4.8 Article

Bead-Based Competitive Fluorescence Immunoassay for Sensitive and Rapid Diagnosis of Cyanotoxin Risk in Drinking Water

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 45, 期 18, 页码 7804-7811

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/es201333f

关键词

-

资金

  1. Plant Technology Advancement Program [07SeaHeroA01-01]
  2. Ministry of Land, Transport and Maritime Affairs
  3. National Research Foundation of Korea (NRF)
  4. Korea government (MEST) [2011-0006866]
  5. National Research Foundation of Korea [2011-0006866] Funding Source: Korea Institute of Science & Technology Information (KISTI), National Science & Technology Information Service (NTIS)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Due to the increased occurrence of cyanobacterial blooms and their toxins in drinking water sources, effective management based on a sensitive and rapid analytical method is in high demand for security of safe water sources and environmental human health. Here, a competitive fluorescence immunoassay of microcystin-LR (MCYST-LR) is developed in an attempt to improve the sensitivity, analysis time, and ease-of-manipulation of analysis. To serve this aim, a bead-based suspension assay was introduced based on two major sensing elements: an antibody-conjugated quantum dot (QD) detection probe and an antigen-immobilized magnetic bead (MB) competitor. The assay was composed of three steps: the competitive immunological reaction of QD detection probes against analytes and MB competitors, magnetic separation and washing, and the optical signal generation of QDs. The fluorescence intensity was found to be inversely proportional to the MCYST-LR concentration. Under optimized conditions, the proposed assay performed well for the identification and quantitative analysis of MCYST-LR (within 30 min in the range of 0.42-25 mu g/L, with a limit of detection of 0.03 mu g/L). It is thus expected that this enhanced assay can contribute both to the sensitive and rapid diagnosis of cyanotoxin risk in drinking water and effective management procedures.

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