MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4378882813 · doi:10.3390/s23115200

Ratiometric Sensing of Glyphosate in Water Using Dual Fluorescent Carbon Dots

2023· article· en· W4378882813 on OpenAlexafffund
Adryanne Clermont‐Paquette, Diego-Andrés Mendoza, Amir Sadeghi, Rafik Naccache

Bibliographic record

VenueSensors · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicCarbon and Quantum Dots Applications
Canadian institutionsConcordia University
FundersConcordia UniversityNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of CanadaMcGill University
KeywordsNanosensorGlyphosateFluorescenceQuenching (fluorescence)PesticideEnvironmental chemistryChemistryNanotechnologyMaterials scienceBiotechnologyBiologyEcology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Glyphosate is a broad-spectrum pesticide used in crops and is found in many products used by industry and consumers. Unfortunately, glyphosate has been shown to have some toxicity toward many organisms found in our ecosystems and has been reported to have carcinogenic effects on humans. Hence, there is a need to develop novel nanosensors that are more sensitive and facile and permit rapid detection. Current optical-based assays are limited as they rely on changes in signal intensity, which can be affected by multiple factors in the sample. Herein, we report the development of a dual emissive carbon dot (CD) system that can be used to optically detect glyphosate pesticides in water at different pH levels. The fluorescent CDs emit blue and red fluorescence, which we exploit as a ratiometric self-referencing assay. We observe red fluorescence quenching with increasing concentrations of glyphosate in the solution, ascribed to the interaction of the glyphosate pesticide with the CD surface. The blue fluorescence remains unaffected and serves as a reference in this ratiometric approach. Using fluorescence quenching assays, a ratiometric response is observed in the ppm range with detection limits as low as 0.03 ppm. Our CDs can be used to detect other pesticides and contaminants in water, as cost-effective and simple environmental nanosensors.

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 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 score0.076
Threshold uncertainty score0.313

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
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 head0.034
GPT teacher head0.281
Teacher spread0.247 · 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.

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

Citations22
Published2023
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSensorsSame topicCarbon and Quantum Dots ApplicationsFrench-language works237,207