MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4211082835 · doi:10.1039/d2an00145d

Homogeneous assays for aptamer-based ethanolamine sensing: no indication of target binding

2022· article· en· W4211082835 on OpenAlexafffund
Yuzhe Ding, Xun Liu, Po‐Jung Jimmy Huang, Juewen Liu

Bibliographic record

VenueThe Analyst · 2022
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMitacs
KeywordsEthanolamineAptamerChemistryDissociation constantBinding constantIsothermal titration calorimetryFluorescenceBinding siteBiochemistryBiologyMolecular biologyReceptor

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

) as low as 9.6 nM. However, most of the previous binding assays and sensing work used either immobilized ethanolamine or immobilized aptamers. In this work, we studied three previously reported DNA sequences, two of which were supposed to bind ethanolamine while the other could not bind. Isothermal titration calorimetry revealed no binding for any of these sequences. In addition, due to their guanine-rich sequences, thioflavin T was used as a probe. Little fluorescence change was observed with up to 1 μM ethanolamine. Responses within the millimolar range of ethanolamine were attributed to the general fluorescence quenching effect of ethanolamine instead of aptamer binding. Finally, after studying the adsorption of ethanolamine to gold nanoparticles (AuNPs), we confirmed the feasibility of using AuNPs as a probe when the concentration of ethanolamine was below 0.1 mM. However, no indication of specific aptamer binding was observed by comparing the three DNA sequences for their color changing trends. This work articulates the importance of careful homogeneous binding assays using free target molecules.

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)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
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 score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0010.000
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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 head0.012
GPT teacher head0.264
Teacher spread0.252 · 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

Citations16
Published2022
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueThe AnalystSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207