| Literature DB >> 35735516 |
Shuhong Zhou1, Chen Liu2, Jianguo Lin1, Zhi Zhu3, Bing Hu4, Long Wu1,3.
Abstract
Due to their advantages of good flexibility, low cost, simple operations, and small equipment size, electrochemical sensors have been commonly employed in food safety. However, when they are applied to detect various food or drug samples, their stability and specificity can be greatly influenced by the complex matrix. By combining electrochemical sensors with molecular imprinting techniques (MIT), they will be endowed with new functions of specific recognition and separation, which make them powerful tools in analytical fields. MIT-based electrochemical sensors (MIECs) require preparing or modifying molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) on the electrode surface. In this review, we explored different MIECs regarding the design, working principle and functions. Additionally, the applications of MIECs in food and drug safety were discussed, as well as the challenges and prospects for developing new electrochemical methods. The strengths and weaknesses of MIECs including low stability and electrode fouling are discussed to indicate the research direction for future electrochemical sensors.Entities:
Keywords: antibiotics detection; electrochemical sensors; food safety; molecularly imprinted polymers; separation and detection
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 35735516 PMCID: PMC9221454 DOI: 10.3390/bios12060369
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biosensors (Basel) ISSN: 2079-6374
Figure 1Schematic presentation of MIECs: (I) preparation of MIPs, (II) design of electrochemical signal, (III) functions of MIECs and (IV) applications in food and drug safety detection.
Figure 2Illustration of working principle of MIECs from the preparation of MIPs to electrochemical signal output.
Figure 3Schematic view of the construction of MECs through an ex-situ/in-situ method.
Figure 4Schematic presentation of MIECs in the applications of food and drug safety detection.
Summary of MIECs methods in different applications (not given: N).
| Type of Application | Test Target | R Value | RSD | Linear Range | LOD | References |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pathogen and toxins |
| 0.9730 | N | 103–107 CFU/mL | 7.5 × 10−8 M | [ |
| LM | N | N | 10–106 CFU/mL | 6 CFU/mL | [ | |
| Patulin | 0.9953 | 7.3% | 1 × 10-12–1 × 10−9 M | 7.57 × 10−13 M | [ | |
| FB1 | 0.9899 | N | 1 fM–10 pM | 0.03 fM | [ | |
| 0.9798 | N | 0.7 fM | ||||
| Pesticide residue | IMI | 0.9987 | 4.5% | 1.0 × 10−7–1.0 × 10−4 M | 6.5 × 10−8 M | [ |
| FEN | 0.9995 | N | 1.0 × 10−11–1.0 × 10−9 M | 3.0 × 10−12 M | [ | |
| Heavy metal ions | Cd(II) | 0.9989 | 2.7% | 0.5–40 µg L−1 | 0.15 μg L−1 | [ |
| Pb(II) | 0.9993 | N | 1–5 ppm | 2 × 10−2 μM | [ | |
| Antibiotics monitoring | PR | N | 1.2% | 1.0 nM–0.1 mM | 0.53 nM | [ |
| s/r-Prop | N | N | 50 μM–1000 μM | N | [ | |
| CPZ | 0.9981 | 0.94% | 0.005–9 μM | 2.6 nM | [ |