ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
Detection and Spatial Mapping of Mercury Contamination in Water Samples Using a Smart-Phone
My Activity
  • Open Access
  • Editors Choice
Article

Detection and Spatial Mapping of Mercury Contamination in Water Samples Using a Smart-Phone
Click to copy article linkArticle link copied!

View Author Information
† ‡ § Electrical Engineering Department, Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), Department of Physics & Astronomy, and Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
*Address correspondence to [email protected]
Open PDFSupporting Information (1)

ACS Nano

Cite this: ACS Nano 2014, 8, 2, 1121–1129
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/nn406571t
Published January 20, 2014

Copyright © 2014 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under these Terms of Use.

Abstract

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Detection of environmental contamination such as trace-level toxic heavy metal ions mostly relies on bulky and costly analytical instruments. However, a considerable global need exists for portable, rapid, specific, sensitive, and cost-effective detection techniques that can be used in resource-limited and field settings. Here we introduce a smart-phone-based hand-held platform that allows the quantification of mercury(II) ions in water samples with parts per billion (ppb) level of sensitivity. For this task, we created an integrated opto-mechanical attachment to the built-in camera module of a smart-phone to digitally quantify mercury concentration using a plasmonic gold nanoparticle (Au NP) and aptamer based colorimetric transmission assay that is implemented in disposable test tubes. With this smart-phone attachment that weighs <40 g, we quantified mercury(II) ion concentration in water samples by using a two-color ratiometric method employing light-emitting diodes (LEDs) at 523 and 625 nm, where a custom-developed smart application was utilized to process each acquired transmission image on the same phone to achieve a limit of detection of ∼3.5 ppb. Using this smart-phone-based detection platform, we generated a mercury contamination map by measuring water samples at over 50 locations in California (USA), taken from city tap water sources, rivers, lakes, and beaches. With its cost-effective design, field-portability, and wireless data connectivity, this sensitive and specific heavy metal detection platform running on cellphones could be rather useful for distributed sensing, tracking, and sharing of water contamination information as a function of both space and time.

Copyright © 2014 American Chemical Society

Since the recognition of severe neurotoxic effects of mercury in the 1960s, (1-3) the development of detection techniques for real-time and long-term monitoring of mercury contamination in environmental and biological samples has become a high priority. Various neurological effects of mercury exposure have been mainly attributed to the organic form of mercury, predominantly methylmercury (MeHg+), which is known to accumulate in the food chain (4) and cross the blood–brain barrier after human ingestion. (5, 6) While such findings have added weight to the severity of organic mercury contamination, the threat of inorganic mercury, namely, mercury(II) ions (Hg2+), should not be underestimated. In fact, mercury(II) ions are the primary mercury contamination in the aquatic system and the “precursor” form of methylmercury due to bacteria-assisted biotransformation processes. (7, 8) Furthermore, inorganic mercury is known to be more nephrotoxic than its organic form, as it primarily accumulates in the kidney proximal tubule cells. (9) Therefore, the detection and quantification of mercury(II) ion contamination in water systems are of paramount importance and could potentially be used to assist prevention of mercury ions from entering the food chain.
Toward this need, low nanomolar (nM) concentrations of mercury(II) ions have been traditionally detected by using spectroscopic methods, including, for example, atomic absorption spectroscopy (AAS), (10, 11) inductively coupled plasma mass spectrometry (ICP-MS), (12) and atomic fluorescence spectrometry (AFS). (13) However, these approaches require complex sample preparation procedures, expensive and bulky instruments, and professionally trained personnel running the tests. Therefore, they are not well suited for rapid on-site detection of mercury and may not even be available for use in developing countries. On the other hand, recent advances in microfabrication and nanoscience have enabled the development of portable detection assays that are integrated with lab-on-a-chip platforms, showing great potential for use in resource-limited environments. (14-18) Among these technologies, gold nanoparticle (Au NP)-based colorimetric assays are emerging as alternative approaches for heavy metal detection, (19-21) providing high sensitivity, specificity, and ease of signal read-out using, for example, UV–vis spectrometers (19-21) or glass slide readers. (14) However, these existing systems that utilize NPs are still limited due to their relatively bulky instrumentation, higher costs, and lack of wireless connectivity, which are important especially for distributed sensing and spatiotemporal mapping of contamination in remote locations and field settings. As an alternative to Au NP-based plasmonic techniques, detection of subppm levels of mercury(II) ions has recently been demonstrated by using dye-embedded polymer films as colorimetric substrates that are digitized using, for example, smart-phone cameras. (22) However, this recent approach does not utilize the processing/computational power of the phone, and it has limited detection sensitivity and repeatability due to unavoidable variations in ambient light conditions and user operation and/or alignment during the image capture process.
To provide a field-portable, cost-effective, and wirelessly connected platform to sensitively quantify heavy metal ion concentration in water samples, here we report a battery-powered mobile sensing device that consists of a lightweight (∼37 g) opto-mechanical attachment to a smart-phone along with a custom-developed Android application for quantification, reporting, and sharing of detection results. This lab-on-a-phone device is based on dual-wavelength illumination using light-emitting diodes (LEDs) at 523 and 625 nm and can quantify mercury-induced subtle transmission changes of a colorimetric assay utilizing citrate-stabilized plasmonic Au NPs and aptamers (Apt) mixed within disposable test tubes. Due to the shift in the plasmonic resonance wavelength of dispersed and aggregated Au NPs in response to mercury(II) ions, we demonstrated sensitive detection of mercury contamination in water samples with a limit of detection (LOD) of ∼3.5 ppb, which has the same order of magnitude as the maximum contaminant level (MCL) of mercury(II) recommended for drinking water, i.e., 2 and 6 ppb, as established by the U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) and the World Health Organization (WHO), respectively. (23, 24) With this cellphone-based colorimetric detection platform, we also demonstrated geospatial mapping of mercury(II) contamination in California by testing water samples collected at more than 50 locations, from tap water sources as well as natural sources such as rivers, lakes, and beaches. This heavy metal detection system running on smart-phones could provide a complementary addition to other mobile-phone-based imaging, sensing, and diagnostics devices (25-42) and holds significant potential for distributed sensing and spatiotemporal mapping and monitoring of mercury contamination globally. In fact, cellphone subscriptions worldwide have reached more than 7 billion by the end of 2013, and smart-phone penetration rate is globally increasing, which is estimated to reach more than 60%, 45%, and 25% by the end of 2015 in North America, Europe, and Africa, respectively. (43) Therefore, the use of mobile phones for bioanalytical measurement science as well as for reporting and sharing of results provides widely scalable, cost-effective, and yet rather powerful/competitive solutions to implement various tests and measurements even in resource-limited and field settings, which constitutes an important motivation for this work.

