handle sequence for the octahedral DNA origami Handle_A0_0 |  GCTCACAATTCCGTGAGCTAACTCACTGGAAGTAATGGTCAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCCTGCTCC
---|---
Handle_A0_1 |  GGCCCTGAGAGAAGCAGGCGAAAATCATTGCGTAGAGGCGGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCCTGCTCC
Handle_A0_2 |  CTTAAACAGCTTATATATTCGGTCGCTTGATGGGGAACAAGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCCTGCTCC
Handle_A0_3 |  TTTGCGGATGGCCAACTAAAGTACGGGCTTGCAGCTACAGAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCCTGCTCC
Handle_A1_0 |  ATCAAAATCATATATGTAAATGCTGAACAAACACTTGCTTCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACATGCGC
Handle_A1_1 |  CAACGCTCAACAGCAGAGGCATTTTCAATCCAATGATAAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACATGCGC
Handle_A1_2 |  AACGGGTATTAAGGAATCATTACCGCCAGTAATTCAACAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACATGCGC
Handle_A1_3 |  TGATTGCTTTGAGCAAAAGAAGATGAAATAGCAGAGGTTTTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACATGCGC
Handle_A2_0 |  ACTGTTGGGAAGCAGCTGGCGAAAGGATAGGTCAAGATCGCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCCAAGTC
Handle_A2_1 |  ATAAATCATACATAAATCGGTTGTACTGTGCTGGCATGCCTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCCAAGTC
Handle_A2_2 |  GGTAGCTATTTTAGAGAATCGATGAAAACATTAAATGTGTAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCCAAGTC
Handle_A2_3 |  AGCTTTCATCAACGGATTGACCGTAAAATCGTATAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCCAAGTC
Handle_A3_0 |  AATAGCAATAGCACCAGAAGGAAACCTAAAGCCACTGGTAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGTGTCAC
Handle_A3_1 |  GACAGGAGGTTGAAACAAATAAATCCGCCCCCTCCGCCACCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGTGTCAC
Handle_A3_2 |  CAGAATCAAGTTTCGGCATTTTCGGTTAAATATATCACCAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGTGTCAC
Handle_A3_3 |  TCATATGGTTTACGATTGAGGGAGGGAAACGCAATACATACATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGTGTCAC
Handle_A4_0 |  CAAATGCTTTAAAAAATCAGGTCTTTAAGAGCAGCCAGAGGGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGGCATAC
Handle_A4_1 |  AAACGAAAGAGGGCGAAACAAAGTACTGACTATATTCGAGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGGCATAC
Handle_A4_2 |  CTTCATCAAGAGAAATCAACGTAACAGAGATTTGTCAATCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGGCATAC
Handle_A4_3 |  AAAGATTCATCAGGAATTACGAGGCATGCTCATCCTTATGCGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGGCATAC
Handle_A5_0 |  AGAGCCTAATTTGATTTTTTGTTTAAATCCTGAAATAAAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGCTGCAAC
Handle_A5_1 |  TTTGCGGAACAATGGCAATTCATCAATCTGTATAATAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGCTGCAAC
Handle_A5_2 |  GAAACATGAAAGCTCAGTACCAGGCGAAAAATGCTGAACAAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGCTGCAAC
Handle_A5_3 |  TGTAGCATTCCAACGTTAGTAAATGAAGTGCCGCGCCACCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGCTGCAAC
Handle_B0_0 |  GCTCACAATTCCGTGAGCTAACTCACTGGAAGTAATGGTCAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCTGTACC
Handle_B0_1 |  GGCCCTGAGAGAAGCAGGCGAAAATCATTGCGTAGAGGCGGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCTGTACC
Handle_B0_2 |  CTTAAACAGCTTATATATTCGGTCGCTTGATGGGGAACAAGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCTGTACC
