Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24705714›Full record

ArticlePloS one2014

The effect of DNA-dispersed single-walled carbon nanotubes on the polymerase chain reaction.

Ryan M Williams, Sara Nayeem, Bridget D Dolash, Letha J Sooter

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
6citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

6 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Ryan M WilliamsBasic Pharmaceutical Sciences, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Sara NayeemBasic Pharmaceutical Sciences, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Bridget D DolashBasic Pharmaceutical Sciences, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.
Letha J SooterBasic Pharmaceutical Sciences, West Virginia University, Morgantown, West Virginia, United States of America.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The unique properties of single-wall carbon nanotubes (SWCNT) make them useful in many new technologies and applications. The interaction of DNA and SWCNT is of interest for many uses, including molecular sensors. This study determined polymerase chain reaction (PCR) efficiency in amplifying a 76 base pair DNA sequence in the presence of SWCNT, of heterogeneous "Mix" and (6,5)-enriched chiralities, associated with three DNA sequences. The dependence of PCR efficiency on the concentration of DNA:SWCNT preparations was measured, as well as their age and level of dispersion (less than one month or between four and ten months). Additionally, the ability to directly amplify the DNA sequence associated with the SWCNT scaffold was investigated. In PCRs with DNA:SWCNT preparations less than one month old, concentrations greater than or equal to 0.1 mg/mL inhibited the PCR reaction. In PCRs with older preparations, no inhibition was seen at 0.01 or 0.1 mg/mL, with amplification at 1 mg/mL in some samples. Additionally, our studies showed that the DNA directly associated with the SWCNT can be amplified using PCR. This work provides an inhibitory concentration of DNA-dispersed SWCNT in PCR reactions for different preparations as well as a basis for future DNA:SWCNT studies that require PCR amplification. This will be useful for future studies focused on the use of SWCNT in molecular sensing technologies.

Indexed as

DNAElectrophoresis, Agar GelNanotubes, CarbonPolymerase Chain ReactionDNANanotubes, Carbon

Identifiers

PMID24705714
PMCPMC3976370

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.