Results and Discussion

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Optical Design of the Smart-Phone-Based Mercury Reader

We created an optical imaging interface that is mechanically attached to the existing camera module of a smart-phone to quantify mercury concentration using a colorimetric nanoparticle and aptamer assay. This attachment contains two button cells (3 V), which are used to power two LEDs, as illustrated in Figure 1a. These LEDs are mounted at a sufficiently large distance (∼26.5 mm) away from the location of the rectangular test tubes (containing the sample and control solutions) and are scattered by optical diffusers to ensure uniform illumination of both tubes (Figure 1a). The emission wavelengths of these LEDs were selected to be 523 and 625 nm to follow the shift in the extinction wavelengths of the dispersed and aggregated Au NPs, respectively. In order to obtain multispectral information from a given water sample, the green LED illuminated the bottom half while the red LED illuminated the top half of each cuvette (Figure 1a). To avoid a possible crosstalk between the green and red lights, the optical paths of the two LEDs were separated by an opaque clapboard before they reached the cuvettes (Figure 1a, inset) and passed through two rectangular apertures (6.6 × 5 mm, one for each color) that are placed in front of each cuvette. The transmitted light through the sample and control cuvettes was then collected through two other rectangular apertures of the same size to be imaged onto the digital camera of the smart-phone using a plano-convex lens (f = 28 mm) (Figure 1a). This external lens was chosen to yield a demagnification factor of 7× so that the two 6.6-mm-wide sample cuvettes could be simultaneously imaged within the active area of the smart-phone CMOS imager chip. All of these electrical and optical elements were consolidated in an opaque cuboid (Figure 1a, gray part) and coupled to a base plate (Figure 1a, black part) with a total weight of ∼37 g. Although the current attachment is designed for an Android phone (Samsung Galaxy S II, Figure 1b), the same optical reader can be implemented on other smart-phones such as an iPhone, after slight mechanical modifications in the base attachment.

Figure 1

Figure 1. Design of the ratiometric optical reader on a smart-phone. (a) 3D schematic illustration of the internal structure of the opto-mechanical attachment. The inset image shows the same attachment with a slightly different observation angle. (b) Photograph of the actual optical reader installed on an Android-based smart-phone. The screen of the smart-phone displays a typical image of the sample and control cuvettes when illuminated by red (625 nm) and green (523 nm) LEDs simultaneously.

Plasmonic Colorimetric Assay and Measurement of Mercury(II) Ion Concentration

Spherical Au NPs have been previously studied as novel sensing probes for mercury(II) ion detection. (19-21) The characteristic color change of Au NPs from red to purple or blue upon aggregation that is induced by mercury(II) ion binding events constitutes the basis of the Au NP-based colorimetric detection assay. However, most Au NP-based probes require a surface modification step to conjugate mercury(II)-specific ligands onto Au NPs, and the LOD varies based on the capturing ligand that is selected. (44-48) Here, we adopt an alternative approach, which utilizes the strong affinity of the thymine-rich aptamer sequence to mercury(II) ions and citrate-stabilized Au NPs as colorimetric signal transducers to generate a high detection sensitivity. (49) In this protocol, Au NPs are used without the need for surface functionalization steps, which greatly facilitates field use. In a typical mercury detection experiment, 0.64 nM Au NPs (50 nm diameter) are mixed with 3 μM aptamer (5′-TTTTTTTTTT-3′) in 20 mM Tris-HCl buffer (pH 8.0) to form the probe solution. Next, 4 μL of water sample solution is added to the probe solution and incubated for 5–10 min (see Methods section for details). Aptamer forms a protective layer on the surface of Au NPs, which prevents them from aggregation even in a high-salt environment such as 10 mM NaCl. However, this aptamer layer will be stripped off by the presence of mercury(II) ions due to the formation of more stable T-Hg2+-T complexes. (50, 51) As a result, the unprotected Au NPs can undergo distinct color transition from red to blue in the presence of NaCl (Figure 2a), and this spectral shift is detected to quantify mercury concentration using our dual-wavelength smart-phone-based colorimetric reader.
A representative smart-phone-captured image of Au NP probe solutions with and without mercury(II) ions is depicted in Figure 2b. Each cuvette was illuminated by red and green LEDs at different spatial locations and separated by two rectangular apertures that are 3 mm apart from each other (Figure 2b). The illumination spots of the LEDs were sufficiently large to cover both the sample and control cuvettes (2 mm apart). This dual-illumination color and dual-cuvette configuration forms four readable signals in a single image frame, namely, red control (RC), red sample (RS), green control (GC), and green sample (GS) signals (Figure 2c). To quantify the mercury contamination in a given water sample, the acquired transmission image of these cuvettes (sample and control) is first digitally split into red (R) and green (G) channels (Figure 2c) to further minimize the spectral crosstalk between these two colors. The centroids of each rectangular aperture are automatically localized by a detection algorithm, and a rectangular region of interest (ROI, 400 × 300 pixels) around each of these four centroids is then used to calculate the averaged transmission signal for each ROI, yielding RC, RS, GC, and GS signals. Note that RC and RS are calculated using the red channel image, whereas GC and GS are calculated using the green channel image, both of which are digitally separated from the raw RGB image captured by the cellphone camera sensor (Figure 2c). The transmission intensity of the sample cuvette is further normalized to that of the control cuvette by placing two identical deionized water samples in both cuvette positions, leading to an illumination normalization factor of 1.15 for the red LED (R_Factor) and 0.98 for the green LED (G_Factor). The calibration ratio of the control cuvette (G/R_C) was obtained by taking the ratio of the GC and RC. Similarly, the calibration ratio of the sample cuvette (G/R_S) was obtained by taking the ratio of GS × G_Factor to RS × R_Factor. Finally, the ultimate normalized green-to-red signal (i.e., normalized G/R) for a given water sample was computed by taking the ratio of G/R_S to G/R_C (Figure 2c). These calculations are automatically implemented using a custom-designed Android application running on the same smart-phone, which will be detailed in the next section.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Principle of dual-color dual-cuvette colorimetric detection. (a) Scheme of the mercury sensing mechanism by using plasmonic Au NPs and aptamer. (b) Representative image captured on the smart-phone under dual-wavelength illumination. The left cuvette (control) contained a mixture of Au NPs (0.64 nM) and aptamer (30 nM), while the right cuvette (sample) contained a mixture of Au NPs and aptamer plus 500 nM Hg2+ (representative of a contaminated water sample). (c) Flow of image-processing steps to compute normalized green-to-red signal ratio (i.e., normalized G/R signal).

