| Literature DB >> 28282974 |
Dandan Song1, Xiaofeng Qu1, Yushen Liu1, Li Li1, Dehui Yin2, Juan Li1, Kun Xu1, Renguo Xie3, Yue Zhai1, Huiwen Zhang1, Hao Bao1, Chao Zhao1, Juan Wang1, Xiuling Song4, Wenzhi Song5.
Abstract
Brucella spp. are facultative intracellular bacteria that cause zoonotic disease of brucellosis worldwide. Traditional methods for detection of Brucella spp. take 48-72 h that does not meet the need of rapid detection. Herein, a new rapid detection method of Brucella was developed based on polyclonal antibody-conjugating quantum dots and antibody-modified magnetic beads. First, polyclonal antibodies IgG and IgY were prepared and then the antibody conjugated with quantum dots (QDs) and immunomagnetic beads (IMB), respectively, which were activated by N-(3-dimethylaminopropyl)-N'-ethylcar-bodiimide hydrochloride (EDC) and N-hydroxysuccinimide (NHS) to form probes. We used the IMB probe to separate the Brucella and labeled by the QD probe, and then detected the fluorescence intensity with a fluorescence spectrometer. The detection method takes 105 min with a limit of detection of 103 CFU/mL and ranges from 10 to 105 CFU/mL (R 2 = 0.9983), and it can be well used in real samples.Entities:
Keywords: Fluorescence; IgG; IgY; Immunomagnetic beads; Quantum dots
Year: 2017 PMID: 28282974 PMCID: PMC5344867 DOI: 10.1186/s11671-017-1941-z
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Nanoscale Res Lett ISSN: 1556-276X Impact factor: 4.703
Fig. 1The technology road mapping. Brucella was separated by IMB probe, and then the QD probe was used as a fluorescent label probe to measure the fluorescence of the complex to determine whether Brucella is present
Fig. 2Assessment of the purity of IgG (a, 2) and IgY (b, 3). The rabbit serum (a, 1) has more mingle strips than IgG, so the saturated ammonium sulfate method is efficient. M marker
The titer of roughly purified rabbit antibody, IgG
| Dilution | 1:2000 | 1:4000 | 1:8000 | 1:16,000 | 1:32,000 | 1:64,000 | 1:128,000 | 1:256,000 | Negative |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum | 2.757 | 2.528 | 2.626 | 2.257 | 1.739 | 1.170 | 0.700 | 0.387 | 0.065 |
| IgG | 2.4865 | 2.4682 | 2.4379 | 2.376 | 1.7194 | 1.368 | 0.8529 | 0.4622 | 0.070 |
The titer of immunoglobulin of yolk, IgY
| Dilution | 1:8000 | 1:16,000 | 1:32,000 | 1:64,000 | 1:128,000 | 1:256,000 | 1:512,000 | 1:1,024,000 | 1:2,048,000 |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Negative | 0.237 | 0.155 | 0.104 | 0.090 | 0.066 | 0.058 | 0.057 | 0.056 | 0.056 |
| 0609 | 0.242 | 0.127 | 0.082 | 0.076 | 0.065 | 0.061 | 0.059 | 0.060 | 0.060 |
| 0622 | 2.549 | 1.227 | 0.738 | 0.407 | 0.257 | 0.130 | 0.091 | 0.083 | 0.068 |
| 0723 | 2.530 | 2.537 | 2.591 | 2.256 | 2.097 | 1.452 | 0.817 | 0.549 | 0.362 |
| 0727 | 2.597 | 2.555 | 2.337 | 1.829 | 0.637 | 0.698 | 0.401 | 0.250 | 0.145 |
Fig. 3Characterization of CdSe/CdS/ZnS QDs. a Absorption spectra of CdSe QDs and the core-shell CdSe/CdS/ZnS QDs. b FL spectra of the water-soluble CdSe/CdS/ZnS QDs samples
Fig. 4TEM images of CdSe/CdS/ZnS QDs
Fig. 5The optimization of bio-probes. a QD probe, the fluorescence intensity of the complex was increased with the increase of the amount of IgY. The flu intensity reached the highest level and then stepped down. b MB probe, A280 nm of the IgG solution was determined before and after conjugation, and the amount of conjugated IgG of IMB was calculated
Fig. 6Results of the optimization of the detection conditions. a The optimization of the amount of IMB probe. b The optimization of the IMS. c The optimization of the amount of QD probe. d The optimization of the mark time
Fig. 7a Results of sensitivity of the detection method of Brucella. b P/N ≥2.1 indicates positive. c the LOD is 103 CFU/mL
Fig. 8The specificity of test of the detection method. a The specificity inter-species. b The specificity intraspecies, the flu intensity is similar among those intraspecies
Fig. 9The result of inoculated sample detection. a Milk. b Lamb
A comparison of the performance between different assays
| LOD (CFU/mL) | Time (h) | Linear | |
|---|---|---|---|
| Liandris et al. [ | 104 | – | – |
| Yang et al. [ | 103 | 2 | – |
| Wu et al. [ | 104 | – | – |
| Our study | 102 | 1.5 | 102–105 |