Properties of Human Serum Albumin Entrapped in Sol−Gel-Derived Silica Bearing Covalently Tethered Sugars
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Silica derived from biocompatible silane precursors and containing covalently bound sugar moieties has recently been reported to be a much more biocompatible matrix for protein entrapment than any previously synthesized materials. To better understand the nature of these new materials, the steady-state and time-resolved fluorescence of human serum albumin (HSA) was used to examine the conformation, dynamics, accessibility, thermal stability, and degree of ligand binding after entrapment of the protein into sol−gel-processed glasses derived from either tetraethyl orthosilicate (TEOS) or diglycerylsilane (DGS), which in some cases contained covalently bound gluconamidylsilane (GLS) moieties. It was observed that the initial conformation, accessibility to external analytes, thermal stability, long-term stability, and degree of ligand binding to HSA were best in DGS-derived materials that contained covalently tethered GLS relative to unmodified DGS-derived materials, TEOS, or TEOS/GLS-derived materials. Measurement of protein rotational dynamics showed that entrapment led to an immediate loss of global motion in all materials. However, the restriction of motion was most dramatic in GLS-doped materials, suggesting preferential interactions of the protein with the sugar-coated surfaces. As aging proceeded, both protein dynamics and the degree of ligand binding decreased, with a gradual loss of segmental motion and a significant increase in local motion in the vicinity of the probe, consistent with unfolding and surface adsorption of the protein, leading to loss of function. Overall, our findings suggest that the use of a biocompatible precursor (DGS) and the addition of a covalently bound sugar both contribute to improved protein performance. However, of these two the use of a biocompatible precursor is the most important factor, and in such cases addition of sugars further improves protein performance. In contrast, the use of the sugar-based additive with a nonbiocompatible precursor such as TEOS imparted essentially no benefit, demonstrating the importance of biocompatible processing conditions.
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".