Android-Based Smart Application for Mercury Quantification

We created a custom-designed Android application that allows for mobile testing and sharing of mercury quantification results. After attaching the colorimetric mercury measurement device onto the smart-phone camera unit (Figure 1), the user can hold the cellphone horizontally and then run mercury tests using this smart application. From the main menu of the application, the user can start a new test, create a device-specific calibration curve, view previously run tests, share the test results, and review the operating instructions (Figure 3a). The user can calibrate the application for attachment-specific variations by imaging, for example, mercury-contaminated control samples at known concentrations (Figure 3b). These calibration curves can be stored and reused by various devices/attachments. After capturing a colorimetric transmission image of the sample, the user can first preview the image on the screen before proceeding to digitally analyze/process it (Figure 3c). The application can also use an image file already stored on the phone memory for processing/testing. After pressing on the “Process” button, the transmission signal ratios between the sample and control regions will be automatically computed on the phone, following the image-processing steps discussed in the previous section. A previously stored calibration curve is used to convert the calculated signal ratio into the mercury concentration level of the sample (in ppb), and the results are then displayed on the screen of the phone (Figure 3d). The total time taken for calculating the mercury concentration on the Android phone (Samsung Galaxy S II) is <7 s. The final test results can be saved on the phone memory with a stamp of time and GPS coordinates of the test and can also be shared with a secure server for spatiotemporal mapping using, for example, a Google Maps-based interface (Figure 3e). With the same Android application, the results can also be reviewed as a function of time per location using a graph-based interface (Figure 3f).

Figure 3

Figure 3. Screen shots of our mercury detection application running on an Android phone. (a) Main menu; (b) calibration menu; (c) preview of a captured or selected colorimetric image before proceeding to analyze/quantify the sample; (d) display of the results; (e) spatiotemporal mapping of mercury contamination using a Google Maps-based interface; (f) tracking of mercury levels as a function of time per location.

Calibration and Specificity Tests

In our cellphone-based mercury detection platform, each normalized G/R ratio computed from a captured RGB image corresponds to a specific mercury concentration value (ppb). The Android application includes a default calibration curve, which was obtained by measuring the normalized G/R ratios of a set of known concentration mercury(II) solutions ranging from 0 to 5 μM (see Figure 4). The values of these normalized G/R ratios increased as the concentration of mercury(II) ions rose above 10 nM and reached saturation at >1000 nM (Figure 4). The signal increase in the 10–1000 nM range is mainly due to the aggregation of Au NPs, which is triggered by the mercury(II) ion concentration. This Au NP aggregation process relatively enhances the extinction at the red wavelength (e.g., 625 nm), while it reduces the extinction at the green wavelength (e.g., 523 nm), which is also confirmed by our UV–vis spectroscopic measurements (see the Supporting Information, Figure S1a). This plasmon-resonance-based wavelength shift occurred rapidly after around 5 min (Supporting Information, Figure S2), demonstrating a quick response time for the NP/aptamer-based colorimetric assay, making it appropriate for use in field settings. As a result of these plasmonic changes due to NP aggregation, the transmission signal of the red channel relatively decreased, whereas the transmission of the green channel increased. Therefore, the final G/R ratio of a sample increased as the mercury(II) ion concentration is increased, which is also illustrated in the calibration curve presented in Figure 4.
To determine the LOD of our smart-phone-based colorimetric assay, we measured the normalized G/R values of a control sample (i.e., [Hg2+] = 0, [Au NPs] = 0.64 nM, [Apt] = 30 nM), which resulted in a signal level of 0.940 ± 0.025 (μblank ± σblank). Our LOD was then determined by the mean of this control sample plus three times its standard deviation (μblank + 3σblank; see the blue dashed line in Figure 4), which corresponds to a mercury(II) ion concentration of approximately 17.3 nM, or ∼3.5 ppb. Quite interestingly, the LOD of our smart-phone-based dual-color ratiometric platform was more than 6 times better than the LOD of the exact same assay measured by a portable UV–vis spectrometer (Ocean Optics, HR2000+), which resulted in 123 nM, or 24.6 ppb, LOD (see the Supporting Information, Figure S1b). More importantly, the LOD of mercury(II) ions using our smart-phone-based field-portable sensor has the same order of magnitude as the EPA’s mercury(II) reference concentration for drinking water (i.e., 2 ppb) (23) and also satisfies the WHO guideline value for mercury(II) concentration (i.e., 6 ppb). (24)

Figure 4

Figure 4. Dose–response curve of the Au NP and aptamer based plasmonic colorimetric assay running on a smart-phone. Each measurement at a given concentration was repeated three times. The curve was fitted by an exponential function with a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.96. An LOD of 3.5 ppb for Hg2+ was obtained based on the G/R ratios of a control sample ([Hg2+] = 0) plus 3 times the standard deviation of the control (blue dashed line).

Next, we performed specificity tests by challenging the same colorimetric plasmonic nanoparticle and aptamer assay with different metal ions, such as Fe3+, Ca2+, Cu2+, and Pb2+, as illustrated in Figure 5. The concentrations of all these metal ion samples were prepared to be 500 nM, and our experiments revealed that, except mercury(II) ions, the other metal ion samples yielded a signal level that is comparable to control samples (Figure 5), verifying the specificity of our assay toward detection of Hg2+. The same specificity performance was also confirmed independently by UV–vis spectroscopic measurements as summarized in the Supporting Information, Figure S1c,d.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Specificity tests of the Au NP and aptamer based plasmonic mercury assay for different metal ions (500 nM). Each measurement was repeated three times.

Mapping of Mercury Concentration in Water Samples in California

The performance of our smart-phone-based mercury sensor was also tested with water samples including city tap water and natural water samples collected at over 50 different locations in California. Figure 6 summarizes our measurement results for 19 of these samples collected from various apartments (tap water), rivers, lakes, and beaches on the California coast. The results suggest that all the city tap water samples have undetectable levels of mercury(II) ions since the signal readings are at the same level as our LOD (Figure 6). However, our measurements for the water samples collected from natural sources reveal higher mercury concentration levels, ranging from 3.7 to 8.6 ppb, as illustrated in Figure 6. The samples that are found to contain mercury(II) ion concentrations above 6 ppb, i.e., the safety level recommended by WHO, (24) are mostly from ocean samples, with the worst being from the San Francisco Bay (Figure 6). Our observation that the mercury content in ocean water samples is higher compared to fresh water is probably because the ocean is at the end of mercury’s global transport pathway in the environment (52) and thus might exhibit higher pollution levels.

