Capping Gold Nanoparticles to Achieve a Protein-like Surface for Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Acceleration and Ultrasensitive DNA Detection
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) is a popular DNA amplification method. Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) were reported to enhance the efficiency of LAMP, although the underlying mechanism remained elusive. Since AuNPs strongly adsorb a range of ligands, preadsorbed ligands cannot be easily displaced. In this work, we systematically investigated the effect of surface-modified AuNPs on LAMP by varying the order of mixing of AuNPs with each reagent in the LAMP system (Mg2+, template DNA, dNTPs, primers, and polymerase). Mixing the AuNPs with the primers delayed the LAMP based on SYBR green I fluorescence. While other orders of mixing had little effect, all accelerated the reaction. We then tested other common ligands including polymers (polyethylene glycol and polyvinylpyrrolidone), inorganic ions (Br–), proteins, glutathione (GSH), and DNA (A15) on AuNP-LAMP. The boosted AuNP performance on LAMP was most obvious when the AuNPs formed a protein-like surface. Finally, using GSH-capped AuNPs, a detection limit of around 100 copies/μL–1 of target DNA was achieved. This work has identified a ligand-capped AuNP strategy to boost LAMP and yielded a higher sensitivity in DNA sensing, which also deepens our understanding of AuNP-assisted LAMP.
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".