4.8 Article

Direct Detection of β-Agonists by Use of Gold Nanoparticle-Based Colorimetric Assays

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 83, 期 18, 页码 6988-6995

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac200769f

关键词

-

资金

  1. The Special Fund for Agro Scientific Research in the Public Interest [HY201203088]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20905009]
  3. China Agricultural University

向作者/读者索取更多资源

beta-Agonists fed to animals for human consumption pose a serious threat to human health. Fast, broad-spectrum detection methods are needed for on-site screening of various types of beta-agonists from animal feeds, meats, and animal body fluids. We developed a colorimetric assay that uses gold nanoparticle (AuNP) plasmon absorption to realize quick detection of beta-agonists from liquid samples. beta-Agonists showed the capability of directly reducing HAuCl(4) into atomic gold, which involved oxidation of the amine or phenol group on the benzene ring of the beta-agonists. The resulting atomic gold formed AuNPs spontaneously, which had strong plasmon absorption at 528 nm. The linear relationship between the concentrations of beta-agonists and the AuNPs plasmon absorbance granted quantitative determination of beta-agonists in solution. The AuNPs colorimetric assay showed different sensitivities toward beta-agonists with different substituent groups on the aromatic ring. beta-Agonists with phenol groups had a lower limit of quantitation (LOQ) than those with amine groups. High-resolution transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images revealed the sizes of the AuNPs were in the range 15-25 nm, while X-ray energy-dispersive spectroscopic data suggested the smaller particles observed in TEM with lower contrast may be salt particles from the buffer solution. The developed colorimetric assay can potentially be used for the detection of beta-agonists and their analogues from serum, urine, and other liquid samples in the presence of interference from common antibiotics and glucose.

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