Handle_B0_3 |  TTTGCGGATGGCCAACTAAAGTACGGGCTTGCAGCTACAGAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCTGTACC
Handle_B1_0 |  ATCAAAATCATATATGTAAATGCTGAACAAACACTTGCTTCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGCATGTC
Handle_B1_1 |  CAACGCTCAACAGCAGAGGCATTTTCAATCCAATGATAAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGCATGTC
Handle_B1_2 |  AACGGGTATTAAGGAATCATTACCGCCAGTAATTCAACAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGCATGTC
Handle_B1_3 |  TGATTGCTTTGAGCAAAAGAAGATGAAATAGCAGAGGTTTTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCGCATGTC
Handle_B2_0 |  ACTGTTGGGAAGCAGCTGGCGAAAGGATAGGTCAAGATCGCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCTCGAAC
Handle_B2_1 |  ATAAATCATACATAAATCGGTTGTACTGTGCTGGCATGCCTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCTCGAAC
Handle_B2_2 |  GGTAGCTATTTTAGAGAATCGATGAAAACATTAAATGTGTAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCTCGAAC
Handle_B2_3 |  AGCTTTCATCAACGGATTGACCGTAAAATCGTATAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCGCTCGAAC
Handle_B3_0 |  AATAGCAATAGCACCAGAAGGAAACCTAAAGCCACTGGTAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCTGACGAC
Handle_B3_1 |  GACAGGAGGTTGAAACAAATAAATCCGCCCCCTCCGCCACCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCTGACGAC
Handle_B3_2 |  CAGAATCAAGTTTCGGCATTTTCGGTTAAATATATCACCAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCTGACGAC
Handle_B3_3 |  TCATATGGTTTACGATTGAGGGAGGGAAACGCAATACATACATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCTGACGAC
Handle_B4_0 |  CAAATGCTTTAAAAAATCAGGTCTTTAAGAGCAGCCAGAGGGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTATGCCGC
Handle_B4_1 |  AAACGAAAGAGGGCGAAACAAAGTACTGACTATATTCGAGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTATGCCGC
Handle_B4_2 |  CTTCATCAAGAGAAATCAACGTAACAGAGATTTGTCAATCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTATGCCGC
Handle_B4_3 |  AAAGATTCATCAGGAATTACGAGGCATGCTCATCCTTATGCGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTATGCCGC
Handle_B5_0 |  AGAGCCTAATTTGATTTTTTGTTTAAATCCTGAAATAAAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCAGAGCCC
Handle_B5_1 |  TTTGCGGAACAATGGCAATTCATCAATCTGTATAATAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCAGAGCCC
Handle_B5_2 |  GAAACATGAAAGCTCAGTACCAGGCGAAAAATGCTGAACAAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCAGAGCCC
Handle_B5_3 |  TGTAGCATTCCAACGTTAGTAAATGAAGTGCCGCGCCACCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTCCAGAGCCC
Handle_C0_0 |  GCTCACAATTCCGTGAGCTAACTCACTGGAAGTAATGGTCAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCGAACCC
Handle_C0_1 |  GGCCCTGAGAGAAGCAGGCGAAAATCATTGCGTAGAGGCGGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCGAACCC
Handle_C0_2 |  CTTAAACAGCTTATATATTCGGTCGCTTGATGGGGAACAAGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCGAACCC
Handle_C0_3 |  TTTGCGGATGGCCAACTAAAGTACGGGCTTGCAGCTACAGAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTAGCGAACCC
Handle_C1_0 |  ATCAAAATCATATATGTAAATGCTGAACAAACACTTGCTTCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTTCGAGCG
Handle_C1_1 |  CAACGCTCAACAGCAGAGGCATTTTCAATCCAATGATAAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTTCGAGCG
Handle_C1_2 |  AACGGGTATTAAGGAATCATTACCGCCAGTAATTCAACAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTTCGAGCG
