| Literature DB >> 35626973 |
Zanlin Chen1, Miaojia Xie1, Fengguang Zhao2, Shuangyan Han1.
Abstract
Heavy metal pollution resulting from significant heavy metal waste discharge is increasingly serious. Traditional methods for the detection of heavy metal ions have high requirements on external conditions, so developing a sensitive, simple, and reproducible detection method is becoming an urgent need. The aptamer, as a new kind of artificial probe, has received more attention in recent years for its high sensitivity, easy acquisition, wide target range, and wide use in the detection of various harmful substances. The detection platform that an aptamer-based electrochemical biosensor (E-apt sensor) provides is a new approach for the detection of heavy metal ions. Nanomaterials are particularly important in the construction of E-apt sensors, as they can be used as aptamer carriers or sensitizers to stimulate or inhibit electrochemical signals, thus significantly improving the detection sensitivity. This review summarizes the application of different types of nanomaterials in E-apt sensors. The construction methods and research progress of the E-apt sensor based on different working principles are systematically introduced. Moreover, the advantages and challenges of the E-apt sensor in heavy metal ion detection are summarized.Entities:
Keywords: aptamer; electrochemical biosensor; heavy metal ions; nanomaterials
Year: 2022 PMID: 35626973 PMCID: PMC9140949 DOI: 10.3390/foods11101404
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Foods ISSN: 2304-8158
Figure 1SELEX flowchart.
Figure 2Web of Science report for the number of indexed papers and patents about the application of the E-apt sensor (keyword: “Electrochemical” and “Aptamer” accessed on 27 March 2022).
Figure 3Schematic diagram of nanomaterial modified aptamer-based electrochemical sensor.
Figure 4SEM images and combination modes of various nanomaterials.
Application of the electrochemical sensor in the detection of heavy metal ions.
| Method | Target | LOD (nM) | Linear Range (nM) | Aptamer Sequence | Sample | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| EIS | Hg2+ | 0.071 | 0.1~50 | 5′-CCCCCCCCCCCCTTCTTTCTTCCCCT | Tap water | [ |
| Hg2+ | 25 | 25~500 | 5′-TTTCTTCTTTCTTCCCCCCTTGTTTGT | Water | [ | |
| Cd2+ | 0.275 | 1~1 × 106 | 5’-ACCGACCGTGCTGGACTCTGGACTG | River water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 1.67 × 10−3 | 5 × 10−3~1 | 5′-HS-TTTTTTCGATAACTCACTATrAGG | Serum | [ | |
| As3+ | 0.26 | 1.3~6.5 | 5′-TGATGTTTGTTTACGCATGTGTGAG | Tap water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 2.27 × 10−3 | 0.01~10.0 | 5′-CAACGGTGGGTGTGGTTGG-3′ | River water | [ | |
| DPV | Hg2+ | 0.03 | 0.01~100 | 5′-SH-(CH2)6-AAAAATTTCCTTTGCTTT-3′ | Lake water | [ |
| Hg2+ | 5 × 10−3 | 0.025~1 × 10−6 | 5′-(NH2C6)-CTT GCT TTC TGT-3′ | Lake water | [ | |
| Hg2+ | 0.03 | 0.1~100 | 5’-SH-(CH2)6-ACCGTGTTTGCCTTTGAC CTC-3’ | Lake water | [ | |
| Hg2+ | 2.9 × 10−3 | 0.01~1 × 105 | 5′-COOH-CTTCTTCCCCCCCCTTCTTC | River water | [ | |
| Hg2+ | 5 × 10−3 | 0.01~500 | 5′-SH-(CH2)6-TCATGTTTGTTTGTGGCC | Tap water | [ | |
| Hg2+ | 0.33 | 1~200 | 5′-Bio-TCTTTCTTCCCTTGTTTGT-3′ | Tap water | [ | |
| Cd2+ | 5 × 10−5 | 1 × 10−3~100 | 5′-ACCGACCGTGCTGGACTCTGACTG | Tap water | [ | |
| Cd2+ | 6.5 × 10−7 | 1 × 10−6~1 | 5′-GGGGGGGGACTGTTGTGGTATTATT | Valley water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 4.3×10−9 | 1.0×10−8~5.0×10−5 | 5′-GGGTGGGTGGGTGGGT-3′ | Springwater | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 1.6 × 10−3 | 4.8 × 10−3~4.8 | 5′-GGTTGGGCGGGATGGGTG-3′ | Tea and Rice | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 5.1 × 10−7 | 1 × 10−6~1 | 5′-MB-GGTGGTGGTGGTTGTGGTGGTG | Tap water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 2.88 | 2.4~120 | 5′-GGGTGGGTGGGTGGGT-3′ | Soil | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 0.018 | 0.05~1 × 103 | 5′-GGGTGGGTGGGTGGGTAT-3′ | Tap water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 0.312 | 0.5~50 | 5′-GGGTGGGTGGGTGGGT-3′ | Serum | [ | |
