MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2055186794 · doi:10.1166/jnn.2012.6647

Magnetic Gold Nanoparticles: Synthesis, Characterization and Its Application in the Delivery of FITC Into KG-1 Cells

2012· article· en· W2055186794 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuzhi Hao, Steven Song, Xiaoyan Yang, James Z. Xing, Jie Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nanoscience and Nanotechnology · 2012
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicNanoparticles: synthesis and applications
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Alberta
FundersCanadian Institutes of Health Research
KeywordsSonicationMaterials scienceConfocalFluoresceinFluorescein isothiocyanateNanoparticleAscorbic acidNanotechnologyConfocal microscopyIron oxide nanoparticlesColloidal goldMagnetic nanoparticlesChemical engineeringFluorescenceOpticsChemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

In this article, we report a new method-a sonication method to disperse iron oxide nanoparticles into smaller nanoparticles and make gold ions absorb onto the surface or trapped in the micropores of the iron oxide nanoparticles using sonication action. By using quick reduction of ascorbic acid and post-HCI solution treatment, gold covered magnetic nanoparticles (mGNPs) with spherical morphology and uniform size were synthesized in a water solution. The size of the mGNPs was found to be 20-30 nm. Some ideal mGNPs possessed a core-shell structure. The mGNPs were non-cytotoxic and mGNP-fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) can enter KG-1 cells when driven by an external magnetic force, which was confirmed by confocal imaging. The confocal image also showed the FITC inside the KG-1 cells was near the nucleus. The fluorescein isothiocyanate (FITC) delivery efficiency is about 100% according to the flow cytometry results.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.000
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 head0.011
GPT teacher head0.228
Teacher spread0.217 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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

Citations9
Published2012
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Nanoscience and NanotechnologySame topicNanoparticles: synthesis and applicationsFrench-language works237,207