MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2975967351 · doi:10.1002/cbic.201900575

Highly Sensitive RNA‐Cleaving DNAzyme Sensors from Surface‐to‐Surface Product Enrichment

2019· article· en· W2975967351 on OpenAlexafffund
Sahar Esmaeili Samani, Dingran Chang, Erin M. McConnell, Meghan Rothenbroker, Carlos D. M. Filipe, Yingfu Li

Bibliographic record

VenueChemBioChem · 2019
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsMcMaster University
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsDeoxyribozymeCleavage (geology)BiosensorRNAOligonucleotideNanotechnologyChemistryDNACombinatorial chemistryMaterials scienceBiochemistryGene

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The engineering of easy-to-use biosensors with ultra-low detection sensitivity remains a major challenge. Herein, we report a simple approach for creating such sensors through the use of an RNA-cleaving DNAzyme (RcD) and a strategy designed to concentrate its cleavage product significantly. The assay uses micron-sized beads loaded with a target-responsive RcD and a paper strip containing a microzone covered with a DNA oligonucleotide capable of capturing the cleavage product of the RcD through Watson-Crick hybridization. Placing the beads and the paper strip in a target-containing test sample allows the bead-bound RcD molecules to undergo target-induced RNA cleavage, releasing a DNA fragment that is captured by the paper strip. This strategy, though simple, is very effective in achieving high levels of detection sensitivity, being able to enrich the concentration of the cleavage product by three orders of magnitude. It is also compatible with both fluorescence-based and colorimetric reporting mechanisms. This work provides a simple platform for developing ultrasensitive biosensors that take advantage of the widely available RcDs as molecular recognition elements.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow)
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 score0.015
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

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

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 head0.007
GPT teacher head0.243
Teacher spread0.236 · 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 teacher head, not a consensus.

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

Citations10
Published2019
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueChemBioChemSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207