Evidence for Rigid Binding of Rhodamine 6G to Silica Surfaces in Aqueous Solution Based on Fluorescence Anisotropy Decay Analysis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Strong ionic binding of the cationic probe rhodamine 6G (R6G) to the anionic surface of silica particles in water provides a convenient labeling procedure to study both particle growth kinetics and surface modification by time-resolved fluorescence anisotropy (TRFA). The decays for R6G dispersed in diluted Ludox silica sols usually fit to a sum of picosecond and nanosecond decay components, along with a significant residual anisotropy component. The origin of the nanosecond decay component (phi2) is not fully understood, and has been ascribed to wobbling of the probe on the silica surface, the presence of a subpopulation of small nanoparticles in the Ludox sol, or rapid exchange between free and bound R6G. To elucidate the physical meaning of phi2, measurements were performed in various silica-based colloidal systems using different concentrations of silica. We found that the fraction of phi2 was generally higher in Ludox than in aqueous sodium silicate and decreased with increasing silica concentration; phi2 vanished upon gelation of sodium silicate at pH 7 leading to a total loss of R6G depolarization (r(t) = const). These results rule out the presence of local R6G wobbling when bound ionically to colloidal silica and support the rigid sphere model to describe the TRFA decays for R6G-Ludox. This conclusion is entirely supported by steady-state anisotropy data and structural considerations for the R6G molecule and the silica surface.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".