Fluorescence-Based Comparative Binding Studies of the Supramolecular Host Properties of PAMAM Dendrimers Using Anilinonaphthalene Sulfonates: Unusual Host-Dependent Fluorescence Titration Behavior
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This work describes the fluorescence enhancement of the anilinonaphthalene sulfonate probes 1,8-ANS, 2,6-ANS, and 2,6-TNS via complexation with PAMAM dendrimer hosts of Generation 4, 5 and 6. The use of this set of three very closely related probes allows for comparative binding studies, with specific pairs of probes differing only in shape (1,8-ANS and 2,6-ANS), or in the presence of a methyl substituent (2,6-TNS vs. 2,6-ANS). The fluorescence of all three probes was significantly enhanced upon binding with PAMAM dendrimers, however in all cases except one, a very unusual spike was consistently observed in the host fluorescence titration plots (fluorescence enhancement vs. host concentration) at low dendrimer concentration. This unprecedented fluorescence titration curve shape makes fitting the data to a simple model such as 1:1 or 2:1 host: guest complexation very difficult; thus only qualitative comparisons of the relative binding of the three guests could be made based on host titrations. In the case of G4 and G5 dendrimers, the order of binding strength was qualitatively determined to be 1,8-ANS<2,6-ANS indicating that the more streamlined 2,6-substituted probes are a better match for the dendrimer cavity shape than the bulkier 1,8-substituted probe. This order of binding strength was also indicated by double fluorometric titration experiments, involving both host and guest titrations. Further double fluorometric titration experiments on 2,6-ANS in G4 dendrimer revealed a host concentration-dependent change in the nature of the host: guest complexation, with multiple guests complexed per host molecule at very low host concentrations, but less than one guest per host at higher concentrations.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
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.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
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".