Using intracellular plasmonics to characterize nanomorphology in human cells
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Determining the characteristics and localization of nanoparticles inside cells is crucial for nanomedicine design for cancer therapy. Hyperspectral imaging is a fast, straightforward, reliable, and accurate method to study the interactions of nanoparticles and intracellular components. With a hyperspectral image, we could collect spectral information consisting of thousands of pixels in a short time. Using hyperspectral images, in this work, we developed a label-free technique to detect nanoparticles in different regions of the cell. This technique is based on plasmonic shifts taking place during the interaction of nanoparticles with the surrounding medium. The unique optical properties of gold nanoparticles, localized surface plasmon resonance bands, are influenced by their microenvironment. The LSPR properties of nanoparticles, hence, could provide information on regions in which nanoparticles are distributed. To examine the potential of this technique for intracellular detection, we used three different types of gold nanoparticles: nanospheres, nanostars and Swarna Bhasma (SB), an Indian Ayurvedic/Sidha medicine, in A549 (human non-small cell lung cancer) and HepG2 (human hepatocellular carcinoma) cells. All three types of particles exhibited broader and longer bands once they were inside cells; however, their plasmonic shifts could change depending on the size and morphology of particles. This technique, along with dark-field images, revealed the uniform distribution of nanospheres in cells and could provide more accurate information on their intracellular microenvironment compared to the other particles. The region-dependent optical responses of nanoparticles in cells highlight the potential application of this technique for subcellular diagnosis when particles with proper size and morphology are chosen to reflect the microenvironment effects properly.
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 | 0.001 | 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) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
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.
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".