Simple Design for DNA Nanotubes from a Minimal Set of Unmodified Strands: Rapid, Room-Temperature Assembly and Readily Tunable Structure
Bibliographic record
Abstract
DNA nanotubes have great potential as nanoscale scaffolds for the organization of materials and the templation of nanowires and as drug delivery vehicles. Current methods for making DNA nanotubes either rely on a tile-based step-growth polymerization mechanism or use a large number of component strands and long annealing times. Step-growth polymerization gives little control over length, is sensitive to stoichiometry, and is slow to generate long products. Here, we present a design strategy for DNA nanotubes that uses an alternative, more controlled growth mechanism, while using just five unmodified component strands and a long enzymatically produced backbone. These tubes form rapidly at room temperature and have numerous, orthogonal sites available for the programmable incorporation of arrays of cargo along their length. As a proof-of-concept, cyanine dyes were organized into two distinct patterns by inclusion into these DNA nanotubes.
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) | 0.000 | 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 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".