Light emitting diode, photodiode‐based fluorescence detection system for DNA analysis with microchip electrophoresis
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Electrophoretic separation of fluorescently end-labeled DNA after a PCR serves as a gold standard in genetic diagnostics. Because of their size and cost, instruments for this type of analysis have had limited market uptake, particularly for point-of-care applications. This might be changed through a higher level of system integration and lower instrument costs that can be realized through the use of LEDs for excitation and photodiodes for detection--if they provide sufficient sensitivity. Here, we demonstrate an optimized microchip electrophoresis instrument using polymeric fluidic chips with fluorescence detection of end-labeled DNA with a LOD of 0.15 nM of Alexa Fluor 532. This represents orders of magnitude improvement over previously reported instruments of this type. We demonstrate the system with an electrophoretic separation of two PCR products and their respective primers. We believe that this is the first LED-induced fluorescence microchip electrophoresis system with photodiode-based detection that could be used for standard applications of PCR and electrophoresis.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.003 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 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 teacher head, 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".