| Literature DB >> 26927130 |
Xihui Mu1, Zhaoyang Tong2, Qibin Huang3, Bing Liu4, Zhiwei Liu5, Lanqun Hao6, Hua Dong7, Jinping Zhang8, Chuan Gao9.
Abstract
Using the multiple advantages of the ultra-highly sensitive electrochemiluminescence (ECL) technique, Staphylococcus protein A (SPA) functionalized gold-magnetic nanoparticles and phage displayed antibodies, and using gold-magnetic nanoparticles coated with SPA and coupled with a polyclonal antibody (pcAb) as magnetic capturing probes, and Ru(bpy)₃(2+)-labeled phage displayed antibody as a specific luminescence probe, this study reports a new way to detect ricin with a highly sensitive and specific ECL immunosensor and amplify specific detection signals. The linear detection range of the sensor was 0.0001~200 µg/L, and the limit of detection (LOD) was 0.0001 µg/L, which is 2500-fold lower than that of the conventional ELISA technique. The gold-magnetic nanoparticles, SPA and Ru(bpy)₃(2+)-labeled phage displayed antibody displayed different amplifying effects in the ECL immunosensor and can decrease LOD 3-fold, 3-fold and 20-fold, respectively, compared with the ECL immunosensors without one of the three effects. The integrated amplifying effect can decrease the LOD 180-fold. The immunosensor integrates the unique advantages of SPA-coated gold-magnetic nanoparticles that improve the activity of the functionalized capturing probe, and the amplifying effect of the Ru(bpy)₃(2+)-labeled phage displayed antibodies, so it increases specificity, interference-resistance and decreases LOD. It is proven to be well suited for the analysis of trace amounts of ricin in various environmental samples with high recovery ratios and reproducibility.Entities:
Keywords: ECL immunosensor; Staphylococcus protein A; gold-magnetic nanoparticles; phage displayed antibody; ricin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2016 PMID: 26927130 PMCID: PMC4813883 DOI: 10.3390/s16030308
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Figure 1Model of detection toxin by ECL immunosensor based on gold-magnetic nanoparticles and phage displayed antibody.
Figure 2TEM images of magnetic nanoparticles (a) and gold-magnetic nanoparticles (b).
Absorbance value of SPA solution before and after binding to magnetic nanoparticles (n = 5).
| Added Amount (µg) | Binding Ratio (%) | Immobilized Amount (µg) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40 | 0.428 ± 0.005 | 0.043 ± 0.003 | 75.0 | 30 |
| 80 | 0.773 ± 0.007 | 0.106 ± 0.006 | 72.5 | 58 |
| 160 | 1.077 ± 0.008 | 0.249 ± 0.005 | 63.8 | 102 |
| 240 | 1.498 ± 0.007 | 0.530 ± 0.008 | 46.3 | 111 |
| 320 | 1.959 ± 0.009 | 0.931 ± 0.008 | 35.3 | 113 |
| 400 | 2.443 ± 0.008 | 1.404 ± 0.009 | 29.3 | 117 |
| 500 | 3.037 ± 0.009 | 1.998 ± 0.008 | 24.0 | 120 |
Absorbance value of SPA solution before and after binding to gold-magnetic nanoparticles.
| Added Amount (µg) | Binding Ratio (%) | Immobilized Amount (µg) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40 | 0.428 ± 0.006 | 0.107 ± 0.004 | 90.0 | 36 |
| 80 | 0.773 ± 0.008 | 0.213 ± 0.006 | 86.3 | 69 |
| 160 | 1.077 ± 0.007 | 0.390 ± 0.006 | 76.9 | 123 |
| 240 | 1.498 ± 0.008 | 0.800 ± 0.007 | 64.6 | 155 |
| 320 | 1.959 ± 0.009 | 1.267 ± 0.008 | 52.5 | 168 |
| 400 | 2.443 ± 0.008 | 1.720 ± 0.007 | 42.3 | 169 |
| 500 | 3.037 ± 0.009 | 2.308 ± 0.009 | 34.2 | 171 |
Figure 3UV-Vis spectrum of SPA solution before and after binding to magnetic nanoparticles ((a) UV-Vis spectrum of 240 μg of SPA solution before binding to magnetic nanoparticles; (b) UV-Vis spectrum of 240 μg of SPA solution after binding to magnetic nanoparticles).
Figure 4UV-Vis spectrum of SPA solution before and after binding to gold-magnetic nanoparticles. (a) UV-Vis spectrum of 320 μg of SPA solution before binding to gold-magnetic nanoparticles; (b) UV-Vis spectrum of 320 μg of SPA solution after binding to gold-magnetic nanoparticles).
