MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2945850802 · doi:10.4081/xeno.2019.8147

Detection of polystyrene nanoplastics in biological tissues with a fluorescent molecular rotor probe

2019· article· en· W2945850802 on OpenAlexafffund
François Gagné

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Xenobiotics · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
FundersEnvironment and Climate Change Canada
KeywordsFluorescencePolystyreneRotor (electric)ChemistryBiophysicsBiologyPhysicsPolymerOpticsOrganic chemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The release of nanoplastics (NPs) from the weathering and degradation of plastics is an important environmental concern. Given their small sizes and their invasiveness in cells, methods for the detection of NPs in biological tissues are urgently needed. A simple fluorescence-based methodology for the detection of polystyrene NPs in biological tissues is proposed. The commercially available molecular rotor probe 9- (dicyanovinyl)-julolidine (DCVJ) has the properties to detect changes in hydrophobicity and microviscosity and was used to detect NPs. Increasing concentrations of 50 and 100 nm NPs in water and in tissue extracts were mixed with the DCVJ probe and the emission spectra determined between 480-800 nm at 450 nm excitation. The data revealed that NPs induces a second emission peak at 620 nm that differed from the normal spectra of the biological extract at 500 nm. A significant linear relationship was obtained for NPs of both sizes (r=0.98; P<0.001) with a theoretical limit of detection of 65 ng/mL. A simple and rapid microplate spectrofluorometric method for the semi-quantitative detection of polystyrene NPs in biological tissues is thus presented.

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)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
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: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.002

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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 head0.005
GPT teacher head0.187
Teacher spread0.182 · 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
GenreEmpirical

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

Citations38
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of XenobioticsSame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207