MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2113813260 · doi:10.1071/ch11205

Self-Assembly of Poly(l-glutamate)-block-poly(2-(diethylamino)ethyl methacrylate) in Aqueous Solutions

2011· article· en· W2113813260 on OpenAlexafffund
Angela M. Leung, Vanessa Ng, Yoon Khei Ho, Lihan Zhou, Heng Phon Too, Kam Chiu Tam

Bibliographic record

VenueAustralian Journal of Chemistry · 2011
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicRNA Interference and Gene Delivery
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsHydrodynamic radiusChemistryMethacrylateIsoelectric pointAqueous solutionCopolymerAmine gas treatingPolymer chemistryMicellePolymerPolyelectrolyteOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The self-assembly and gene delivery applications of poly(l-glutamate)-block-poly(2-(diethylamino)ethyl methacrylate) (PLG18-b-PDEAEMA37) were investigated. Owing to the functional groups on the polymer, an amine and a carboxylic acid group, the self-assembly process is dependent on the solution pH, where the critical micelle concentration was determined to be 61 and 320 µg mL–1 at high and low pH, respectively. The block copolymer forms positively charged vesicles at low pH with a hydrodynamic radius of 90 nm and negatively charged vesicles at high pH with a hydrodynamic radius of 50 nm. At the isoelectric point of 4.9, PLG-b-PDEAEMA was found to form larger micellar aggregates with a hydrodynamic radius of 180 nm because of the presence of both positive and negative charges. The complexation between PLG-b-PDEAEMA and DNA was studied at physiological pH as well as at low and high pH. DNA is condensed most effectively at pH 3, at an N/P ratio of 5, whereas at pH 7 and 10, an N/P ratio of 20 is required. However, in-vitro studies at physiological pH using neuroblastoma cells did not show substantial gene expression.

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 score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.957

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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 science0.0010.000
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 head0.027
GPT teacher head0.254
Teacher spread0.228 · 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

Citations3
Published2011
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueAustralian Journal of ChemistrySame topicRNA Interference and Gene DeliveryFrench-language works237,207