| As3+ | 4 × 10−5 | 0.13~130 | 5′-HS-GGTAATACGACTCATAAGGGA | River water | [ | |
| SWV | Hg2+ | 1.79 | 10~100 | 5′-MB-CGCTTTAGATG-3′ | Juice | [ |
| Hg2+ | 1 × 10−4 | 2 × 10−3~20 | 5′-SH-AATTCTCTCTTCGACGTTGTGT | Tap water | [ | |
| Hg2+ | 0.094 | 1~5 × 103 | 5’-SH-(CH2)6-CTGTTTTCTTTCGGACGA CCCCCCTCGTCCGTTTGTTTTCAG-MB+-3′ | River water | [ | |
| Cd2+ | 0.089 | 0.1~1000 | 5′-CTCAGGACGACGGGTTCACAGTC | Lettuce | [ | |
| Cd2+ | 0.014 | 0.1~5 | 5′-HS(CH2)6GGACTGTTGTGGTATTAT | Tap water | [ | |
| As3+ | 0.7 | 3.83~766 | 5′-HS-GGTAATACGACTCATTAGGGAG | None | [ | |
| PEC | Hg2+ | 3.33 × 10−6 | 1 × 10−5−1 × 10−3 | 5′-NH2-(CH2)6-TTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTTT | Tap water | [ |
| Cd2+ | 1.8 × 10−3 | 5 × 10−3~29 | 5′-GGACTGTTGTGGTATTATTTTTGGT | Lake water | [ | |
| Cd2+ | 0.011 | 0.03~40 | 5′-SH-GGACTGTTGTGGTATTATTTTTG | Lake water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 3 × 10−4 | 1 × 10−3~5 | 5′-TTGGGTGGGTGGGTGGGT-3′ | Tap water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 1.67 × 10−5 | 5 × 10−5~1 × 103 | 5′-NH2-(CH2)6-TTGGGTGGGTGGGTGGG | Reservoir water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 0.05 | 0.1~50 | 5′-NH2-(CH2)6-TTGGGTGGGTGGGTGG | Tap water | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 1.6 × 10−3 | 5 × 10−3~10 | 5′-SH-GGGTGGGTGGGTGGGT-3′ | Soil | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 0.34 | 1~1 × 104 | 5′-NH2-(CH2)6-TTGGGTGGGTGGGTGGG | River water | [ | |
| ECL | Hg2+ | 0.01 | 0.05~1 × 103 | 5′-NH2-TTGTTTGTCCCCTCTTTCTTA-(CH2)3-SH-3′ | Tap water | [ |
| Hg2+ | 4 × 10−5 | 1 × 10−4~0.01 | 5′-amino-(CH2)6-O-TCTCCAGCGTCGTT | Water | [ | |
| Hg2+ | 3 × 10−4 | 1 × 10−3~1 × 104 | 5′-GGTTGGTGTGGTTGGTTCTTTCTT | None | [ | |
| Hg2+ | 4.1 × 10−6 | 1.0 × 10−5~0.01 | 5′-TTTTTTAAAATTTTTT-SH-3′ | Shrimp | [ | |
| Cd2+ | 9.7 × 10−4 | 0.26~2.6 × 106 | 5′-ACCGACCGTGCTGGACTCTGGAC | Extracting solution of sophora | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 4 × 10−8 | 1.0 × 10−7~0.1 | 5′-GGTTGGTGTGGTTGG-3′ | Soil | [ | |
| Pb2+ | 3.82 × 10−6 | 1.0 × 10−5~1.0 × 10−2 | 5′-SH- (CH2)6-TTTTTACCCAGGGTGGG | River water | [ | |
| As3+ | 9.2 × 10−3 | 15.3~1.53 × 104 | 5′-GGTAATACGACTCACTATAGGGAG | Extracting solution of sophora | [ |
Figure 5Electrochemical sensor technology is based on aptamers and different electrodes.
Figure 6Inkjet−printed electrochemical apt sensor performance analysis; (a) Analytical Faradaic impedance response under optimal fabrication conditions; (b) Working electrode diagram; (c) The bar chart represents the overall reaction, and the shaded area represents the signal strength after subtracting the background; (d) Linear correlation between signal and target concentration; and (e) All the results correspond to the mean value from 5 independent replicates and the error bars represent 1 SD from the mean. Reprinted with permission from ref. [79]. Copyright 2019 Elsevier.
Figure 7Schematic illustration of the assembly process and the detection strategy; (A) Preparation of nano-probe; (B) Modification of flexible electrode. Reprinted with permission from ref. [83]. Copyright 2018 Elsevier.
Figure 8Fabrication of the ECL-RET aptasensor for Hg2+ and TB, respectively based on the resonance energy transfer between CdS:La QDs film and AuNPs; (A) Preparation of aptamer probe; (B) Electrode surface modification and sensor reaction principle. Reprinted with permission from ref. [105]. Copyright 2019 Elsevier.