ArticleACS omega2022
Electrical Conductance of Charged Nanopores.
Article in ACS omega, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Modulating Electrostatic Interactions to Control the Analyte Transport in Nanochannels.ACS applied materials & interfaces · 2025Article
- Scaling of ionic conductance in a fluctuating single-layer nanoporous membrane.Scientific reports · 2023Article
- Electrical Conductance of Charged Nanopores.ACS omega · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
A nanopore's response to an electrical potential drop is characterized by its electrical conductance, . For the last two decades, it has been thought that at low electrolyte concentrations, , the conductance is concentration-independent such that . It has been recently demonstrated that surface charge regulation changes the dependency to , whereby the slope typically takes the values α = 1/3 or 1/2. However, experiments have observed slopes of 2/3 and 1 suggesting that additional mechanisms, such as convection and slip-lengths, appear. Here, we elucidate the interplay between three mechanisms: surface charge regulation, convection, and slip lengths. We show that the inclusion of convection does not change the slope, and when the effects of hydrodynamic slip are included, the slope is doubled. We show that when all effects are accounted for, α can take any value between 0 and 1 where the exact value of the slope depends on the material properties. This result is of utmost importance in designing any electro-kinetically driven nanofluidic system characterized by its conductance.
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.