4.7 Article

Comparison of biosensor platforms for surface plasmon resonance based detection of paralytic shellfish toxins

期刊

TALANTA
卷 85, 期 1, 页码 519-526

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.talanta.2011.04.033

关键词

Surface plasmon resonance; Biosensor; Paralytic shellfish poisoning; Saxitoxin

资金

  1. BIOCOP [IP FOOD-CT-2004-06988]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Paralytic shellfish poisoning (PSP) toxins are produced by certain marine dinoflagellates and may accumulate in bivalve molluscs through filter feeding. The Mouse Bioassay (MBA) is the internationally recognised reference method of analysis, but it is prone to technical difficulties and regarded with increasing disapproval due to ethical reasons. As such, alternative methods are required. A rapid surface plasmon resonance (SPR) biosensor inhibition assay was developed to detect PSP toxins in shellfish by employing a saxitoxin polyclonal antibody (R895). Using an assay developed for and validated on the Biacore Q biosensor system, this project focused on transferring the assay to a high-throughput, Biacore T100 biosensor in another laboratory. This was achieved using a prototype PSP toxin kit and recommended assay parameters based on the Biacore Q method. A monoclonal antibody (GT13A) was also assessed. Even though these two instruments are based on SPR principles, they vary widely in their mode of operation including differences in the integrated mu-fluidic cartridges, autosampler system, and sensor chip compatibilities. Shellfish samples (n = 60), extracted using a simple, rapid procedure, were analysed using each platform, and results were compared to AOAC high performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and MBA methods. The overall agreement, based on statistical 2 x 2 comparison tables, between each method ranged from 85% to 94.4% using R895 and 77.8% to 100% using GT13A. The results demonstrated that the antibody based assays with high sensitivity and broad specificity to PSP toxins can be applied to different biosensor platforms. (C) 2011 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