Figure 6

Figure 6. Smart-phone-based mercury detection results for 11 tap water samples and eight natural samples collected in California, USA. Each measurement was repeated three times. Note that the measurements are plotted against the G/R ratios, which makes the presented scale of the mercury concentration (ppb) nonlinear, between 0.8 and 9.1 ppb.

As one of its major advantages, our hand-held smart-phone-based mercury detection platform is also able to generate spatiotemporal contamination maps for, for example, environmental monitoring. To do so, GPS coordinates were recorded for each water sample that was tested, and all the other sample-related information such as measurement results and dates was sent to a secure server using the smart-phone application for mapping of the results. Figure 7a–c represent three smart-phone-generated mercury-monitoring maps, where the spatial resolution of the maps is determined by the sampling density. For instance, in Figure 7a, samples were collected and measured at a low density of ∼0.2 measurements/km; in Figure 7b and c, higher resolution was shown by increasing the sampling density to 3.3 and 20 measurements/km, respectively. Figure 7d–f show histogram plots corresponding to the mercury(II) concentrations that are displayed in Figure 7a–c with a better visualization of the variation of mercury(II) levels within a given area. Interestingly, some locations such as points B and C in Figure 7a and d had statistically higher mercury(II) levels than the rest with very small p values (<0.001) determined by standard Student’s t test. Further investigation of this area indicated that the red ROI in Figure 7a included a marina hosting yachts and boats (Figure 7b), which possibly form the major source of heavy metal pollution in that particular region. Mercury(II) ion concentration near the marina also formed a weak gradient (from A to T), as illustrated in Figure 7b and e, with the closest point to the marina having the highest mercury(II) concentration (i.e., point T in Figure 7b and e). Point E in Figure 7e was statistically lower in mercury(II) concentration (p < 0.01) compared to other locations within the same region of interest, and this observation was confirmed by higher resolution mercury(II) mapping in Figure 7c and f. In addition to spatial mapping of contamination, the option of monitoring the level of mercury concentration as a function of time for a specific location is also feasible using our smart-phone-based sensing platform as illustrated in Figure 3f.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Spatiotemporal mapping of mercury contamination in Los Angeles coastal area. (a–c) Geospatial mercury concentration maps with different sampling densities; (b) zoomed-in area of the red ROI in (a); (c) enlarged region of the red ROI in (b). (d–f) Corresponding mercury concentration readings in (a)–(c). All the data points were measured three times. p values were calculated via two-sample Student’s t test by setting target data set as one population and the rest of the data sets as the other. ** represents p < 0.01, and *** represents p < 0.001.

Conclusions

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

In summary, we introduced a sensitive and cost-effective smart-phone-based mercury(II) ion sensor platform, which utilizes a battery-powered opto-mechanical reader attached to the existing camera module of a smart-phone to digitally quantify mercury concentration using a plasmonic Au NP and aptamer based colorimetric assay. We employed a two-color ratiometric detection method using LEDs at 523 and 625 nm and a custom-developed Android application for rapid digital image processing of the captured transmission images on the same phone. The LOD of mercury(II) ions with this mobile device is found to be 3.5 ppb, which is on the same order of magnitude with the maximum allowable level of mercury(II) ions in drinkable water defined by the U.S. EPA (2 ppb) (23) and WHO (6 ppb). (24) Moreover, we generated a geospatial mercury(II) contamination map by measuring more than 50 samples collected in California from various sources including tap, river, lake, and ocean water samples. The cost-effective design, portability, and data connectivity of this sensitive heavy metal detection device integrated onto cellphones could be rather useful for distributed sensing, tracking, and sharing of water contamination information as a function of both space and time, globally.

Methods

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Hardware Design

Our optical imaging system was designed for an Android phone (Samsung Galaxy S II) in Autodesk (Inventor) and printed using a 3D printer (Elite, Dimension). Two LEDs (120 degree illumination angle, SuperBrightLEDs), one green (523 nm, RL5-G16120) and one red (625 nm, RL5-G12120), illuminated the test/sample and control cuvettes simultaneously and were powered by two button cells (3 V, CR1620, Energizer). An optical diffuser (made using three sheets of A4 printer paper) was inserted between the LEDs and the cuvettes for uniform illumination of each cuvette. The transmitted light through the cuvettes was then collected by a plano-convex lens (focal length f = 28 mm, NT65–576, Edmund Optics) and imaged using the smart-phone camera (f = 4 mm). This imaging configuration provides an optical demagnification factor of 28/4 = 7-fold, which permits imaging of both the test and control cuvettes (6.6 × 6.6 mm in cross section) within the field of view of the phone’s CMOS imager chip. To avoid crosstalk of the two-color illumination, a black clapboard was used to separate the light paths of the LEDs before entering the cuvettes, and four rectangular apertures (6.6 × 5 mm) were added both in front of and behind the cuvettes to spatially filter the transmitted light at each color (i.e., red and green). The acquired images were analyzed in digitally separated red and green channels to further reject possible spectral crosstalk between red and green illumination wavelengths.

Gold Nanoparticle and Aptamer Based Colorimetric Assay

Citrate-stabilized Au NPs (50 nm) were purchased from NanoComposix. Aptamer sequence of 5′-TTTTTTTTTT-3′ was obtained from Integrated DNA Technologies. All metal salts such as mercury(II) chloride were obtained from Sigma. Stock Au NP solution in 20 mM Tris-HCl buffer (TH, pH 8.0) was prepared by centrifugation of raw Au NP-citrate solution, aspiration of the supernatant, and redispersion in TH buffer with 20× dilution to give a working concentration of 0.64 nM. Water samples collected from rivers, lakes, and beaches were filtered by a 0.2 μm polyethersulfone membrane (Whatman) to remove sand and other solid particles within the test samples. Tap water samples and calibration solutions containing mercury(II) ions prepared in deionized water were used directly without further purification. In a typical measurement procedure, 4 μL of the sample of interest was mixed with 4 μL of 3 μM aptamer (20 mM TH buffer, pH 8.0), followed by a 5 min reaction period. Next, 400 μL of Au NPs (0.64 nM) in 20 mM TH buffer solution was added and allowed to react for 5 min. Finally, 8 μL of 10 mM NaCl was added and incubated for another 10 min before being analyzed by the smart-phone device.

UV–Vis Spectroscopic Investigation of Water Samples Using a Portable Spectrometer

In our comparison measurements against the smart-phone (see the Supporting Information), a white LED (RL5-W15120, SuperBrightLEDs) was used as the light source, and the transmission signal that passed through a standard 1 cm cuvette was collected by a 600-μm-diameter optical fiber and measured by a portable spectrometer (HR2000+, Ocean Optics). The background spectrum was recorded using deionized water as a blank control sample. Each spectrum was collected with an exposure time of 1 ms and scanned 500 times for averaging in order to improve the signal-to-noise ratio of each UV–vis spectroscopic measurement.

