4.8 Article

Reagentless Bidirectional Lateral Flow Bioactive Paper Sensors for Detection of Pesticides in Beverage and Food Samples

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 81, 期 21, 页码 9055-9064

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac901714h

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
  2. SENTINEL Canadian Network for the Development
  3. Canada Foundation for Innovation
  4. Ontario Innovation Trust

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A reagentless bioactive paper-based solid-phase biosensor was developed for detection of acetylcholinesterase (AChE) inhibitors, including organophosphate pesticides. The assay strip is composed of a paper support (1 x 10 cm), onto which AChE and a chromogenic substrate, indophenyl acetate (IPA), were entrapped using biocompatible sol gel derived silica inks in two different zones (e.g., sensing and substrate zones). The assay protocol involves first introducing the sample to the sensing zone via lateral flow of a pesticide-containing solution. Following an incubation period, the opposite end of the paper support is placed into distilled deionized water (ddH(2)O) to allow lateral flow in the opposite direction to move paper-bound IPA to the sensing area to initiate enzyme catalyzed hydrolysis of the substrate, causing a yellow-to-blue color change. The modified sensor is able to detect pesticides without the use of any external reagents with excellent detection limits (bendiocarb 1 nM; carbatyl similar to 10 nM; paraoxon similar to 1 nM; malathion similar to 10 nM) and rapid response times (similar to 5 min). The sensor strip showed negligible matrix effects in detection of pesticides in spiked milk and apple juice samples. Bioactive paper-based assays on pesticide residues collected from food samples showed good agreement with a conventional mass spectrometric assay method. The bioactive paper assay should, therefore, be suitable for rapid screening of trace levels of organophosphate and carbamate pesticides in environmental and food samples.

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