4.8 Article

Detection of swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) viruses using a localized surface plasmon coupled fluorescence fiber-optic biosensor

期刊

BIOSENSORS & BIOELECTRONICS
卷 26, 期 3, 页码 1068-1073

出版社

ELSEVIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2010.08.060

关键词

Fiber-optic biosensor; Gold nanoparticle; Localized surface plasmon; Swine-origin influenza A virus; H1N1

资金

  1. National Science Council of Taiwan [NSC 98-2221-E-182-063-MY3, NSC 98-2221-E-182-064-MY3, NSC 97-2320-B-010-011-MY3]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Swine-origin influenza A (H1N1) virus (S-OIV) was identified as a new reassortant strain of influenza A virus in April 2009 and led to an influenza pandemic. Accurate and timely diagnoses are crucial for the control of influenza disease. We developed a localized surface plasmon coupled fluorescence fiber-optic biosensor (LSPCF-FOB) which combines a sandwich immunoassay with the LSP technique using antibodies against the hemagglutinin (HA) proteins of S-OIVs. The detection limit of the LSPCF-FOB for recombinant S-OIV H1 protein detection was estimated at 13.9 pg/mL, which is 10(3)-fold better than that of conventional capture ELISA when using the same capture antibodies. For clinical S-OIV isolates measurement, meanwhile, the detection limit of the LSPCF-FOB platform was calculated to be 8.25 x 10(4) copies/mL, compared with 2.06 x 10(6) copies/mL using conventional capture ELISA. Furthermore, in comparison with the influenza A/B rapid test, the detection limit of the LSPCF-FOB for S-OIV was almost 50-fold in PBS solution and 25-fold lower in mimic solution, which used nasal mucosa from healthy donors as the diluent. The findings of this study therefore indicate that the high detection sensitivity and specificity of the LSPCF-FOB make it a potentially effective diagnostic tool for clinical S-OIV infection and this technique has the potential to be applied to the development of other clinical microbe detection platforms. (C) 2010 Elsevier BM. 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

4.8
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