Supporting Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

UV–vis spectroscopic measurement results of the Au NP and aptamer based colorimetric assay (calibration curve, specificity, and dynamics test). This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.

Terms & Conditions

Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.

Author Information

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

  • Corresponding Author
    • Aydogan Ozcan - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Qingshan Wei - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
    • Richie Nagi - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
    • Kayvon Sadeghi - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
    • Steve Feng - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
    • Eddie Yan - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
    • So Jung Ki - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
    • Romain Caire - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
    • Derek Tseng - †Electrical Engineering Department, ‡Bioengineering Department, §California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), ∥Department of Physics & Astronomy, and ⊥Department of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of California, Los Angeles (UCLA), Los Angeles, California 90095, United States
  • Author Contributions

    R. Nagi and K. Sadeghi contributed equally to this project.

  • Notes
    The authors declare the following competing financial interest(s): A. Ozcan is the cofounder of a start-up company that aims to commercialize computational microscopy tools.

Acknowledgment

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

Ozcan Research Group gratefully acknowledges the support of the Presidential Early Career Award for Scientists and Engineers (PECASE), Army Research Office (ARO) Life Sciences Division, ARO Young Investigator Award, National Science Foundation (NSF) CAREER Award, NSF CBET Division Biophotonics Program, NSF Emerging Frontiers in Research and Innovation (EFRI) Award, Office of Naval Research (ONR), and National Institutes of Health (NIH) Director’s New Innovator Award DP2OD006427 from the Office of the Director, National Institutes of Health. We also thank Dr. Hangfei Qi from Prof. Ren Sun’s lab at the Department of Molecular and Medical Pharmacology (UCLA) for providing the aptamer sequence.

References

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!

This article references 52 other publications.

