Biophysical Characterization of Complexation of DNA with Block Copolymers of Poly(2-dimethylaminoethyl) Methacrylate, Poly(ethylene oxide), and Poly(propylene oxide)
Bibliographic record
Abstract
The interactions of DNA (salmon testes) with two new cationic block copolymers made of poly(2-dimethylaminoethyl) methacrylate and poly(ethylene oxide), PEO-pDMAEMA, or poly(ethylene oxide)-poly(propylene oxide)-poly(ethylene oxide), L92-pDMAEMA, were studied with the aim to understand their different in vitro transfection efficiencies when used as nonviral delivery vectors. PEO-pDMAEMA does not show surface activity while L92-pDMAEMA is as surface active as its parent Pluronic L92. Surface tension, titration microcalorimetry, ethidium bromide displacement, and zeta-potential measurements were carried out in phosphate buffers at pH 5 and 7. The association of L92-pDMAEMA with DNA was strongly exothermic at both pHs; the critical aggregation concentration (CAC) corresponded to a N/P ratio of 0.3, the maximum energy evolved was reached for N/P ratios of 0.82 and 1.27 at pH 5 and pH 7, respectively, and the saturation occurred for N/P ratios close to 2. The presence of L92 in the structure of this new block copolymer apparently did not modify the thermodynamic parameters of the interaction with DNA. In contrast, the interaction with PEO-pDMAEMA was significantly less exothermic, and CAC and saturation occurred for N/Ps equal to 0.43 and 1.37, respectively. The strong affinity of L92-pDMAEMA for DNA was reflected in its capacity to displace ethidium bromide and in the jump in the values of the zeta potential when N/P is near 1. Above the N/P ratio at which electroneutral polyplexes are formed, only at pH 5 an excess of L92-pDMAEMA is incorporated in the complexes, resulting in positively charged complexes. The profile of the zeta-potential values obtained for mixtures of L92-pDMAEMA with Pluronic P123 showed a shift to a lower N/P ratio, owing to an easier interaction of L92-pDMAEMA molecules with DNA in the presence of P123. Additionally, a visual inspection of the systems indicates that P123 contributes to stabilize/solubilize the DNA/cationic polymer aggregates, by avoiding the typical phase separation near the charge neutralization point. The information obtained can be particularly useful to optimize the conditions to form efficient polyplexes for gene delivery systems.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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".