Detection limits for nanoscale biosensors

Nano Letters

Volumn 5, Issue 4, 2005, Pages 803-807

  Sheehan, Paul E ^a   Whitman, Lloyd J ^a  

^a NAVAL RESEARCH LABORATORY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

BIOMOLECULAR ASSAYS; BIOMOLECULAR SENSORS; DETECTION LIMITS; FEMTOMOLAR (FM) CONCENTRATIONS;

BIOASSAY; BIOSENSORS; COMPUTER SIMULATION; DNA; ELECTROSTATICS; FINITE ELEMENT METHOD; FLOW OF FLUIDS; HEAT TRANSFER; INTEGRATION; MATHEMATICAL MODELS; SENSORS; SIGNAL TO NOISE RATIO;

NANOSTRUCTURED MATERIALS;

DNA;

ARTICLE; CHEMISTRY; GENETIC PROCEDURES; NANOTECHNOLOGY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY; THEORETICAL MODEL;

BIOSENSING TECHNIQUES; DNA; MODELS, THEORETICAL; NANOTECHNOLOGY; SENSITIVITY AND SPECIFICITY;

EID: 18144396893     PISSN: 15306984     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1021/nl050298x     Document Type: Article

References (35)

1. Reyes, D. R.; Iossifidis, D.; Auroux, P. A.; Manz, A. Anal. Chem. 2002, 74, 2623-2636.
2. Auroux, P. A.; Iossifidis, D.; Reyes, D. R.; Manz, A. Anal Chem. 2002, 74, 2637-2652.
3. Tamanaha, C.; Colton, R.; Miller, M.; Piani, M.; Rife, J.; Sheehan, P.; Whitman, L. In Micro Total Analysis Systems 2001; Ramsey, J. M., van den Berg, A., Eds.; Kluwer Academic Publishers: Boston, 2001; pp 444-446.
4. Cao, Y. W. C.; Jin, R. C.; Mirkin, C. A. Science 2002, 297, 1536-1540.
5. Ferguson, J. A.; Steemers, F. J.; Walt, D. R. Anal. Chem. 2000, 72, 5618-5624.
6. Cui, Y.; Wei, Q. Q.; Park, H. K.; Lieber, C. M. Science 2001, 293, 1289-1292.
7. Kong, J.; Franklin, N. R.; Zhou, C.; Chapline, M. G.; Peng, S.; Cho, K.; Dai, H. Science 2000, 287, 622-625.
8. Ilic, B.; Craighead, H. G.; Krylov, S.; Senaratne, W.; Ober, C.; Neuzil, P. J. Appl. Phys. 2004, 95, 3694-3703.
9. Graham, D. L.; Ferreira, H.; Bernardo, J.; Freitas, P. P.; Cabral, J. M. S. J. Appl. Phys. 2002, 91, 7786-7788.
10. Wang, H.; Branton, D. Nature Biotechnol. 2001, 19, 622-623.
11. Singh-Zocchi, M.; Dixit, S.; Ivanov, V.; Zocchi, G. PNAS 2003, 100, 7605-7610.
12. Booth, J.; Compton, R. G.; Cooper, J. A.; Dryfe, R. A. W.; Fisher, A. C.; Davies, C. L.; Walters, M. K. J. Phys. Chem. 1995, 99, 10942-10947.
13. Zhang, W.; Stone, H. A.; Sherwood, J. D. J. Phys. Chem. 1996, 100, 9462-9464. Note that the stated characteristic flow rate, U, is incorrectly equated to Q/6hw. The correct value is 6 Q/hw.
14. Gupta, A.; Akin, D.; Bashir, R. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004, 84, 1976-1978.
15. We focus on biomolecule detection in solution because it is much more challenging than gaseous chemical detection. First, diffusion of molecules in solution is several orders of magnitude slower than through a gas, and consequently mass transport is slower. Second, the desired detection limits for biological species (<0.1 pM) are typically much lower than for gases (1 ppb∼50 pM).
16. Holt, D.; Rabbany, S. Y.; Kusterbeck, A. W.; Ligler, F. S. Rev. Anal. Chem. 1999, 18, 107-132.
17. Phillips, C.; Jakusch, M.; Steiner, H.; Mizaikoff, B.; Fedorov, A. G. Anal. Chem. 2003, 75, 1106-1115.
18. Myszka, D. G.; He, X.; Dembo, M.; Morton, T. A.; Goldstein, B. Biophys. J. 1998, 75, 583-594.
19. Kankare, J.; Vinokurov, I. A. Langmuir 1999, 75, 5591-5599.
20. Strictly speaking, the accumulation used here is the average expected accumulation. For a given experiment, the accumulation of a few molecules will be described by Poisson statistics and will display the large relative variances associated with those statistics.
21. Stellwagen, E.; Stellwagen, N. C. Electrophoresis 2002, 23, 2794-2803.
22. Edelstein, R. L.; Tamanaha, C. R.; Sheehan, P. E.; Miller, M. M.; Baselt, D. R.; Whitman, L. J.; Colton, R. J. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2000, 14, 805-813.
23. Schena, M.; Shalon, D.; Heller, R.; Chai, A.; Brown, P. O.; Davis, R. W. PNAS 1996, 93, 10614-10619.
24. Crank, J. The Mathematics of Diffusion; Oxford University Press: Oxford, 1975.
25. Interestingly, this enhancement may have been overlooked in the explanation of the rings seen when DNA arrays are exposed to a static sample solution. The rings are often attributed to the "coffee stain effect" occurring during spotting, which would result in an uneven distribution of probe DNA.; however, in a static solution, a ring is the expected result.
26. Carslaw, H. S.; Jaeger, J. C. Conduction of Heat In Solids; Clarendon Press: Oxford, 1959.
27. Heller, M. J.; Forster, A. H.; Tu, E. Electrophoresis 2000, 21, 157-164.
28. Brody, J. P.; Yager, P.; Goldstein, R. E.; Austin, R. H. Biophys. J. 1996, 71, 3430-3441.
29. Hofmann, O.; Voirin, G.; Niedermann, P.; Manz, A. Anal. Chem. 2002, 74, 5243-5250.
30. Lee, G. U.; Yanavich, C. U.S. Patent 6, 676, 904, 2004.
31. Ilic, B.; Yang, Y.; Craighead, H. G. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004, 85, 2604-2606.
32. Viani, M. B.; Schaffer, T. E.; Chand, A.; Rief, M.; Gaub, H. E.; Hansma, P. K. J. Appl. Phys. 1999, 86, 2258-2262.
33. Fritz, J.; Baller, M. K.; Lang, H. P.; Rothuizen, H.; Vettiger, P.; Meyer, E.; J. Güntherodt, H.; Gerber, C.; Gimzewski, J. K. Science 2000, 288, 316-318.
34. Li, J.; Stein, D.; McMullan, C.; Branton, D.; Aziz, M. J.; Golovchenko, J. A. Nature 2001, 412, 166-169.
35. Rife, J. C.; Miller, M. M.; Sheehan, P. E.; Tamanaha, C. R.; Tondra, M.; Whitman, L. J. Sens. Actuators, A 2003, 107, 209-218.