4.7 Article

Rapid colorimetric sensing of tetracycline antibiotics with in situ growth of gold nanoparticles

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 839, 期 -, 页码 83-90

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2014.05.021

关键词

Gold nanoparticles; Tetracycline antibiotics; Colorimetric assay; Urine sample

资金

  1. Beijing Municipal Commission of Education [SQKM201210037002]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20905009]
  3. Beijing Area Logistics System & Technology Major Laboratory
  4. Logistics Management & Engineering Platform from Beijing Wuzi University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A colorimetric assay utilizing the formation of gold nanoparticles was developed to detect tetracycline antibiotics in fluidic samples. Tetracycline antibiotics showed the capability of directly reducing aurate salts into atomic gold which form gold nanoparticles spontaneously under proper conditions. The resulted gold nanoparticles showed characteristic plasmon absorbance at 526 nm, which can be visualized by naked eyes or with a spectrophotometer. UV-vis absorbance of the resulted gold nanoparticles is correlated directly with the concentrations of tetracycline antibiotics in the solution, allowing for quantitative colorimetric detection of tetracycline antibiotics. Reaction conditions, such as pH, temperature, reaction time, and ionic strength were optimized. Sensitivity of the colorimetric assay can be enhanced by the addition of gold nanoparticle seeds, a LOD as low as 20 ng mL(-1) can be achieved with the help of seed particles. The colorimetric assay showed minimum interference from ethanol, methanol, urea, glucose, and other antibiotics such as sulfonamides, amino glycosides etc. Validity of the method was also evaluated on urine samples spiked with tetracycline antibiotics. The method provides a broad spectrum detection method for rapid and sensitive detection of reductive substances such as tetracycline antibiotics in liquid and biological samples. (C) 2014 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