Figure 5Immobilization ability of polyclonal antibody on 1 mg of gold-magnetic nanoparticles and magnetic nanoparticles.
Absorbance value of BSA solution before and after binding to gold-magnetic nanoparticles.
| Added Amount (µg) | Binding Ratio (%) | Immobilized Amount (µg) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|
| 40 | 0.434 ± 0.008 | 0.043 ± 0.006 | 90.0 | 36 |
| 80 | 0.795 ± 0.009 | 0.099 ± 0.007 | 87.5 | 70 |
| 160 | 1.094 ± 0.008 | 0.219 ± 0.008 | 80.0 | 128 |
| 240 | 1.518 ± 0.009 | 0.411 ± 0.006 | 72.9 | 175 |
| 320 | 1.923 ± 0.007 | 0.600 ± 0.009 | 68.8 | 220 |
| 400 | 2.446 ± 0.009 | 0.824 ± 0.008 | 66.3 | 265 |
| 480 | 2.956 ± 0.010 | 1.318 ± 0.009 | 55.4 | 266 |
| 560 | 3.550 ± 0.010 | 1.864 ± 0.010 | 47.5 | 266 |
Figure 6Immobilization ability of polyclonal antibody on 1 mg of gold-magnetic nanoparticles.
Figure 7Magnetic hysteresis loops curve of the SPA-coated gold-magnetic nanoparticles functionalized capturing probe.
Figure 8Determination activity of the SPA-coated gold-magnetic nanoparticles functionalized capturing probe.
Selective enrichment of anti-ricin phage displayed antibodies from the libraries during panning.
| Round | Phage Input (PFU) | Phage Output (PFU) | Recovery Ratio (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 1 | 3.3 × 1012 | 6.2 × 105 | 1.9 × 10−7 |
| 2 | 9.6 × 1011 | 9.7 × 105 | 1.0 × 10−6 |
| 3 | 1.4 ×1012 | 2.2 × 106 | 1.6 × 10−6 |
Recovery ratio (%) = (No. of phage output)/(No. of phage input) × 100%.
Figure 9Determination of absorbance values of the 20 anti-ricin phage displayed antibody clones by ELISA.
Figure 10UV-Vis spectrum of ECL probe ((a) UV-Vis spectrum of phage displayed antibody; (b) UV-Vis spectrum of Ru(bpy)32+-NHS ester; (c) UV-Vis spectrum of Ru(bpy)32+-labeled phage displayed antibody).
Figure 11ECL profile of luminescence probe.
Figure 12ECL spectra for the ricin detection at different concentrations.
Figure 13Standard curve of ricin determined by ECL immunosensor.
Figure 14Comparison of five ECL immunosensors (Method 1: SPA-coated gold-magnetic nanoparticles coupled with pcAb capturing probe–toxins–Ru(bpy)32+-labeled phage displayed antibody luminescence probe detection scheme; Method 2: SPA-coated magnetic nanoparticles coupled with pcAb capturing probe–toxins–Ru(bpy)32+-labeled phage displayed antibody luminescence probe detection scheme; Method 3: gold-magnetic nanoparticles coupled with pcAb capturing probe–toxins–Ru(bpy)32+-labeled phage displayed antibody luminescence probe detection scheme; Method 4: SPA-coated gold-magnetic nanoparticles coupled with pcAb capturing probe–toxins–Ru(bpy)32+-labeled mcAb luminescence probe detection scheme; Method 5: magnetic nanoparticles coupled with pcAb capturing probe–toxins–Ru(bpy)32+-labeled mcAb luminescence probe detection scheme).
Comparison of five ECL immunosensor and ELISA (Method 1~5 see Figure 9; Method 6: conventional double-antibody sandwich ELISA.)
| Detecting Scheme | Linear Range (μg/L) | Regression Equation | Correlation Coefficient (R) | Limit of Detection (μg/L) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| Method 1 | 0.0001~200 | Y = 219.42X + 748.61 | 0.9903 | 0.0001 |
| Method 2 | 0.0003~200 | Y = 204.83X + 643.88 | 0.9918 | 0.0003 |
| Method 3 | 0.0003~200 | Y = 194.17X + 613.61 | 0.9919 | 0.0003 |
| Method 4 | 0.002~500 | Y = 171.42X + 398.51 | 0.9905 | 0.002 |
| Method 5 | 0.018~500 | Y = 158.86X + 236.21 | 0.9913 | 0.018 |
| Method 6 | 0.25~250 | Y = 0.5415X + 0.6196 | 0.9945 | 0.25 |
Summary of ricin detection methods.