  1. 1
    International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS). Methylmercury; World Health Organization, 1990. http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc101.htm.
  2. 2
    Tsubaki, T. Minamata Disease: Methylmercury Poisoning in Minamata and Niigata, Japan; Elsevier Scientific: Amsterdam, 1977.
  3. 3
    Harada, M. Minamata Disease: Methylmercury Poisoning in Japan Caused by Environmental Pollution Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 1995, 25, 1 24
  4. 4
    TEACH. Organic Mercury, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. http://www.epa.gov/teach/chem_summ/mercury_org_summary.pdf.
  5. 5
    Clarkson, T. W. The Toxicology of Mercury Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. 1997, 34, 369 403
  6. 6
    Wolfe, M. F.; Schwarzbach, S.; Sulaiman, R. A. Effects of Mercury on Wildlife: A Comprehensive Review Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1998, 17, 146 160
  7. 7
    TEACH. Inorganic Mercury, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. http://www.epa.gov/teach/chem_summ/mercury_inorg_summary.pdf.
  8. 8
    Blum, J. D.; Popp, B. N.; Drazen, J. C.; Anela Choy, C.; Johnson, M. W. Methylmercury Production below the Mixed Layer in the North Pacific Ocean Nat. Geosci. 2013, 6, 879 884
  9. 9
    Stacchiotti, A.; Morandini, F.; Bettoni, F.; Schena, I.; Lavazza, A.; Grigolato, P. G.; Apostoli, P.; Rezzani, R.; Aleo, M. F. Stress Proteins and Oxidative Damage in a Renal Derived Cell Line Exposed to Inorganic Mercury and Lead Toxicology 2009, 264, 215 224
  10. 10
    Harnly, M.; Seidel, S.; Rojas, P.; Fornes, R.; Flessel, P.; Smith, D.; Kreutzer, R.; Goldman, L. Biological Monitoring for Mercury within a Community with Soil and Fish Contamination Environ. Health Perspect. 1997, 105, 424 429
  11. 11
    Legrand, M.; Sousa Passos, C. J.; Mergler, D.; Chan, H. M. Biomonitoring of Mercury Exposure with Single Human Hair Strand Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, 4594 4598
  12. 12
    Hightower, J. M.; Moore, D. Mercury Levels in High-End Consumers of Fish Environ. Health Perspect. 2003, 111, 604 608
  13. 13
    McDowell, M. A.; Dillon, C. F.; Osterloh, J.; Bolger, P. M.; Pellizzari, E.; Fernando, R.; de Oca, R. M.; Schober, S. E.; Sinks, T.; Jones, R. L.et al. Hair Mercury Levels in U.S. Children and Women of Childbearing Age: Reference Range Data from NHANES 1999–2000 Environ. Health Perspect. 2004, 112, 1165 1171
  14. 14
    Lee, J.-S.; Mirkin, C. A. Chip-Based Scanometric Detection of Mercuric Ion Using DNA-Functionalized Gold Nanoparticles Anal. Chem. 2008, 80, 6805 6808
  15. 15
    Cho, E. S.; Kim, J.; Tejerina, B.; Hermans, T. M.; Jiang, H.; Nakanishi, H.; Yu, M.; Patashinski, A. Z.; Glotzer, S. C.; Stellacci, F.et al. Ultrasensitive Detection of Toxic Cations through Changes in the Tunnelling Current across Films of Striped Nanoparticles Nat. Mater. 2012, 11, 978 985
  16. 16
    Gartia, M. R.; Braunschweig, B.; Chang, T.-W.; Moinzadeh, P.; Minsker, B. S.; Agha, G.; Wieckowski, A.; Keefer, L. L.; Liu, G. L. The Microelectronic Wireless Nitrate Sensor Network for Environmental Water Monitoring J. Environ. Monit. 2012, 14, 3068 3075
  17. 17
    Lafleur, J. P.; Senkbeil, S.; Jensen, T. G.; Kutter, J. P. Gold Nanoparticle-Based Optical Microfluidic Sensors for Analysis of Environmental Pollutants Lab Chip 2012, 12, 4651 4656
  18. 18
    Chung, E.; Gao, R.; Ko, J.; Choi, N.; Lim, D. W.; Lee, E. K.; Chang, S.-I.; Choo, J. Trace Analysis of Mercury(II) Ions Using Aptamer-Modified Au/Ag Core-Shell Nanoparticles and SERS Spectroscopy in a Microdroplet Channel Lab Chip 2013, 13, 260 266
  19. 19
    Lin, Y.-W.; Huang, C.-C.; Chang, H.-T. Gold Nanoparticle Probes for the Detection of Mercury, Lead and Copper Ions Analyst 2011, 136, 863 871
  20. 20
    Liu, D.; Wang, Z.; Jiang, X. Gold Nanoparticles for the Colorimetric and Fluorescent Detection of Ions and Small Organic Molecules Nanoscale 2011, 3, 1421 1433
  21. 21
    Du, J.; Jiang, L.; Shao, Q.; Liu, X.; Marks, R. S.; Ma, J.; Chen, X. Colorimetric Detection of Mercury Ions Based on Plasmonic Nanoparticles Small 2013, 9, 1467 1481
  22. 22
    El Kaoutit, H.; Estévez, P.; García, F. C.; Serna, F.; García, J. M. Sub-ppm Quantification of Hg(II) in Aqueous Media Using Both the Naked Eye and Digital Information from Pictures of a Colorimetric Sensory Polymer Membrane Taken with the Digital Camera of a Conventional Mobile Phone Anal. Methods 2013, 5, 54 58
  23. 23
    U.S. EPA. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. US EPA, 2009. http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm#List.
  24. 24
    World Health Organization. Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, 4th ed.; World Health Organization: Geneva, 2011. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789241548151_eng.pdf.
  25. 25
    Vashist, S.; Mudanyali, O.; Schneider, E. M.; Zengerle, R.; Ozcan, A. Cellphone-Based Devices for Bioanalytical Sciences Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2013,  DOI: 10.1007/s00216-013-7473-1
  26. 26
    Coskun, A. F.; Ozcan, A. Computational Imaging, Sensing and Diagnostics for Global Health Applications Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2013, 25, 8 16
