ArticlePeerJ2019
Impact of metal oxide nanoparticles on in vitro DNA amplification.
Article in PeerJ, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- Separating pathogens from drinking water and food using magnetic nanomaterials: opportunities and challenges.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2026Review
- Optimizing Lysis and Extraction Workflows for Enrichment-Free qPCR Detection ofPathogens (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Environmentally Safe Synthesis of Gold Nanoparticles for Antigen Detection in CLIA System.ACS omega · 2025Article
- Can nanotechnology and genomics innovations trigger agricultural revolution and sustainable development?Functional & integrative genomics · 2024Review
- Cellular Alterations Due to Direct and Indirect Interaction of Nanomaterials with Nucleic Acids.International journal of molecular sciences · 2024Review
- Enzyme Nanoscale Interactions with Manganese Zinc Sulfide Give Insight into Potential Antiviral Mechanisms and SARS-CoV-2 Inhibition.ACS pharmacology & translational science · 2022Article
- Effects of intranasal instillation of nanoparticulate matter in the olfactory bulb.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Genotoxicity of Nanomaterials: Advanced In Vitro Models and High Throughput Methods for Human Hazard Assessment-A Review.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Effects of graphene oxide on PCR amplification for microbial community survey.BMC microbiology · 2020Article
- Comparative analysis and gut bacterial community assemblages of grass carp and crucian carp in new lineages from the Dongting Lake area.MicrobiologyOpen · 2020Article
- Transcriptomics in Toxicogenomics, Part I: Experimental Design, Technologies, Publicly Available Data, and Regulatory Aspects.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Review
- Genotoxicity of Aluminum and Aluminum Oxide Nanomaterials in Rats Following Oral Exposure.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Polymerase chain reaction (PCR) is used as an in vitro model system of DNA replication to assess the genotoxicity of nanoparticles (NPs). Prior results showed that several types of NPs inhibited PCR efficiency and increased amplicon error frequency. In this study, we examined the effects of various metal oxide NPs on inhibiting PCR, using high- vs. low-fidelity DNA polymerases; we also examined NP-induced DNA mutation bias at the single nucleotide level. The effects of seven major types of metal oxide NPs (Fe
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.