Relating the Surface Properties of Superparamagnetic Iron Oxide Nanoparticles (SPIONs) to Their Bactericidal Effect towards a Biofilm of Streptococcus mutans
Bibliographic record
Abstract
This study was designed to determine the effects of superparamagnetic iron oxide nanoparticles (SPIONs) on the biological activity of a bacterial biofilm (Streptococcus mutans). Our hypothesis was that the diffusion of the SPIONs into biofilms would depend on their surface properties, which in turn would largely be determined by their surface functionality. Bare, positively charged and negatively charged SPIONs, with hydrodynamic diameters of 14.6 ± 1.4 nm, 20.4 ± 1.3 nm and 21.2 ± 1.6 nm were evaluated. Time-of-flight secondary ion mass spectrometry (TOF-SIMS) and electrophoretic mobility (EPM) measurements were used to confirm that carboxylic functional groups predominated on the negatively charged SPIONS, whereas amine functional groups predominated on the positively charged particles. Transmission electron microscopy (TEM) showed the morphology and sizes of SPIONs. Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and EPM measurements indicated that the surfaces of the SPIONs were covered with biomolecules following their incubation with the biofilm. Bare SPIONs killed bacteria less than the positively charged SPIONs at the highest exposure concentrations, but the toxicity of the bare and positively charged SPIONs was the same for lower SPION concentrations. The positively charged SPIONs were more effective in killing bacteria than the negatively charged ones. Nonetheless, electrophoretic mobilities of all three SPIONs (negative, bare and positively charged) became more negative following incubation with the (negatively-charged) biofilm. Therefore, while the surface charge of SPIONS was important in determining their biological activity, the initial surface charge was not constant in the presence of the biofilm, leading eventually to SPIONS with fairly similar surface charges in situ. The study nonetheless suggests that the surface characteristics of the SPIONS is an important parameter controlling the efficiency of antimicrobial agents. The analysis of the CFU/mL values shows that the SPIONs have the same toxicity on bacteria in solution in comparison with that on the biofilm.
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".