4.7 Article

Sandwich-type electrochemiluminescence immunosensor based on Ru-silica@Au composite nanoparticles labeled anti-AFP

期刊

TALANTA
卷 82, 期 4, 页码 1468-1471

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2010.07.021

关键词

Electrochemiluminescence (ECL); lmmunosensor; Ru-silica@Au composite nanoparticles; alpha-1-Fetoprotein (AFP)

资金

  1. NNSF of China [20675064]
  2. Ministry of Education of China [708073]
  3. Natural Science Foundation of Chongqing City [CSTC-2009BA1003]
  4. High Technology Project Foundation of Southwest University, China [XSGX02]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A simple and sensitive sandwich-type electrochemiluminescence immunosensor for alpha-1 -fetoprotein (AFP) on a gold nanoparticles (nano-Au) modified glassy carbon electrode (GCE) was developed by using Ru-silica (Ru(bpy)(3)(2+)-doped silica) doped Au (Ru-silica@Au) composite as labels. The primary antibody, anti-AFP was first immobilized on the gold nanoparticles modified electrode due to the covalent conjugation, then the antigen and the Ru-silica@Au composite nanoparticles labeled secondary antibody was conjugated successively to form a sandwich-type immunocomplex through the specific interaction. The surfaces of Ru-silica nanoparticles were modified via the assemble of Au nanoparticles. The prepared Ru-silica@Au composite nanoparticles own the large surface area, good biocompatibility and highly effective electrochemiluminescence properties. The morphologies of the Ru-silica@Au composite nanoparticles were investigated by using transmission electronic microscope (TEM). The Ru-silica@Au composite nanoparticles labeled anti-AFP/AFP/bovine serum albumin (BSA)/anti-AFP/nano-Au modified GCE electrode was evaluated by means of cyclic voltammetry (CV) and electrogenerated chemiluminescence (ECL). The immunosensor performed high sensitivity and wide liner for detection AFP in the range of 0.05-50 ng/mL and the limit detection was 0.03 ng/mL (defined as S/N=3). (C) 2010 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据