MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort

In‐liquid <scp>TEM</scp> to visualize multimerization and self‐assembly of <scp>DNA</scp> functionalized gold nanoparticles

2016· other· en· W4233484650 on OpenAlexaff
Sercan Keskin, Stephanie Besztejan, Guenther Kassier, Stephanie Manz, Robert Buecker, Svenja Riekeberg, Hoc Khiem Trieu, Andrea Rentmeister, Dwayne Miller

Bibliographic record

VenueEuropean Microscopy Congress 2016: Proceedings · 2016
Typeother
Languageen
FieldBiochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology
TopicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Toronto
Fundersnot available
KeywordsDNAOligonucleotideTransmission electron microscopyChemistryColloidal goldBase pairDNA origamiBiophysicsNanotechnologyNanoparticleMaterials scienceBiochemistryBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Base‐pairing stability in DNA‐gold nanoparticle (DNA‐AuNP) multimers along with their dynamics under different electron beam intensities was investigated with in‐liquid transmission electron microscopy (in‐liquid TEM) using custom developed silicon nitride based liquid cells. Multimer formation was triggered by hybridization of DNA oligonucleotides to another DNA strand (Hyb‐DNA) related to the concept of DNA origami. We analyzed the degree of multimer formation for a number of samples and a series of control samples to determine the specificity of the multimerization during the TEM imaging. DNA‐AuNPs with Hyb‐DNA showed an interactive motion and assembly into 1D structures once the electron beam intensity exceeds a threshold value. These findings indicate that DNA base pairing interactions are the driving force for in situ multimerization and DNA‐metallic NP conjugates provide excellent models to understand structure‐function correlation in biological systems with nanometer spatial resolution (Keskin et al., 2015, 10.1021/acs.jpclett.5b02075).

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: none
Teacher disagreement score0.700
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
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 head0.274
Teacher spread0.267 · 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

Citations0
Published2016
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueEuropean Microscopy Congress 2016: ProceedingsSame topicAdvanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniquesFrench-language works237,207