| Detection Method | Ricin Enrichment Method | Sample Matrix | LOD | Time | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Sandwich-type ELISA based on microwave irradiation and heat | Antibody conjugated to 96-well plate | Food Samples | 10 ppb | 2 h | [ |
| ELISA and Luminex fluid array assays | sdAb conjugated to 96-well plate | Buffer | 1 ng/mL and 64 pg/mL | Not reported | [ |
| Lateral flow devices | Antibody conjugated nitrocellulose membrane | Cosmetics | 0.01 μg/mL | Not reported | [ |
| Colloidal immunochromatographic assay | Antibody conjugated nitrocellulose membrane | Buffer | 0.1~50 ng/mL | 10 min | [ |
| Electrochemiluminescence assay | Antibody conjugated to 96-well plate | Buffer | 50 pg/mL | 2.5 h | [ |
| Magnetoelastic sensor | Antibody conjugated to sensor surface | Water, blood and serum | 5 ng/mL | 3.5 h | [ |
| Microring resonator array | sdAb conjugated to microring resonator array | Buffer | 300 pM | 15 min | [ |
| Surface plasmon resonance based on sdAb-QD | sdAb conjugated to SPR chip | Buffer | 1 ng/mL and 0.7 ng/mL | 2~6 min | [ |
| Antibody-sandwich surface plasmon resonance sensor | Antibody conjugated to SPR chip | Buffer | 3 ng/mL | <30 min | [ |
| Liquid-crystal based sensor | Antibody conjugated to liquid crystals supported surfaces | Buffer | 10 μg/mL | 1–2 h | [ |
| Electrochemical aptamer scaffold biosensors | Aptamer conjugated to gold electrode surface | Buffer | 0.3~0.1 nM | Not reported | [ |
| Nanoelectrode array biosensor based on carbon nanofiber | Antibody or aptamer conjugated to the carbon nanofibers chips | Buffer | <1 pM | 4 h | [ |
| DNA aptamer and Raman scattering technique | Aptamer conjugated to magnetic particles | Buffer and beverages | 25 ng/mL | Not reported | [ |
| Immuno-PCR | Antibody conjugated to microtitration plate | Ground beef, milk, and egg | 0.01~0.1 ng/mL | Not reported | [ |
| Real-time fluorescence PCR of nanoparticle-based bio-barcode | Antibody conjugated to magnetic nanoparticle | Buffer | 1 fg/mL | Not reported | [ |
| Nano LC–MS | Lactose-immobilized monolithic spin column | High protein solution | 8 ng/mL | 5 h | [ |
Detection specificity of ECL immunosensor (n = 5).
| Object | ECL Intensity (a.u.) | Relative Standard Deviation (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Ricin | 737.8 ± 13.5 | 1.8 |
| Abrin | 5.2 ± 0.5 | 8.6 |
| SEB | 5.6 ± 0.5 | 9.8 |
| BSA | 5.6 ± 0.5 | 9.8 |
| River water | 4.8 ± 0.4 | 9.3 |
| Fertilized soil | 5.2 ± 0.4 | 8.6 |
| Butter biscuit | 5.2 ± 0.4 | 8.6 |
| Whole rabbit blood | 5.6± 0.5 | 9.8 |
| PBS buffer | 5.2 ± 0.4 | 8.6 |
Determination of the simulated ricin specimens by ECL immunosensor (n = 4).
| Sample | Added (μg/L) | Found (μg/L) | Recovery Ratio (%) | Relative Standard Deviation (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| River water | 5 | 4.71 ± 0.15 | 94.2 | 3.08 |
| Fertilized soil | 5 | 4.58 ± 0.07 | 91.6 | 1.46 |
| Butter biscuit | 5 | 4.55 ± 0.14 | 91.1 | 2.97 |
| Whole rabbit blood | 5 | 4.54 ± 0.11 | 90.8 | 2.38 |
Determination of the simulated ricin specimens by conventional double-antibody sandwich ELISA (n = 4).
| Sample | Added (μg/L) | Found (μg/L) | Recovery Ratio (%) | Relative Standard Deviation (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| River water | 5 | 4.61 ± 0.12 | 92.2 | 2.60 |
| Fertilized soil | 5 | 5.77 ± 0.11 | 115.4 | 1.91 |
| Butter biscuit | 5 | 4.55 ± 0.09 | 91.0 | 1.98 |
| Whole rabbit blood | 5 | 5.96 ± 0.14 | 119.2 | 2.35 |