Confined diffusion in tubular structures analyzed by fluorescence correlation spectroscopy on a mirror
Bibliographic record
Abstract
In fluorescence correlation spectroscopy (FCS) analysis it is generally assumed that molecular species diffuse freely in volumes much larger than the three-dimensional FCS observation volume. However, this standard assumption is not valid in many measurement conditions, particularly in tubular structures with diameters in the micrometer range, such as those found in living cells (organelles, dendrites) and microfluidic devices (capillaries, reaction chambers). As a result the measured autocorrelation functions (ACFs) deviate from those predicted for free diffusion, and this can shift the measured diffusion coefficient by as much as ~50% when the tube diameter is comparable with the axial extension of the FCS observation volume. We show that the range of validity of the FCS measurements can be drastically improved if the tubular structures are located in the close vicinity of a mirror on which FCS is performed. In this case a new fluctuation time in the ACF, arising from the diffusion of fluorescent probes in optical fringes, permits measurement of the real diffusion coefficient within the tubular structure without assumptions about either the confined geometry or the FCS observation volume geometry. We show that such a measurement can be done when the tubular structure contains at least one pair of dark and bright fringes resulting from interference between the incoming and the reflected excitation beams on the mirror surface. Measurement of the diffusion coefficient of the enhanced green fluorescent protein (EGFP) and IscS-EGFP in the cytoplasm of living Escherichia coli illustrates the capabilities of the technique.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".