| Literature DB >> 35498485 |
Kaiyue Fu1,2, Huiwen Zhang1, Yuanyuan Guo1, Juan Li1, Heran Nie3, Xiuling Song1, Kun Xu1, Juan Wang1, Chao Zhao1.
Abstract
Molecular imprinting technology offers a means of tailor-made materials with high affinity and selectivity for certain analysts. However, the recognition and separation of specific bacteria in complex matrices are still challenging. Herein, a bacteria-imprinted polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS) film was facilely prepared and modified with 1H,1H,2H,2H-perfluorooctyltriethoxysilane (POTS). Employing Vibrio parahaemolyticus as a model bacterium, the imprinted surface exhibited three-dimensionality cavities with mean size of 1000 × 800 nm in square and 100 nm in depth. After incubation for 2 h with 6 × 107 CFU mL-1 of V. parahaemolyticus, the imprinted polymer film can reach a 62.9% capture efficiency. Furthermore, the imprinted POTS-modified PDMS film based solid phase extraction combined with polymerase chain reaction and agarose gel electrophoresis allows for detecting 104 CFU mL-1 with excellent selectivity in fresh oyster samples. As a result, the developed selective sample pretreatment method using molecular imprinting technology provides a promising platform for separation, identification, and analysis of pathogens. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 35498485 PMCID: PMC9051946 DOI: 10.1039/d0ra00306a
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Fig. 1Schematic diagram for bacteria-imprinted film fabrication and PCR detection of V. parahaemolyticus (AGE: agarose gel electrophoresis).
Oligonucleotide primers used in the PCR
| Primer | Sequence (5′ to 3′) | Target gene | Amplicon size (bp) |
|---|---|---|---|
|
| GTAAAGGTCTCTGACTTTTGGAC |
| 269 |
|
| TGGAATAGAACCTTCATCTTCACC | ||
|
| TTGACCCACACTTTGCCGTAA |
| 227 |
|
| GCGAAAACTGTGGAATTGGG |
Information for bacterial strains employed in this work
| Bacteria | Abbreviation | ATCC no. |
|---|---|---|
|
|
| 17802 |
|
|
| 13311 |
|
|
| 19111 |
|
|
| 25922 |
|
|
| 25923 |
Fig. 2(A) AFM image of imprinted PDMS film; (B) cavity size of imprinted PDMS film; (C) AFM image of POTS-modified imprinted PDMS film; (D) cavity size of POTS-modified imprinted PDMS film.
Fig. 3Static contact angles of (A) non-imprinted PDMS film (NIP), (B) POTS-modified non-imprinted PDMS film (POTS-modified NIP), (C) imprinted PDMS film, and (D) POTS-modified imprinted PDMS film.
Dynamic contact angle of different kinds of films
| Classification | Advanced angle | Back angle | Lag angle |
|---|---|---|---|
| NIP | 125.0857 | 95.59065 | 29.49505 |
| POTS-modified NIP | 110.8186 | 105.2685 | 5.5501 |
| Imprinted PDMS film | 119.7184 | 85.59501 | 34.12339 |
| POTS-modified imprinted PDMS film | 108.703 | 103.4097 | 5.2933 |
| POTS-modified imprinted PDMS film + | 116.4673 | 96.11665 | 20.35065 |
Fig. 4(A) Agarose gel electrophoresis of the PCR products from the DNA of V. parahaemolyticus and E. coli O157:H7. (1) Negative control; (2) positive control of V. parahaemolyticus; (3) enrichment of V. parahaemolyticus by imprinted PDMS film; (4) enrichment of V. parahaemolyticus by imprinted POTS-modified PDMS film; (5) negative control; (6) positive control of E. coli O157:H7; (7) enrichment of E. coli O157:H7 by imprinted PDMS film; (8) enrichment of E. coli O157:H7 by imprinted POTS-modified PDMS film. (B) The adsorption efficiency of imprinted POTS-modified PDMS film incubated with V. parahaemolyticus at different times. Error bars represent the standard deviation of three replicates.
Fig. 5(A) Imprinted PDMS film agarose gel electrophoresis of the PCR products from the DNA of V. parahaemolyticus. (1) Negative control; (2) positive control; (3) 0 CFU mL−1; lane (4)–(10): from 102 to 108 CFU mL−1. (B) NIPs agarose gel electrophoresis of the PCR products from the DNA of V. parahaemolyticus. (1) Negative control; (2) positive control; (3) 0 CFU mL−1; lane (4)–(8): from 104 to 108 CFU mL−1. (C) Selectivity test. Agarose gel electrophoresis of the PCR products. (1) Negative control; (2) positive control; (3) L. monocytogenes; (4) S. aureus; (5) E. coli O157:H7; (6) S. typhimurium; (7) V. parahaemolyticus; (8) mixture; (9) mixture plus V. parahaemolyticus. (D) Agarose gel electrophoresis of the PCR products with V. parahaemolyticus at various concentrations in oyster samples. (1) Negative control; (2) positive control; (3) 0 CFU mL−1; lane (4)–(8): from 104 to 108 CFU mL−1.
Comparison of the POTS-modified imprinted PDMS film-PCR-agarose gel electrophoresis method with other PCR based methods for detection of V. parahaemolyticus
| Methods | Pre-enrichment time | Detection limit (CFU mL−1) | References |
|---|---|---|---|
| Multiplex PCR | 6 h | 104 | Federici |
| Reverse transcriptase-PCR-denatured gradient gel electrophoresis (ReVT-PCR-DGGE) | 24 h | 102 | Chahorm and Prakitchaiwattana 2018 ( |
| Colorimetric integrated PCR | 12 h | 2.9 × 104 | Cheng |
| Multiplex touchdown PCR | 16 h | 103 | Wei |
| POTS-modified imprinted PDMS film-PCR-agarose gel electrophoresis | 2 h | 104 | This work |