MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1660654272 · doi:10.1021/acsnano.5b04335

Covalent Linkage of One-Dimensional DNA Arrays Bonded by Paranemic Cohesion

2015· article· en· W1660654272 on OpenAlexaff
Yoel P. Ohayon, Ruojie Sha, Ortho Flint, Wenyan Liu, Banani Chakraborty, Hari K. K. Subramanian, Jianping Zheng, Arun Richard Chandrasekaran, Hatem Abdallah, Xing Wang, Xiaoping Zhang, Nadrian C. Seeman

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Nano · 2015
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsWestern University
FundersArmy Research OfficeNational Institute of General Medical SciencesOffice of Naval ResearchGordon and Betty Moore FoundationU.S. Department of EnergyDivision of Computing and Communication FoundationsFrancis Crick InstituteDivision of Civil, Mechanical and Manufacturing InnovationNational Science Foundation
KeywordsCovalent bondLinkage (software)Materials scienceCohesion (chemistry)DNANanotechnologyCrystallographyGeneticsChemistryBiologyOrganic chemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The construction of DNA nanostructures from branched DNA motifs, or tiles, typically relies on the use of sticky-ended cohesion, owing to the specificity and programmability of DNA sequences. The stability of such constructs when unligated is restricted to a specific range of temperatures, owing to the disruption of base pairing at elevated temperatures. Paranemic (PX) cohesion was developed as an alternative to sticky ends for the cohesion of large topologically closed species that could be purified reliably on denaturing gels. However, PX cohesion is also of limited stability. In this work, we added sticky-ended interactions to PX-cohesive complexes to create interlocked complexes by functionalizing the sticky ends with psoralen, which can form cross-links between the two strands of a double helix. We were able to reinforce the stability of the constructs by creating covalent linkages between the 3'-ends and 5'-ends of the sticky ends; the sticky ends were added to double crossover domains via 3'-3' and 5'-5' linkages. Catenated arrays were obtained either by enzymatic ligation or by UV cross-linking. We have constructed finite-length one-dimensional arrays linked by interlocking loops and have positioned streptavidin-gold particles on these constructs.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.004
Threshold uncertainty score0.481

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.018
GPT teacher head0.265
Teacher spread0.247 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations41
Published2015
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS NanoSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207