4.7 Article

Highly sensitive SERS immunosensor for the detection of amantadine in chicken based on flower-like gold nanoparticles and magnetic bead separation

Journal

FOOD AND CHEMICAL TOXICOLOGY
Volume 118, Issue -, Pages 589-594

Publisher

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.fct.2018.06.013

Keywords

Surface-enhanced Raman scattering; Flower-like gold nanoparticles; Magnetic beads; Amantadine; Chicken samples

Funding

  1. National Science Foundation of China [31622057, 31472236]
  2. Sanming Project of Medicine in Shenzhen [SZSM201611068]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Here we report a novel ultrasensitive surface-enhanced Raman scattering (SERS) immunosensor based on the flower-like gold nanoparticles (AuNFs) and magnetic bead separation for homogeneous detection of amantadine (AMD) in chicken just by one-step. The 5, 5'-dithiobis (2-nitrobenzoicacid) (DTNB) modified AuNFs and N-(1-adamantyl) ethylenediamine (AEDA) conjugated denatured BSA (AEDA-dBSA) was used as the SERS nanoprobe. And the capture probe was anti-AMD monoclonal antibody (mAbs)-functionalized magnetic beads (MNBs-mAbs). An immunoreaction occurred between free AMD and SERS nanoprobe for competing limited binding sites of MNBs-mAbs. This work combined inherent sensitive property of SERS with antibody-antigen highly specificity recognition for the AMD detection. The analytical results showed that the SEAS-based immunosensor was sensitive, simple and reliable with a limit of detection (LOD) of 0.005 ng/mL for AMD, which were 2 orders of magnitude better than an enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay based on the same immunoreagents. Analysis of AMD-spiked chicken samples revealed that the developed immunosensor provided accepted recoveries ranging from 74.76%-89.34% with coefficient of variation less than 15.04%. This strategy represents a simple, reliable, and universal approach for detection of chemical contaminants in food samples.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available