Piezoelectric ink jet printing of horseradish peroxidase on fibrous substrates
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Solid phase bioanalysis relies on the creation of a highly selective and sensitive layer of bioagent on a solid support capable of recognizing specific target analytes. Using ink jet printing technology picoliter volumes of bioagents can be precisely patterned over large surfaces with controlled uniformity. Despite the advantages of bioanalytical methods and the flexibility of ink jet printers, producing this type of functional materials is challenging. Solid supports can affect the biological activity, the spatial distribution and the binding capacity of the bioagent causing problems during post print detection. In this study a bioink containing the enzyme horseradish peroxidase (HRP) was jetted with a piezoelectric-based ink-jet deposition system on various fibrous substrates with differences in composition, surface chemistry and pore structure. Enzyme activity in solution and after printing was tested colorimetrically using 2, 2′-azino-di-(3- ethylbenzthiazoline) 6-sulphonate (ABTS) as chromogen. It was found that the papers tested have significantly different bioanalytical response in the detection of hydrogen peroxide. The uncoated papers showed the most sensitive green color response; whereas, the uncoated wood free paper gave the broader range of measurement and the highest color intensity. In contrast, the coated papers developed lower color intensity and the cast coated paper produced a pink color response possibly due to enzyme intermediate compounds produced under conditions of substrate inhibition.
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".