Handle_C1_3 |  TGATTGCTTTGAGCAAAAGAAGATGAAATAGCAGAGGTTTTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTTCGAGCG
Handle_C2_0 |  ACTGTTGGGAAGCAGCTGGCGAAAGGATAGGTCAAGATCGCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGAGCAGGG
Handle_C2_1 |  ATAAATCATACATAAATCGGTTGTACTGTGCTGGCATGCCTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGAGCAGGG
Handle_C2_2 |  GGTAGCTATTTTAGAGAATCGATGAAAACATTAAATGTGTAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGAGCAGGG
Handle_C2_3 |  AGCTTTCATCAACGGATTGACCGTAAAATCGTATAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGAGCAGGG
Handle_C3_0 |  AATAGCAATAGCACCAGAAGGAAACCTAAAGCCACTGGTAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCCTCTCCC
Handle_C3_1 |  GACAGGAGGTTGAAACAAATAAATCCGCCCCCTCCGCCACCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCCTCTCCC
Handle_C3_2 |  CAGAATCAAGTTTCGGCATTTTCGGTTAAATATATCACCAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCCTCTCCC
Handle_C3_3 |  TCATATGGTTTACGATTGAGGGAGGGAAACGCAATACATACATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGCCTCTCCC
Handle_C4_0 |  CAAATGCTTTAAAAAATCAGGTCTTTAAGAGCAGCCAGAGGGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGCTCTGG
Handle_C4_1 |  AAACGAAAGAGGGCGAAACAAAGTACTGACTATATTCGAGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGCTCTGG
Handle_C4_2 |  CTTCATCAAGAGAAATCAACGTAACAGAGATTTGTCAATCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGCTCTGG
Handle_C4_3 |  AAAGATTCATCAGGAATTACGAGGCATGCTCATCCTTATGCGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGCTCTGG
Handle_C5_0 |  AGAGCCTAATTTGATTTTTTGTTTAAATCCTGAAATAAAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTGACACGC
Handle_C5_1 |  TTTGCGGAACAATGGCAATTCATCAATCTGTATAATAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTGACACGC
Handle_C5_2 |  GAAACATGAAAGCTCAGTACCAGGCGAAAAATGCTGAACAAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTGACACGC
Handle_C5_3 |  TGTAGCATTCCAACGTTAGTAAATGAAGTGCCGCGCCACCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTGACACGC
Handle_D0_0 |  GCTCACAATTCCGTGAGCTAACTCACTGGAAGTAATGGTCAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGTACAGCG
Handle_D0_1 |  GGCCCTGAGAGAAGCAGGCGAAAATCATTGCGTAGAGGCGGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGTACAGCG
Handle_D0_2 |  CTTAAACAGCTTATATATTCGGTCGCTTGATGGGGAACAAGATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGTACAGCG
Handle_D0_3 |  TTTGCGGATGGCCAACTAAAGTACGGGCTTGCAGCTACAGAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGTACAGCG
Handle_D1_0 |  ATCAAAATCATATATGTAAATGCTGAACAAACACTTGCTTCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGTTCGCT
Handle_D1_1 |  CAACGCTCAACAGCAGAGGCATTTTCAATCCAATGATAAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGTTCGCT
Handle_D1_2 |  AACGGGTATTAAGGAATCATTACCGCCAGTAATTCAACAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGTTCGCT
Handle_D1_3 |  TGATTGCTTTGAGCAAAAGAAGATGAAATAGCAGAGGTTTTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGTTCGCT
Handle_D2_0 |  ACTGTTGGGAAGCAGCTGGCGAAAGGATAGGTCAAGATCGCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACTTGGCG
Handle_D2_1 |  ATAAATCATACATAAATCGGTTGTACTGTGCTGGCATGCCTGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACTTGGCG
Handle_D2_2 |  GGTAGCTATTTTAGAGAATCGATGAAAACATTAAATGTGTAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACTTGGCG
