Food grade silica nanoparticles cause non‐competitive type inhibition of human salivary α‐amylase because of surface interaction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Given the potential of ingested particles to interact with enzymes in oral cavity, we compared different grades of SiO2 particles (food‐grade and non‐food grade nanoparticles (FG‐SiO2‐NP, NFG‐SiO2‐NP), and food grade microparticles (FG‐SiO2‐MP)) for their interaction with human salivary α‐amylase (HSA). There were differences in the agglomeration behavior and relative abundance of silanol and siloxane groups among different grades of SiO2 particles where FG‐SiO2‐NPs contained less cyclic siloxane groups but more silanol groups. Secondary structure and function of HSA were negatively impacted by FG‐SiO2‐NPs. In order to verify if this inhibition is mediated through surface interactions, pristine particles were compared with those interacted with pure protein (bovine serum albumin‐BSA) and with food matrix (milk) for HSA inhibition. BSA coating of SiO2 particles ameliorated HSA inhibition, but milk interacted ones showed an enhanced the HSA inhibition because of the presence of milk protease suggesting the relevance of surface interactions in manifesting potential negative impacts of silica particles used in food.
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 | 0.000 | 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) | 0.001 | 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".