4.8 Article

Immobilization-free sequence-specific electrochemical detection of DNA using ferrocene-labeled peptide nucleic acid

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 80, 期 19, 页码 7341-7346

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac8010236

关键词

-

资金

  1. Hong Kong Special Administrative Region Government [601106]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

An electrochemical method for sequence-specific detection of DNA without solid-phase probe immobilization is reported. This detection scheme starts with a solution-phase hybridization of ferrocene-labeled peptide nucleic acid (Fc-PNA) and its complementary DNA (cDNA) sequence, followed by the electrochemical transduction of Fc-PNA-DNA hybrid on indium tin oxide (ITO)-based substrates. On the bare ITO electrode, the negatively charged Fc-PNA-DNA hybrid exhibits a much reduced electrochemical signal than that of the neutral-charge Fc-PNA. This is attributed to the electrostatic repulsion between the negatively charged ITO surface and the negatively charged DNA, hindering the access of FcPNA-DNA to the electrode. On the contrary, when the transduction measurement is done on the ITO electrode coated with a positively charged poly(allylamine hydrochloride) (PAH) layer, the electrostatic attraction between the (+) PAH surface and the (-) Fc-PNA-DNA hybrid leads to a much higher electrochemical signal than that of the Fc-PNA. The measured electrochemical signal is proportional to the amount of cDNA present. In terms of detection sensitivity, the PAH-modified ITO platform was found to be more sensitive (with a detection limit of 40 fmol) than the bare ITO counterpart (with a detection limit of 500 fmol). At elevated temperatures, this method was able to distinguish fully matched target DNA from DNA with partial mismatches. Unpurified PCR amplicons were detected using a similar format with a detection limit down to 4.17 amol. This detection method holds great promise for single-base mismatch detection as well as electrochemistry-based detection of post-PCR products.

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

4.8
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