Handle_D2_3 |  AGCTTTCATCAACGGATTGACCGTAAAATCGTATAATATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGACTTGGCG
Handle_D3_0 |  AATAGCAATAGCACCAGAAGGAAACCTAAAGCCACTGGTAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTCGTCAGC
Handle_D3_1 |  GACAGGAGGTTGAAACAAATAAATCCGCCCCCTCCGCCACCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTCGTCAGC
Handle_D3_2 |  CAGAATCAAGTTTCGGCATTTTCGGTTAAATATATCACCAGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTCGTCAGC
Handle_D3_3 |  TCATATGGTTTACGATTGAGGGAGGGAAACGCAATACATACATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTCGTCAGC
Handle_D4_0 |  CAAATGCTTTAAAAAATCAGGTCTTTAAGAGCAGCCAGAGGGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGAGAGGC
Handle_D4_1 |  AAACGAAAGAGGGCGAAACAAAGTACTGACTATATTCGAGCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGAGAGGC
Handle_D4_2 |  CTTCATCAAGAGAAATCAACGTAACAGAGATTTGTCAATCATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGAGAGGC
Handle_D4_3 |  AAAGATTCATCAGGAATTACGAGGCATGCTCATCCTTATGCGTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGGGAGAGGC
Handle_D5_0 |  AGAGCCTAATTTGATTTTTTGTTTAAATCCTGAAATAAAGAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTTGCAGCC
Handle_D5_1 |  TTTGCGGAACAATGGCAATTCATCAATCTGTATAATAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTTGCAGCC
Handle_D5_2 |  GAAACATGAAAGCTCAGTACCAGGCGAAAAATGCTGAACAAATTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTTGCAGCC
Handle_D5_3 |  TGTAGCATTCCAACGTTAGTAAATGAAGTGCCGCGCCACCCTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTGTTGCAGCC

## References

  * [1] F. Romano, J. Russo, L. Kroc, and P. Šulc.  Designing patchy interactions to self-assemble arbitrary structures.  Physical Review Letters, 125(11):118003, 2020.
  * [2] J. Russo, F. Romano, L. Kroc, F. Sciortino, L. Rovigatti, and P. Šulc.  SAT-assembly: A new approach for designing self-assembling systems.  Journal of Physics: Condensed Matter, 34(35):354002, 2022.
  * [3] N. Een.  MiniSat: A SAT solver with conflict-clause minimization.  In Proc. SAT-05: 8th Int. Conf. on Theory and Applications of Satisfiability Testing, pages 502–518, 2005.
  * [4] P. Šulc, F. Romano, T. E. Ouldridge, L. Rovigatti, J. P. Doye, and A. A. Louis.  Sequence-dependent thermodynamics of a coarse-grained DNA model.  The Journal of chemical physics, 137(13):135101, 2012.
  * [5] T. E. Ouldridge, A. A. Louis, and J. P. Doye.  Structural, mechanical, and thermodynamic properties of a coarse-grained DNA model.  The Journal of chemical physics, 134(8):02B627, 2011.
  * [6] B. E. Snodin, F. Randisi, M. Mosayebi, P. Šulc, J. S. Schreck, F. Romano, T. E. Ouldridge, R. Tsukanov, E. Nir, A. A. Louis, et al.  Introducing improved structural properties and salt dependence into a coarse-grained model of DNA.  The Journal of chemical physics, 142(23):06B613_1, 2015.
  * [7] J. Russo, P. Tartaglia, and F. Sciortino.  Reversible gels of patchy particles: role of the valence.  The Journal of chemical physics, 131(1):014504, 2009.
  * [8] P. Šulc, F. Romano, T. E. Ouldridge, L. Rovigatti, J. P. K. Doye, and A. A. Louis.  Sequence-dependent thermodynamics of a coarse-grained DNA model.  Journal of Chemical Physics, 137(13):5101, 2012.
