4.3 Article

Evaluation of seawater monitoring for the detection of Escherichia coli and Enterococcus faecalis on an integrated biosensor system

期刊

SENSOR REVIEW
卷 43, 期 2, 页码 92-98

出版社

EMERALD GROUP PUBLISHING LTD
DOI: 10.1108/SR-09-2022-0380

关键词

Seawater; Biosensor; Escherichia coli; Enterococcus faecalis; Biomarkers; LAMP

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study aims to monitor seawater by determining two biological indicators, Escherichia coli and Enterococcus faecalis. The cellulose acetate filter was found to have the highest efficiency for bacterial concentration. The proposed method using loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) polymerase chain reaction (PCR) could provide rapid and accurate results for seawater analysis.
PurposeThis study aims to monitor seawater by determing two biological indicators, Escherichia coli and Enterococcus faecalis. The process of following standard procedures is mainly time-consuming. Thus, there is a demand for a biosensor, an appropriate device for rapid and accurate results that can give information about the microbiological quality of seawater in an effective and rapid way. Design/methodology/approachIn the gold standard method for seawater monitoring, the filter method is applied as a condensation step. In this work, the authors evaluated six types of common syringe filters for bacteria concentration and then the best filter was used for seawater analysis for E. coli and Enterococci with loop-mediated isothermal amplification (LAMP) polymerase chain reaction (PCR). FindingsCellulose acetate filter had the highest efficiency (98%) for bacterial concentration. The limit of detection of the LAMP method was 104/1,000 mL for both E. coli and E. faecalis. The proposed method could be used for the development of seawater biosensors with advantages such as a simple heating element and the speed that the LAMP PCR presents. Originality/valueThe suggested protocol is proposed in an integrated in situ system, a biosensor, for seawater quality determination.

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

4.3
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