  27. 27
    Tseng, D.; Mudanyali, O.; Oztoprak, C.; Isikman, S. O.; Sencan, I.; Yaglidere, O.; Ozcan, A. Lensfree Microscopy on a Cellphone Lab Chip 2010, 10, 1787 1792
  28. 28
    Zhu, H.; Mavandadi, S.; Coskun, A. F.; Yaglidere, O.; Ozcan, A. Optofluidic Fluorescent Imaging Cytometry on a Cell Phone Anal. Chem. 2011, 83, 6641 6647
  29. 29
    Zhu, H.; Yaglidere, O.; Su, T.-W.; Tseng, D.; Ozcan, A. Cost-Effective and Compact Wide-Field Fluorescent Imaging on a Cell-Phone Lab Chip 2011, 11, 315 322
  30. 30
    Preechaburana, P.; Gonzalez, M. C.; Suska, A.; Filippini, D. Surface Plasmon Resonance Chemical Sensing on Cell Phones Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2012, 51, 11585 11588
  31. 31
    Shen, L.; Hagen, J. A.; Papautsky, I. Point-of-Care Colorimetric Detection with a Smartphone Lab Chip 2012, 12, 4240 4243
  32. 32
    Mudanyali, O.; Dimitrov, S.; Sikora, U.; Padmanabhan, S.; Navruz, I.; Ozcan, A. Integrated Rapid-Diagnostic-Test Reader Platform on a Cellphone Lab Chip 2012, 12, 2678 2686
  33. 33
    Zhu, H.; Sikora, U.; Ozcan, A. Quantum Dot Enabled Detection of Escherichia coli Using a Cell-Phone Analyst 2012, 137, 2541 2544
  34. 34
    Gallegos, D.; Long, K. D.; Yu, H.; Clark, P. P.; Lin, Y.; George, S.; Nath, P.; Cunningham, B. T. Label-Free Biodetection Using a Smartphone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 2124 2132
  35. 35
    O’Driscoll, S.; MacCraith, B. D.; Burke, C. S. A Novel Camera Phone-Based Platform for Quantitative Fluorescence Sensing Anal. Methods 2013, 5, 1904 1908
  36. 36
    Oncescu, V.; O’Dell, D.; Erickson, D. Smartphone Based Health Accessory for Colorimetric Detection of Biomarkers in Sweat and Saliva Lab Chip 2013, 13, 3232 3238
  37. 37
    Lillehoj, P. B.; Huang, M.-C.; Truong, N.; Ho, C.-M. Rapid Electrochemical Detection on a Mobile Phone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 2950 2955
  38. 38
    Zhu, H.; Sencan, I.; Wong, J.; Dimitrov, S.; Tseng, D.; Nagashima, K.; Ozcan, A. Cost-Effective and Rapid Blood Analysis on a Cell-Phone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 1282 1288
  39. 39
    Coskun, A. F.; Nagi, R.; Sadeghi, K.; Phillips, S.; Ozcan, A. Albumin Testing in Urine Using a Smart-Phone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 4231 4238
  40. 40
    Coskun, A. F.; Wong, J.; Khodadadi, D.; Nagi, R.; Tey, A.; Ozcan, A. A Personalized Food Allergen Testing Platform on a Cellphone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 636 640
  41. 41
    Navruz, I.; Coskun, A. F.; Wong, J.; Mohammad, S.; Tseng, D.; Nagi, R.; Phillips, S.; Ozcan, A. Smart-Phone Based Computational Microscopy Using Multi-Frame Contact Imaging on a Fiber-Optic Array Lab Chip 2013, 13, 4015 4023
  42. 42
    Wei, Q.; Qi, H.; Luo, W.; Tseng, D.; Ki, S. J.; Wan, Z.; Göröcs, Z.; Bentolila, L. A.; Wu, T.-T.; Sun, R.et al. Fluorescent Imaging of Single Nanoparticles and Viruses on a Smart Phone ACS Nano 2013, 7, 9147 9155
  43. 43
    Portio Research Limited. Portio Research Mobile Factbook 2013. http://www.portioresearch.com/media/3986/Portio%20Research%20Mobile%20Factbook%202013.pdf.
  44. 44
    Kim, Y.; Johnson, R. C.; Hupp, J. T. Gold Nanoparticle-Based Sensing of “Spectroscopically Silent” Heavy Metal Ions Nano Lett. 2001, 1, 165 167
  45. 45
    Lee, J.-S.; Han, M. S.; Mirkin, C. A. Colorimetric Detection of Mercuric Ion (Hg2+) in Aqueous Media Using DNA-Functionalized Gold Nanoparticles Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 4093 4096
  46. 46
    Huang, C.-C.; Chang, H.-T. Parameters for Selective Colorimetric Sensing of Mercury(II) in Aqueous Solutions Using Mercaptopropionic Acid-Modified Gold Nanoparticles Chem. Commun. 2007, 1215 1217
  47. 47
    Darbha, G. K.; Singh, A. K.; Rai, U. S.; Yu, E.; Yu, H.; Chandra Ray, P. Selective Detection of Mercury(II) Ion Using Nonlinear Optical Properties of Gold Nanoparticles J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 8038 8043
  48. 48
    Liu, D.; Wang, S.; Swierczewska, M.; Huang, X.; Bhirde, A. A.; Sun, J.; Wang, Z.; Yang, M.; Jiang, X.; Chen, X. Highly Robust, Recyclable Displacement Assay for Mercuric Ions in Aqueous Solutions and Living Cells ACS Nano 2012, 6, 10999 11008
  49. 49
    Li, L.; Li, B.; Qi, Y.; Jin, Y. Label-Free Aptamer-Based Colorimetric Detection of Mercury Ions in Aqueous Media Using Unmodified Gold Nanoparticles as Colorimetric Probe Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2009, 393, 2051 2057
  50. 50
    Miyake, Y.; Togashi, H.; Tashiro, M.; Yamaguchi, H.; Oda, S.; Kudo, M.; Tanaka, Y.; Kondo, Y.; Sawa, R.; Fujimoto, T.et al. MercuryII-Mediated Formation of Thymine-HgII-Thymine Base Pairs in DNA Duplexes J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 2172 2173
  51. 51
    Tanaka, Y.; Oda, S.; Yamaguchi, H.; Kondo, Y.; Kojima, C.; Ono, A. 15n-15n J-Coupling across HgII: Direct Observation of HgII-Mediated T-T Base Pairs in a DNA Duplex J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 129, 244 245
  52. 52
    Boening, D. W. Ecological Effects, Transport, and Fate of Mercury: A General Review Chemosphere 2000, 40, 1335 1351

