Spreading of Cell Aggregates on Zwitterion-Modified Chitosan Films
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract The sulfobetaine (SB) moiety, which comprises a quaternary ammonium group linked to a negatively charged sulfonate ester, is known to impart nonfouling properties to interfaces coated with polysulfobetaines or grafted with SB-polymeric brushes. Increasingly, evidence emerges that the SB group is, overall, a better antifouling group than the phosphorylcholine (PC) moiety extensively used in the past. We report here the synthesis of a series of SB-modified chitosans (CH-SB) carrying between 20 and 40 mol % SB per monosaccharide unit. Chitosan (CH) itself is a naturally derived copolymer of glucosamine and N-acetyl-glucosamine linked with a ?-1,4 bond. Analysis by quartz crystal microbalance with dissipation (QCM-D) indicates that CH-SB films (thickness ? 20 nm) resist adsorption of bovine serum albumin (BSA) with increasing efficiency as the SB content of the polymer augments (surface coverage ? 15 ?g cm?2 for films of CH with 40 mol % SB). The cell adhesivity of CH-SB films coated on glass was assessed by determining the spreading dynamics of CT26 cell aggregates. When placed on chitosan films, known to be cell-adhesive, the CT26 cell aggregates spread by forming a cell monolayer around them. The spreading of CT26 cell aggregates on zwitterion-modified chitosans films is thwarted remarkably. In the cases of CH-SB30 and CH-SB40 films, only a few isolated cells escape from the aggregates. The extent of aggregate spreading, quantified based on the theory of liquid wetting, provides a simple in vitro assay of the nonfouling properties of substrates toward specific cell lines. This assay can be adopted to test and compare the fouling characteristics of substrates very different from the chemical viewpoint.
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) | 0.001 | 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) | 0.002 | 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".