MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2805634366 · doi:10.1038/s41598-018-23930-1

Real-time Detection and Monitoring of Loop Mediated Amplification (LAMP) Reaction Using Self-quenching and De-quenching Fluorogenic Probes

2018· article· en· W2805634366 on OpenAlexaff
Vijay Gadkar, David A. Goldfarb, Soren Gantt, Peter Tilley

Bibliographic record

VenueScientific Reports · 2018
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicBiosensors and Analytical Detection
Canadian institutionsChildren's & Women's Health Centre of British Columbia
Fundersnot available
KeywordsLoop-mediated isothermal amplificationDetection limitQuenching (fluorescence)AmpliconChemistryPrimer (cosmetics)FluorescenceAnalyteChromatographyPolymerase chain reactionDNAOpticsBiochemistryPhysics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) is an isothermal nucleic acid amplification (iNAAT) technique known for its simplicity, sensitivity and speed. Its low-cost feature has resulted in its wide scale application, especially in low resource settings. The major disadvantage of LAMP is its heavy reliance on indirect detection methods like turbidity and non-specific dyes, which often leads to the detection of false positive results. In the present work, we have developed a direct detection approach, whereby a labelled loop probe quenched in its unbound state, fluoresces only when bound to its target (amplicon). Henceforth, referred to as Fluorescence of Loop Primer Upon Self Dequenching-LAMP (FLOS-LAMP), it allows for the sequence-specific detection of LAMP amplicons. The FLOS-LAMP concept was validated for rapid detection of the human pathogen, Varicella-zoster virus, from clinical samples. The FLOS-LAMP had a limit of detection of 500 copies of the target with a clinical sensitivity and specificity of 96.8% and 100%, respectively. The high level of specificity is a major advance and solves one of the main shortcomings of the LAMP technology, i.e. false positives. Self-quenching/de-quenching probes were further used with other LAMP primer sets and different fluorophores, thereby demonstrating its versatility and adaptability.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation 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: Methods · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.010
GPT teacher head0.230
Teacher spread0.219 · 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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreMethods

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

Citations201
Published2018
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueScientific ReportsSame topicBiosensors and Analytical DetectionFrench-language works237,207