Interaction of gold nanoglycodendrimers with algal cells (<i>Chlamydomonas reinhardtii</i>) and their effect on physiological processes
Bibliographic record
Abstract
With the rise of nanotechnologies, the risk of contamination of aquatic ecosystems with nanoparticles is increasing. Glycodendrimer-coated gold nanoparticles have been developed for biomedical applications; however, their effect on microalgae has never been studied. In this report, their interactions with algae were investigated using two strains of Chlamydomonas reinhardtii, a wild type having cell wall and a cell wall-deficient mutant. Cultures were exposed 48 h to 6 and 12 ng ml⁻¹ of gold nanoparticles coated with mannose generation 0 polyamidoamine dendrimer. Culture aggregation was found only for wild type cells, probably because of interactions between mannose and cell wall glycoproteins. Nanoparticles penetrated cytoplasm in both strains; however, inhibition of algal growth and photosynthetic activity was found only in the wild type. We conclude that nanoparticles' deteriorating effect in algae is caused by interactions with the cell wall, causing an aggregation of cell culture, and not by nanoparticle penetration inside the cytoplasm.
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 | 0.000 |
| 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 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".