4.7 Article

Target-triggered aggregation of gold nanoparticles for photothermal quantitative detection of adenosine using a thermometer as readout

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 1110, 期 -, 页码 151-157

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2020.03.023

关键词

Gold nanopartides; Photothermal effect; Aptamer; Aggregation

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21904020, 21974020]
  2. Program for Changjiang Scholars and Innovative Research Team in University [IRT15R11]
  3. cooperative project of production and study in University of Fujian Province [2018Y4007]
  4. Sciences Foundation of Fujian Province [2018J05018, 2018J01685, 2018J01682]
  5. STS Key Project of Fujian Province [2017T3007]
  6. Foundation for Scholars of Fuzhou University [XRC-1671, XRC-17007]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Colorimetric platform using the aggregation of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) is a pretty simple method for biosensing, but advanced instruments such as specterophotometer is still needed to achieve accurately quantitative readout. Aggregated AuNPs exhibit excellent photothermal properties under near-infrared laser irradiation, which is significantly different from non-aggregated AuNPs. Herein, given the different photothermal effect, we translated the AuNPs-based colorimetric assay into a photothermal assay for the quantitative detection of adenosine using a thermometer as readout. Short single-stranded DNA (ssDNA, adenosine aptamer) was adsorbed on the surface of AuNPs and hence prevented the aggregation of AuNPs under high ionic concentration. The presence of adenosine caused the structural change of ssDNA and the AuNPs became aggregated. The enhanced temperature under NIR-laser irradiation has a linear response to the concentration of adenosine in the range of 2.0-50.0 mu M. The detection limit was 1.7 mu M. This proposed method is portable, easy and applicable to the quantitative assay of other targets by simply replacing of the sequence of ssDNA. (C) 2020 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据