4.7 Article

A fluorescent aptasensor based on nitrogen-doped carbon supported palladium and exonuclease III-assisted signal amplification for sensitive detection of AFB1

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 1226, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2022.340272

关键词

Fluorescent aptasensor; Nitrogen doped carbon supported palladium; Exonuclease III; Signal amplification

资金

  1. Key Scientific and Technological Project of Henan Province [212102310001, 182102310707]
  2. Special Project for Collaborative Innovation of Zhengzhou [21ZZXTCX15]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel nitrogen-doped carbon supported palladium material (C-N-Pd) was synthesized and used in constructing a fluorescent aptasensor for AFB1 detection. The aptasensor exhibited high sensitivity and good selectivity towards AFB1, and successfully detected the toxin in contaminated food samples. The aptasensor showed good agreement with the HPLC method, indicating its potential as a reliable detection tool for AFB1.
Aflatoxin B1 (AFB(1)) has strong carcinogenicity and toxicity, so it is necessary to develop a highly sensitive detection method. In this paper, a novel nitrogen-doped carbon supported palladium (C-N-Pd) material was synthesized and firstly used as the energy receptor for fluorescent aptasensor. Using C-N-Pd as a novel quenching material and exonuclease III (Exo III) as assisted signal amplification, a fluorescent aptasensor for AFB1 detection was constructed. Compared with the sensor without enzyme, the fluorescence intensity obtained by the sensor with Exo III increased by 74.7%. The fabricated fluorescent aptasensor exhibited a good selectivity toward AFB1 with a limit of detection (LOD) as low as 9 pg mL(-1). Moreover, the designed aptasensor was successfully utilized to detect AFB1 in spiked corn, peanut and wine samples, and the LOD is 15 pg mL(-1), 13 pg mL(-1) and 18 pg mL(-1), respectively. In addition, the aptasensor was also compared with HPLC method, and the good agreement was found between them.

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