4.6 Article

Ultrasensitive and rapid count of Escherichia coli using magnetic nanoparticle probe under dark-field microscope

Journal

BMC MICROBIOLOGY
Volume 18, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

BMC
DOI: 10.1186/s12866-018-1241-5

Keywords

Rapid enumeration; Escherichia coli; Magnetic nanoparticle; Dark field microscope

Categories

Funding

  1. National Key R&D Program of China [2016YFD0500800]
  2. startup funds by the Yangzhou University [137011016]
  3. Priority Academic Program Development of Jiangsu Higher Education Institutions (Veterinary Medicine)

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Background: Escherichia coli (E. coli) is one of the best-known zoonotic bacterial species, which pathogenic strain can cause infections in humans and animals. However, existing technologies or methods are deficient for quickly on-site identifying infection of E. coli before they breakout. Herein, we present an ultrasensitive and on-site method for counting E. coli using magnetic nanoparticle (MNP) probe under a dark-field in 30 min. Results: The antibodies functionalized MNP, binding to E. coli to form a golden ring-like structure under a dark-field microscope, allowing for counting E. coli. This method via counting MNP-conjugated E. coli under dark-field microscope demonstrated the sensitivity of 6 CFU/mu L for E. coli detection. Importantly, due to the advantages such as time-saving (only 30 min) and almost free of instrument (only require a portable microscope), our MNP-labeled dark-field counting strategy has the potential of being a universal tool for on-site quantifying a variety of pathogens with size ranges from a few hundreds of nanometers to a few micrometers. Conclusion: In summary, the MNP-labeled dark-field counting strategy is a rapid, simple, sensitive as well as low-cost assay strategy, which has the potential of being a universal tool for on-site quantification of micrometer-size pathogens like E. coli.

Authors

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

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available