MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4394934096 · doi:10.1021/acssensors.4c00090

CRISPR/Cas14 and G-Quadruplex DNAzyme-Driven Biosensor for Paper-Based Colorimetric Detection of African Swine Fever Virus

2024· article· en· W4394934096 on OpenAlexaff
Xue Zhao, Yawen He, Shengjie Shao, Qiaoqiao Ci, Lin Chen, Xiaonan Lu, Qian Liu, Juhong Chen

Bibliographic record

VenueACS Sensors · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicAnimal Disease Management and Epidemiology
Canadian institutionsMcGill University
FundersNational Institute of General Medical SciencesNational Institutes of HealthVirginia Polytechnic Institute and State University
KeywordsDeoxyribozymeDetection limitCRISPRAfrican swine fever virusVirologyBiosensorBiologyDNAVirusChemistryChromatographyGeneGeneticsBiochemistry

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

The highly contagious nature and 100% fatality rate contribute to the ongoing and expanding impact of the African swine fever virus (ASFV), causing significant economic losses worldwide. Herein, we developed a cascaded colorimetric detection using the combination of a CRISPR/Cas14a system, G-quadruplex DNAzyme, and microfluidic paper-based analytical device. This CRISPR/Cas14a-G4 biosensor could detect ASFV as low as 5 copies/μL and differentiate the wild-type and mutated ASFV DNA with 2-nt difference. Moreover, this approach was employed to detect ASFV in porcine plasma. A broad linear detection range was observed, and the limit of detection in spiked porcine plasma was calculated to be as low as 42-85 copies/μL. Our results indicate that the developed paper platform exhibits the advantages of high sensitivity, excellent specificity, and low cost, making it promising for clinical applications in the field of DNA disease detection and suitable for popularization in low-resourced areas.

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 score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.004

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.001
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0010.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

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 head0.031
GPT teacher head0.257
Teacher spread0.226 · 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

Citations58
Published2024
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueACS SensorsSame topicAnimal Disease Management and EpidemiologyFrench-language works237,207