| Literature DB >> 22346707 |
Paul D Selid1, Hanying Xu, E Michael Collins, Marla Striped Face-Collins, Julia Xiaojun Zhao.
Abstract
Mercury is a very toxic element that is widely spread in the atmosphere, lithosphere, and surface water. Concentrated mercury poses serious problems to human health, as bioaccumulation of mercury within the brain and kidneys ultimately leads to neurological diseases. To control mercury pollution and reduce mercury damage to human health, sensitive determination of mercury is important. This article summarizes some current sensors for the determination of both abiotic and biotic mercury. A wide array of sensors for monitoring mercury is described, including biosensors and chemical sensors, while piezoelectric and microcantilever sensors are also described. Additionally, newly developed nanomaterials offer great potential for fabricating novel mercury sensors. Some of the functional fluorescent nanosensors for the determination of mercury are covered. Afterwards, the in vivo determination of mercury and the characterization of different forms of mercury are discussed. Finally, the future direction for mercury detection is outlined, suggesting that nanomaterials may provide revolutionary tools in biomedical and environmental monitoring of mercury.Entities:
Keywords: determination of mercury; fluorescence; mercury pollution; nanomaterials; sensors
Year: 2009 PMID: 22346707 PMCID: PMC3274135 DOI: 10.3390/s90705446
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1.A EP2-19G2-cofactor biosensor for mercury. Reprinted with permission from [29]. Copyright American Chemical Society (2005).
Figure 2.Schematic diagram of a flow system in a mercury chemical sensor. A and B, valves; C, thermostatted water bath; D, cooling coil; E, fluorescence flow cell. Reprinted with permission from [32]. Copyright Elsevier (1999).
Figure 3.Ionic mercury reacts with thiamine to generate a “turn-on” fluorescence signal when thiochrome is formed.
Figure 4.Schematic diagram of a microcantilever sensor system. Reprinted with permission from [42]. Copyright American Chemical Society (2002).
Figure 5.Rhodamine B-AuNP mercury sensor modified by thiol ligands and PDCA. Reprinted with permission from [8]. Copyright American Chemical Society (2006).
A comparison of different types of mercury sensors.
| Biosensor | Mercury interaction with bacterial cell | Moderately difficult | Inorganic Hg | ∼10−7M | [ |
| Mercury interaction with antibody | Moderately difficult | Hg2+ | ∼10−6 M | [ | |
| Chemical sensor | Fluorescence quenching | Moderately difficult | Hg2+ | ∼10−6M | [ |
| Fluorescence enhancing | Moderately difficult | Hg2+ | ∼10−9M | [ | |
| Conductometric sensor | Conductivity/resistance | Easy | Hg vapor | ∼10−8 M | [ |
| Microcantilever sensor | Physical property changes | Easy | Hg2+, Hg0 | ∼10−11 M | [ |
| SAW sensor | Oscillation frequency | Easy | Hg vapor | ∼10−8 M | [ |
| Piezoelectric sensor | Frequency of vibration | Easy | Hg0 | ∼10−9M | [ |
| Nanosensor | Interaction with nanoparticles | Moderately difficult | Hg2+ | 10−11∼10−15 M | [ |