MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2037280409 · doi:10.1021/ja908508j

A Contractile Electronic Switch Made of DNA

2010· article· en· W2037280409 on OpenAlexafffund
Yu Chuan Huang, Dipankar Sen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of the American Chemical Society · 2010
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsSimon Fraser University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsChemistryAntiparallel (mathematics)DNAThymineHelix (gastropod)GuanineCrystallographyCircular dichroismDNA nanotechnologyG-quadruplexStereochemistryBiophysicsNucleotideBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Double-helical DNA has been shown to conduct both electrons and electron holes, the latter over distances of >20 nm. DNA is thus a material of significant interest for the bottom-up construction of nanocircuitry. Here, we describe a contractile DNA nanoswitch, which can toggle between a structurally extended "off" state and a contracted "on" state, with a 40-fold conductivity difference between the two. To turn on, two short motifs of guanine-guanine mismatches in an otherwise standard double helix synapse to form a conductive G-quadruplex, bypassing an insulating element within the helix. This switch can be turned repeatedly on by treatment with millimolar concentrations of K(+) and turned off by sequestration of the K(+) by a crown ether. Circular dichroism and thymine-thymine photocross-linking experiments reveal that strand orientations within the on state G-quadruplex are wholly antiparallel and that the two conductive double-helices interface with the same face of the quadruplex. Although this DNA nanoswitch is chemically gated, it should be adaptable to other kinds of gating and thus serve as a prototype for increasingly sophisticated and complex electronic devices made of DNA.

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 score0.005
Threshold uncertainty score0.224

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
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 head0.004
GPT teacher head0.255
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations52
Published2010
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of the American Chemical SocietySame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207