Slashdot Mirror


Nano-Probes Stay Inside a Cell's Nucleus for Days

Roland Piquepaille writes "Researchers from the Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory (LBL) have developed fluorescent and stable nano-probes which can stay inside a cell's nucleus for hours or even days. According to this LBL news release, this will help biologists to better understand nuclear processes that evolve slowly, such as DNA replication, genomic alterations, and cell cycle control. This research was partially based on previous investigations about quantum dots. Now, the researchers want to tailor their quantum dots, which emit different colors depending on their sizes, to check specific chemical reactions inside nuclei, such as how proteins help repair DNA after irradiation. Read more for other details and references and to see how a nano-sized probe is entering a cell's nucleus."

9 of 123 comments (clear)

  1. Resistance is futile by Anonymous Coward · · Score: 5, Funny

    One step closer to Borg technology. Awesome.

  2. One word.. by The+Jon · · Score: 5, Funny

    ..medichlorians.

    --
    umop apisdn aw pow f,uop aseald :umop aw pow 'dn aw pow
  3. Re:Alarmist by Evil+W1zard · · Score: 5, Informative

    These really aren't nanobots. The definition of nanotechnology comprises any technological developments on the nanometer scale, usually 0.1 to 100 nm. In my opinion I believe that when you say the word "nanotechnology" most people today would think of super tiny robots (thanks to tv and movies). With that said these are not tiny little robots, they are crystals. So there is no reason to be alarmed because the the nano-sized attack robots have not yet been made.

    --
    News Reporters Make Tasty Polar Bear Treats!
  4. "Nanoprobe" by jokestress · · Score: 5, Funny

    That's my nickname for my ex-boyfriend! /here all week //try the veal

    --
    Evil sig is livE.
  5. Observe without interfering? by amanox · · Score: 5, Interesting

    I'm just curious : how can they observer without interfering the process they observe? I'm no biologist, but I'm pretty sure the nucleus must have some kind of reaction to a foreign body entering it. Not to mention the recation coused by the illuminating the nucleus: these probes seem to emit some kind of light. This must have at least some effect on the readings they get from these probes.

    1. Re:Observe without interfering? by janek78 · · Score: 4, Insightful

      It's been a long time since my biology classes, but I can't think of any reaction to foreign body inside a cell (at least not in the usual way). A cell hasn't got an immune system of it's own. Of course it has systems capable of expelling foreign/toxic chemicals out of the cell (exocytosis, pinocytosis), but it is altogether different from say your body's reaction to a foreign body. So these microcrystals will probably in some way interfere with the inner working of the cell (it trying to expell it) but they do not neccessarily need to interfere with the actual working of the nucleus.

  6. fluorescent by hovercraftSpareWheel · · Score: 4, Funny

    ...fluorescent and stable nano-probes which can stay inside a cell's nucleus for hours or even days.

    Now we can mod our heads to match our PC cases!

  7. Yet another Ronald Piquepaille article by nyri · · Score: 5, Informative

    I will give him a little credit as he links sometimes to intresting articles. But I must say that his blog sucks big time. He has scored a slashdot.org article 13 times this year. From Ronalds account page:
    Robotic Nanotech Swarms on Mars... in 2034 14:54 Wednesday 30 March 2005
    Nano-Probes Stay Inside a Cell's Nucleus for Days 19:42 Tuesday 29 March 2005
    The Rise of Smart Buildings 22:19 Saturday 19 March 2005
    3D Virtualization Edges Toward the Mainstream 21:57 Sunday 13 March 2005
    Taking Care of Mobile Patients 20:20 Saturday 26 February 2005
    Smart Holograms Used as Biosensors 20:22 Sunday 20 February 2005
    Wearable PC with an Artificial-Reality Helmet 20:20 Saturday 19 February 2005
    Transgenic Mustard Cleans Up Soils 22:38 Tuesday 15 February 2005
    Elektro, the Oldest U.S. Robot 16:35 Thursday 10 February 2005
    Open-Source Streaming Translations in Porto Alegre 15:33 Monday 31 January 2005
    RFID-Equipped Robots Used as Guide Dogs 19:35 Saturday 29 January 2005
    Streaming a Database in Real Time 23:58 Friday 21 January 2005
    Morse Code Used by Human Cells? 20:05 Wednesday 12 January 2005
    Engineered Enhancers Closer Than You Think 20:54 Friday 31 December 2004
    Transparent Transistors Are Coming 22:20 Wednesday 29 December 2004
    DURL, a Search Tool for del.icio.us 14:47 Monday 27 December 2004
    IBM Prepares 100-Terabyte Tape Drives 15:19 Sunday 26 December 2004
    With Linux Clusters, Seeing Is Believing 16:47 Monday 13 December 2004
    Self-Adapting Traffic Lights 19:07 Sunday 05 December 2004
    Robotic Science Network Watches Our Oceans 23:32 Friday 03 December 2004

    I think I speak for most readers here when I yell: SLASHDOT EDITORS, PLEASE, NO MORE LINKS TO RONALDS NO-GOOD BLOG.

  8. Re:Cancer cure in there somewhere? by merlin_jim · · Score: 4, Informative

    So, if you could tag all the cancer cells with something that emits a beacon

    There's a company that's working on an enzyme dye using jellyfish flourescence to do just that. This would work in theory even after it has metastized.

    then does that mean you could home in on them with a gamma knife and elimite them in any delicate part of the body with perfect accuracy?

    Forget gamma knife. Proton treatment is where it's at. Get radiation treatment for your prostate cancer in the morning, play tennis in the afternoon. Basically they create a 3D model of the tumor and modulate the proton beam's energy and shape (using a series of masks) so that the protons deposit most of their energy inside the tumor. There's a small amount that gets deposited ahead of it and none behind. Much cleaner/better than other radiation treatments. I've heard that with early diagnosis they're getting phenomenal success rates. And its outpatient.

    --
    I am disrespectful to dirt! Can you see that I am serious?!