  * [9] L. Rovigatti, P. Šulc, I. Z. Reguly, and F. Romano.  A comparison between parallelization approaches in molecular dynamics simulations on GPUs.  Journal of computational chemistry, 36(1):1–8, 2015.
  * [10] E. Poppleton, M. Matthies, D. Mandal, F. Romano, P. Šulc, and L. Rovigatti.  oxDNA: coarse-grained simulations of nucleic acids made simple.  Journal of Open Source Software, 8(81):4693, 2023.
  * [11] E. Poppleton, J. Bohlin, M. Matthies, S. Sharma, F. Zhang, and P. Šulc.  Design, optimization and analysis of large DNA and RNA nanostructures through interactive visualization, editing and molecular simulation.  Nucleic acids research, 48(12):e72–e72, 2020.
  * [12] J. Bohlin, M. Matthies, E. Poppleton, J. Procyk, A. Mallya, H. Yan, and P. Šulc.  Design and simulation of DNA, RNA and hybrid protein–nucleic acid nanostructures with oxView.  Nature protocols, 17(8):1762–1788, 2022.
  * [13] Y. Tian, T. Wang, W. Liu, H. L. Xin, H. Li, Y. Ke, W. M. Shih, and O. Gang.  Prescribed nanoparticle cluster architectures and low-dimensional arrays built using octahedral DNA origami frames.  Nature nanotechnology, 10(7):637–644, 2015.
  * [14] J. Zhang, Y. Xu, Y. Huang, M. Sun, S. Liu, S. Wan, H. Chen, C. Yang, Y. Yang, and Y. Song.  Spatially patterned neutralizing icosahedral DNA nanocage for efficient SARS-CoV-2 blocking.  Journal of the American Chemical Society, 144(29):13146–13153, 2022\.
  * [15] J. N. Zadeh, C. D. Steenberg, J. S. Bois, B. R. Wolfe, M. B. Pierce, A. R. Khan, R. M. Dirks, and N. A. Pierce.  NUPACK: Analysis and design of nucleic acid systems.  Journal of computational chemistry, 32(1):170–173, 2011.
  * [16] C. Lin, S. D. Perrault, M. Kwak, F. Graf, and W. M. Shih.  Purification of DNA-origami nanostructures by rate-zonal centrifugation.  Nucleic acids research, 41(2):e40–e40, 2013.
  * [17] Y. Wang, L. Dai, Z. Ding, M. Ji, J. Liu, H. Xing, X. Liu, Y. Ke, C. Fan, P. Wang, et al.  DNA origami single crystals with Wulff shapes.  Nature Communications, 12(1):3011, 2021.
  * [18] D. J. Lewis, L. Z. Zornberg, D. J. Carter, and R. J. Macfarlane.  Single-crystal Winterbottom constructions of nanoparticle superlattices.  Nature materials, 19(7):719–724, 2020.
  * [19] Y. Tian, J. R. Lhermitte, L. Bai, T. Vo, H. L. Xin, H. Li, R. Li, M. Fukuto, K. G. Yager, J. S. Kahn, et al.  Ordered three-dimensional nanomaterials using DNA-prescribed and valence-controlled material voxels.  Nature materials, 19(7):789–796, 2020.
  * [20] K. G. Yager, Y. Zhang, F. Lu, and O. Gang.  Periodic lattices of arbitrary nano-objects: modeling and applications for self-assembled systems.  Journal of Applied Crystallography, 47(1):118–129, 2014.
  * [21] S.-T. Wang, B. Minevich, J. Liu, H. Zhang, D. Nykypanchuk, J. Byrnes, W. Liu, L. Bershadsky, Q. Liu, T. Wang, et al.  Designed and biologically active protein lattices.  Nature communications, 12(1):3702, 2021.
  * [22] J. SantaLucia Jr and D. Hicks.  The thermodynamics of DNA structural motifs.  Annu. Rev. Biophys. Biomol. Struct., 33:415–440, 2004.