| Literature DB >> 22163871 |
Yeison Montagut1, José V García, Yolanda Jiménez, Carmen March, Angel Montoya, Antonio Arnau.
Abstract
Acoustic wave resonator techniques are widely used in in-liquid biochemical applications. The main challenges remaining are the improvement of sensitivity and limit of detection, as well as multianalysis capabilities and reliability. The sensitivity improvement issue has been addressed by increasing the sensor frequency, using different techniques such as high fundamental frequency quartz crystal microbalances (QCMs), surface generated acoustic waves (SGAWs) and film bulk acoustic resonators (FBARs). However, this sensitivity improvement has not been completely matched in terms of limit of detection. The decrease on frequency stability due to the increase of the phase noise, particularly in oscillators, has made it impossible to increase the resolution. A new concept of sensor characterization at constant frequency has been recently proposed based on the phase/mass sensitivity equation: Δφ/Δm ≈ -1/m(L), where m(L) is the liquid mass perturbed by the resonator. The validation of the new concept is presented in this article. An immunosensor application for the detection of a low molecular weight pollutant, the insecticide carbaryl, has been chosen as a validation model.Entities:
Keywords: acoustic biosensors; high fundamental frequency QCM; high resolution; microbalance; phase characterization; sensitivity
Mesh:
Year: 2011 PMID: 22163871 PMCID: PMC3231406 DOI: 10.3390/s110504702
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.Bulk acoustic devices: (a) QCM, (b) FBAR and (c) Cantilevers.
Figure 2.Different types of SGAW devices: (a) typical SAW configuration, (b) Love-wave SGAW device and (c) flexural plate SGAW device.
Figure 3.(a) Description of the phase approach and (b) Simple implementation.
Figure 4.Schematics of the interface system for the sensor phase characterization.
Figure 5.Experimental Setup.
Figure 6.Real-time signal obtained for piezoelectric immunosensor with the phase-shift characterization system.
Figure 7.Real time piezoelectric immunosensor response to different concentrations of analyte: with the balanced-bridge oscillator (upper panel), and with the phase-shift characterization system (lower panel).
Figure 8.Average standard curve for the carbaryl piezoelectric immunosensor: (a) by using the classical frequency-shift characterization with the balanced-bridge oscillator proposed elsewhere [54,89], and (b) by using the phase-shift characterization method and interface.
Comparative results obtained for the QCM immunosensor using different electronic characterization techniques.
| Sensitivity | 16.7 | 24.0 | 30.0 |
| L.O.D. | 4.0 | 6.5 | 11.0 |
| Linear Range (μg/L) | 7–35 | 11–42 | 15–53 |