4.7 Article

Silicon Nanowires Length and Numbers Dependence on Sensitivity of the Field-Effect Transistor Sensor for Hepatitis B Virus Surface Antigen Detection

Journal

BIOSENSORS-BASEL
Volume 12, Issue 2, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/bios12020115

Keywords

silicon nanowire; NWFET; Hepatitis B surface antigen; HBsAg; sensitivity

Funding

  1. Taiwan Ministry of Science and Technology [MOST110-2221-E-167-037]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study explored the effect of nanowire dimensions on silicon NWFET biosensors. The results showed that shorter and fewer nanowires can increase the sensitivity of the sensors and have a linear sensing range within a specific concentration range.
Silicon nanowire field effect transistor (NWFET) sensors have been demonstrated to have high sensitivity, are label free, and offer specific detection. This study explored the effect of nanowire dimensions on sensors' sensitivity. We used sidewall spacer etching to fabricate polycrystalline silicon NWFET sensors. This method does not require expensive nanoscale exposure systems and reduces fabrication costs. We designed transistor sensors with nanowires of various lengths and numbers. Hepatitis B surface antigen (HBsAg) was used as the sensing target to explore the relationships of nanowire length and number with biomolecule detection. The experimental results revealed that the sensor with a 3 p.m nanowire exhibited high sensitivity in detecting low concentrations of HBsAg. However, the sensor reached saturation when the biomolecule concentration exceeded 800 fg/mL. Sensors with 1.6 and 5 mu m nanowires exhibited favorable linear sensing ranges at concentrations from 800 ag/mL to 800 pg/mL. The results regarding the number of nanowires revealed that the use of few nanowires in transistor sensors increases sensitivity. The results demonstrate the effects of nanowire dimensions on the silicon NWFET biosensors.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available