Role of Tau Protein on Photophysical Properties of Carbon Dots
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Aggregation of intrinsically disordered Tau protein is a key biomarker of the progressive neurodegenerative disorder Alzheimer's Disease [1]. Although the precise mechanism by which tau aggregates is not well understood, abnormal post‐translational modifications of tau have been implicated in the formation of tau aggregates and neurofibrillary tangles. In vitro, Tau aggregation may be detected by the fluorescent Thioflavin T dye, which is limited by non‐specific interactions between the dye and other additives and low fluorescence quantum yield. CDs are a highly modifiable nanomaterials with characteristic optical properties and poorly‐understood protein interactions. Using the novel fluorescent nanoallotrope, Carbon dots (CDs), we examined an alternative method for facile detection of intrinsically disordered Tau protein. Through photophysical studies of tau protein with two varieties of CDs, we determined that Tau protein decreased the fluorescent intensity of dual‐fluorescing CDs to a greater extent than nitrogen‐doped CDs after monitoring fluorescence. Tau protein aggregation was also induced by using heparin and this process was monitored by using ThT as well as CD assays. The CDs exhibited similar properties with heparin‐aggregated tau samples and non‐aggregated tau protein under specific experimental conditions. Data indicate that carbon dots are viable sensors for proteins and could be further optimized for disease biomarker detection and quantification in the development of rapid, sensitive and selective diagnostic assays. References [1] M.D. Weinggarten, A.H. Lockwood, S.Y. Hwo, M.W. Kirschener, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci., 1975, 72, 1858‐1862.
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 imitationNot 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.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| 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) | 0.000 | 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 teacher head, 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".