Biosensors are ideally portable, low-cost tools for the rapid detection of pathogens, proteins, and other analytes. The global biosensor market is currently worth over 10 billion dollars annually and is a burgeoning field of interdisciplinary research that is hailed as a potential revolution in consumer, healthcare, and industrial testing. A key barrier to the widespread adoption of biosensors, however, is their cost. Although many systems have been validated in the laboratory setting and biosensors for a range of analytes are proven at the concept level, many have yet to make a strong commercial case for their acceptance. Though it is true with the development of cheaper electrodes, circuits, and components that there is a downward pressure on costs, there is also an emerging trend toward the development of multianalyte biosensors that is pushing in the other direction. One way to reduce the cost that is suitable for certain systems is to enable their reuse, thus reducing the cost per test. Regenerating biosensors is a technique that can often be used in conjunction with existing systems in order to reduce costs and accelerate the commercialization process. This article discusses the merits and drawbacks of regeneration schemes that have been proven in various biosensor systems and indicates parameters for successful regeneration based on a systematic review of the literature. It also outlines some of the difficulties encountered when considering the role of regeneration at the point of use. A brief meta-analysis has been included in this review to develop a working definition for biosensor regeneration, and using this analysis only ∼60% of the reported studies analyzed were deemed a success. This highlights the variation within the field and the need to normalize regeneration as a standard process across the field by establishing a consensus term.

The development of a sensor based on molecularly imprinted polymer nanoparticles (nanoMIPs) and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) for the detection of trace levels of cocaine is described in this paper. NanoMIPs for cocaine detection, synthesized using a solid phase, were applied as the sensing element. The nanoMIPs were first characterized by Transmission Electron Microscopy (TEM) and Dynamic Light Scattering and found to be ~148.35 ± 24.69 nm in size, using TEM. The nanoMIPs were then covalently attached to gold screen-printed electrodes and a cocaine direct binding assay was developed and optimized, using EIS as the sensing principle. EIS was recorded at a potential of 0.12 V over the frequency range from 0.1 Hz to 50 kHz, with a modulation voltage of 10 mV. The nanoMIPs sensor was able to detect cocaine in a linear range between 100 pg mL−1 and 50 ng mL−1 (R2 = 0.984; p-value = 0.00001) and with a limit of detection of 0.24 ng mL−1 (0.70 nM). The sensor showed no cross-reactivity toward morphine and a negligible response toward levamisole after optimizing the sensor surface blocking and assay conditions. The developed sensor has the potential to offer a highly sensitive, portable and cost-effective method for cocaine detection.

Upconversion nanoparticles (UCNPs) are utilized extensively for biomedical imaging, sensing, and therapeutic applications, yet the molecular weight of UCNPs has not previously been reported. Herein, we present a theory based upon the crystal structure of UCNPs to estimate the molecular weight of UCNPs: enabling insight into UCNP molecular weight for the first time. We estimate the theoretical molecular weight of various UCNPs reported in the literature, predicting that spherical NaYF4 UCNPs ~ 10 nm in diameter will be ~1 MDa (i.e. 106 g/mol), whereas UCNPs ~ 45 nm in diameter will be ~100 MDa (i.e. 108 g/mol). We also predict that hexagonal crystal phase UCNPs will be of greater molecular weight than cubic crystal phase UCNPs. Additionally we find that a Gaussian UCNP diameter distribution will correspond to a lognormal UCNP molecular weight distribution. Our approach could potentially be generalised to predict the molecular weight of other arbitrary crystalline nanoparticles: as such, we provide stand-alone graphic user interfaces to calculate the molecular weight both UCNPs and arbitrary crystalline nanoparticles. We expect knowledge of UCNP molecular weight to be of wide utility in biomedical applications where reporting UCNP quantity in absolute numbers or molarity will be beneficial for inter-study comparison and repeatability.

Article:Goode, J orcid.org/0000-0002-3642-1291, Dillon, G and Millner, PA orcid.org/0000-0002-4813-4302 (2016 ReuseUnless indicated otherwise, fulltext items are protected by copyright with all rights reserved. The copyright exception in section 29 of the Copyright, Designs and Patents Act 1988 allows the making of a single copy solely for the purpose of non-commercial research or private study within the limits of fair dealing. The publisher or other rights-holder may allow further reproduction and re-use of this version -refer to the White Rose Research Online record for this item. Where records identify the publisher as the copyright holder, users can verify any specific terms of use on the publisher's website. TakedownIf you consider content in White Rose Research Online to be in breach of UK law, please notify us by emailing eprints@whiterose.ac.uk including the URL of the record and the reason for the withdrawal request. This has led to the development of alternative immuno-reagents such as non-antibody binding proteins (NABPs). These are low molecular weight proteins which largely avoid the aforementioned advantages of antibodies. They are commonly produced by bacteria enabling the use of DNA technology to manipulate bioreceptors at the molecular level.Single chain VHHs (commonly known as nanobodies) are an antibody derived NABP adapted from camelid heavy chain antibodies which are the isolated binding domain. Whilst nanobodies have been used for diagnostic and therapeutic applications, they have limited demonstration in biosensors.In this study, both antibodies and nanobodies were used to construct a biosensor. In addition nanobody performance was optimised by introducing a novel peptide spacer. The role of nanobody orientation and spacing was thus investigated and spacer length was optimised, leading to an increase in the sensitivity of the biosensor. Highlights: Nanobodies have been used on impedimetric immunosensors to detect rabbit IgG  Unmodified nanobody sensors displayed a decrease in resistance upon analyte recognition.  Nanobodies were modified with a peptide spacer, effectively reversing this phenomena.  The use of a spacer also increased the sensitivity of the immunosensor.