ArticleJournal of visualized experiments : JoVE2017
DNA-magnetic Particle Binding Analysis by Dynamic and Electrophoretic Light Scattering.
Article in Journal of visualized experiments : JoVE, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 6 citations in OpenAlex.
- Article
- A Robust, Safe, and Scalable Magnetic Nanoparticle Workflow for RNA Extraction of Pathogens from Clinical and Wastewater Samples.Global challenges (Hoboken, NJ) · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Isolation of DNA using magnetic particles is a field of high importance in biotechnology and molecular biology research. This protocol describes the evaluation of DNA-magnetic particles binding via dynamic light scattering (DLS) and electrophoretic light scattering (ELS). Analysis by DLS provides valuable information on the physicochemical properties of particles including particle size, polydispersity, and zeta potential. The latter describes the surface charge of the particle which plays major role in electrostatic binding of materials such as DNA. Here, a comparative analysis exploits three chemical modifications of nanoparticles and microparticles and their effects on DNA binding and elution. Chemical modifications by branched polyethylenimine, tetraethyl orthosilicate and (3-aminopropyl)triethoxysilane are investigated. Since DNA exhibits a negative charge, it is expected that zeta potential of particle surface will decrease upon binding of DNA. Forming of clusters should also affect particle size. In order to investigate the efficiency of these particles in isolation and elution of DNA, the particles are mixed with DNA in low pH (~6), high ionic strength and dehydration environment. Particles are washed on magnet and then DNA is eluted by Tris-HCl buffer (pH = 8). DNA copy number is estimated using quantitative polymerase chain reaction (PCR). Zeta potential, particle size, polydispersity and quantitative PCR data are evaluated and compared. DLS is an insightful and supporting method of analysis that adds a new perspective to the process of screening of particles for DNA isolation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.