Cited By

Click to copy section linkSection link copied!
Citation Statements
Explore this article's citation statements on scite.ai

This article is cited by 359 publications.

  1. Mohamed Ateia, Haoran Wei, Silvana Andreescu. Sensors for Emerging Water Contaminants: Overcoming Roadblocks to Innovation. Environmental Science & Technology 2024, 58 (6) , 2636-2651. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.3c09889
  2. Hui Hun Cho, Do Hyeon Jung, Jun Hyuk Heo, Chae Yeon Lee, Sang Yun Jeong, Jung Heon Lee. Gold Nanoparticles as Exquisite Colorimetric Transducers for Water Pollutant Detection. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2023, 15 (16) , 19785-19806. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.3c00627
  3. Cheng Zhang, Mengna Liang, Congying Shao, Ziwei Li, Xue Cao, Yongxiang Wang, Yanan Wu, Shun Lu. Visual Detection and Sensing of Mercury Ions and Glutathione Using Fluorescent Copper Nanoclusters. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2023, 6 (3) , 1283-1293. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.3c00031
  4. Ting Liu, He Ding, Jianwei Huang, Chengsen Zhan, Shouyu Wang. Liquid-Core Hydrogel Optical Fiber Fluorescence Probes. ACS Sensors 2022, 7 (11) , 3298-3307. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.2c00821
  5. E. Christian Wells, Abby M. Vidmar, W. Alex Webb, Alesia C. Ferguson, Matthew E. Verbyla, Francis L. de los Reyes, III, Qiong Zhang, James R. Mihelcic. Meeting the Water and Sanitation Challenges of Underbounded Communities in the U.S.. Environmental Science & Technology 2022, 56 (16) , 11180-11188. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.est.2c03076
  6. Kamaljit Kaur, Bandana Kumari Sahu, Kanchan Swami, Mahima Chandel, Anshika Gupta, Li-Hua Zhu, Jeffrey P. Youngblood, Selvaraju Kanagarajan, Vijayakumar Shanmugam. Phone Camera Nano-Biosensor Using Mighty Sensitive Transparent Reusable Upconversion Paper. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2022, 14 (23) , 27507-27514. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.2c06894
  7. Mengmeng Yan, Huidong Li, Min Li, Xiaolin Cao, Yongxin She, Zilei Chen. Advances in Surface-Enhanced Raman Scattering-Based Aptasensors for Food Safety Detection. Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 2021, 69 (47) , 14049-14064. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.1c05274
  8. Shu-Mei Fan, Chang-Yue Chiang, Yen-Ta Tseng, Tsung-Yan Wu, Yen-Ling Chen, Chun-Jen Huang, Lai-Kwan Chau. Detection of Hg(II) at Part-Per-Quadrillion Levels by Fiber Optic Plasmonic Absorption Using DNA Hairpin and DNA-Gold Nanoparticle Conjugates. ACS Applied Nano Materials 2021, 4 (10) , 10128-10135. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsanm.1c01566
  9. Brigitta R. Sun, Alvin G. Zhou, Xiaochun Li, Hua-Zhong Yu. Development and Application of Mobile Apps for Molecular Sensing: A Review. ACS Sensors 2021, 6 (5) , 1731-1744. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.1c00512
  10. Kuiyu Wang, Zhenhao Wang, Hui Zeng, Xiliang Luo, Tao Yang. Advances in Portable Visual Detection of Pathogenic Bacteria. ACS Applied Bio Materials 2020, 3 (11) , 7291-7305. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsabm.0c00984
  11. Huiyun Jiang, Bing Sun, Yan Jin, Junjie Feng, Hongwei Zhu, Lin Wang, Shucai Zhang, Zhe Yang. A Disposable Multiplexed Chip for the Simultaneous Quantification of Key Parameters in Water Quality Monitoring. ACS Sensors 2020, 5 (10) , 3013-3018. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.0c00775
  12. Ning Ma, Xiang Ren, Huan Wang, Xuan Kuang, Dawei Fan, Dan Wu, Qin Wei. Ultrasensitive Controlled Release Aptasensor Using Thymine–Hg2+–Thymine Mismatch as a Molecular Switch for Hg2+ Detection. Analytical Chemistry 2020, 92 (20) , 14069-14075. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c03110
  13. Jianzheng Yang, Yue Zhang, Jianrong Guo, Yumeng Fang, Zili Pang, Junhui He. Nearly Monodisperse Copper Selenide Nanoparticles for Recognition, Enrichment, and Sensing of Mercury Ions. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12 (35) , 39118-39126. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c09865
  14. Susana Díaz-Amaya, Min Zhao, Jan P. Allebach, George T.-C. Chiu, Lia A. Stanciu. Ionic Strength Influences on Biofunctional Au-Decorated Microparticles for Enhanced Performance in Multiplexed Colorimetric Sensors. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12 (29) , 32397-32409. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c07636
  15. Joost L. D. Nelis, Yunfeng Zhao, Laszlo Bura, Karen Rafferty, Christopher T. Elliott, Katrina Campbell. A Randomized Combined Channel Approach for the Quantification of Color- and Intensity-Based Assays with Smartphones. Analytical Chemistry 2020, 92 (11) , 7852-7860. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.0c01099
  16. Meng Xiao, Zhonggang Liu, Ningxia Xu, Lelun Jiang, Mengsu Yang, Changqing Yi. A Smartphone-Based Sensing System for On-Site Quantitation of Multiple Heavy Metal Ions Using Fluorescent Carbon Nanodots-Based Microarrays. ACS Sensors 2020, 5 (3) , 870-878. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.0c00219
  17. Yumeng Fang, Yue Zhang, Leigang Cao, Jianzheng Yang, Minghua Hu, Zili Pang, Junhui He. Portable Hg2+ Nanosensor with ppt Level Sensitivity Using Nanozyme as the Recognition Unit, Enrichment Carrier, and Signal Amplifier. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2020, 12 (10) , 11761-11768. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.0c00210
  18. Arunkumar Kathiravan, Annasamy Gowri, Themmila Khamrang, Madhu Deepan Kumar, Namasivayam Dhenadhayalan, King-Chuen Lin, Marappan Velusamy, Madhavan Jaccob. Pyrene-Based Chemosensor for Picric Acid—Fundamentals to Smartphone Device Design. Analytical Chemistry 2019, 91 (20) , 13244-13250. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.9b03695
  19. Zheng Li, Shengwei Zhang, Tao Yu, Zhiming Dai, Qingshan Wei. Aptamer-Based Fluorescent Sensor Array for Multiplexed Detection of Cyanotoxins on a Smartphone. Analytical Chemistry 2019, 91 (16) , 10448-10457. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.9b00750
  20. Ali Khademhosseini, (Associate Editor), Andre E. Nel, (Associate Editor), Holly Bunje, (ACS Nano Communications), Christopher J. DeSantis, (Managing Editor), Anne M. Andrews, (Professor and ACS Chemical Neuroscience Associate Editor), Rita A. Blaik, (CNSI Manager of Education), Zhen Gu, (Professor), Huan Meng, (Assistant Professor), Aydogan Ozcan, (Chancellor’s Professor and Editorial Advisory Board), Sarah H. Tolbert, (Professor), Tian Xia, (Associate Professor), Jeffrey I. Zink, (Distinguished Professor), Paul S. Weiss (Editor-in-Chief). Nanoscience and Nanotechnology at UCLA. ACS Nano 2019, 13 (6) , 6127-6129. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.9b04680
  21. Jérôme F. L. Duval, Christophe Pagnout. Decoding the Time-Dependent Response of Bioluminescent Metal-Detecting Whole-Cell Bacterial Sensors. ACS Sensors 2019, 4 (5) , 1373-1383. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.9b00349
  22. Lunjie Huang, Qingrui Zhu, Jie Zhu, Linpin Luo, Shuhan Pu, Wentao Zhang, Wenxin Zhu, Jing Sun, Jianlong Wang. Portable Colorimetric Detection of Mercury(II) Based on a Non-Noble Metal Nanozyme with Tunable Activity. Inorganic Chemistry 2019, 58 (2) , 1638-1646. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.inorgchem.8b03193
  23. Alexey S. Galushko, Evgeniy G. Gordeev, Valentine P. Ananikov. High-Performance Synthesis of Phosphorus-Doped Graphene Materials and Stabilization of Phosphoric Micro- and Nanodroplets. Langmuir 2018, 34 (51) , 15739-15748. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.8b03417
  24. Dionysios C. Christodouleas, Balwinder Kaur, Parthena Chorti. From Point-of-Care Testing to eHealth Diagnostic Devices (eDiagnostics). ACS Central Science 2018, 4 (12) , 1600-1616. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscentsci.8b00625
  25. Krishna K. Swain, Sunil Bhand. A Dual-Readout Magnetic Nanoparticle-Based Enzyme Assay for the Sensitive Detection of Hg(II) Ions in Drinking Water. ACS Earth and Space Chemistry 2018, 2 (12) , 1312-1322. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsearthspacechem.8b00142
  26. G. IJ. Salentijn, M. Grajewski, E. Verpoorte. Reinventing (Bio)chemical Analysis with Paper. Analytical Chemistry 2018, 90 (23) , 13815-13825. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.8b04825
  27. Hoang Nguyen, Yulung Sung, Kelly O’Shaughnessy, Xiaonan Shan, Wei-Chuan Shih. Smartphone Nanocolorimetry for On-Demand Lead Detection and Quantitation in Drinking Water. Analytical Chemistry 2018, 90 (19) , 11517-11522. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.8b02808
  28. Kai Sun, Yingkun Yang, Hua Zhou, Shengyan Yin, Weiping Qin, Jiangbo Yu, Daniel T. Chiu, Zhen Yuan, Xuanjun Zhang, Changfeng Wu. Ultrabright Polymer-Dot Transducer Enabled Wireless Glucose Monitoring via a Smartphone. ACS Nano 2018, 12 (6) , 5176-5184. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.8b02188
  29. Karteek Kadimisetty, Spundana Malla, Ketki S. Bhalerao, Islam M. Mosa, Snehasis Bhakta, Norman H. Lee, James F. Rusling. Automated 3D-Printed Microfluidic Array for Rapid Nanomaterial-Enhanced Detection of Multiple Proteins. Analytical Chemistry 2018, 90 (12) , 7569-7577. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.8b01198
  30. Nan Cheng, Yang Song, Mohamed M. A. Zeinhom, Yu-Chung Chang, Lina Sheng, Haolin Li, Dan Du, Lei Li, Mei-Jun Zhu, Yunbo Luo, Wentao Xu, and Yuehe Lin . Nanozyme-Mediated Dual Immunoassay Integrated with Smartphone for Use in Simultaneous Detection of Pathogens. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2017, 9 (46) , 40671-40680. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsami.7b12734
  31. Xiaochun Li, Fan Yang, Jessica X. H. Wong, and Hua-Zhong Yu . Integrated Smartphone-App-Chip System for On-Site Parts-Per-Billion-Level Colorimetric Quantitation of Aflatoxins. Analytical Chemistry 2017, 89 (17) , 8908-8916. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.7b01379
  32. Karteek Kadimisetty, Spundana Malla, and James F. Rusling . Automated 3-D Printed Arrays to Evaluate Genotoxic Chemistry: E-Cigarettes and Water Samples. ACS Sensors 2017, 2 (5) , 670-678. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.7b00118
  33. Zachary S. Ballard, Daniel Shir, Aashish Bhardwaj, Sarah Bazargan, Shyama Sathianathan, and Aydogan Ozcan . Computational Sensing Using Low-Cost and Mobile Plasmonic Readers Designed by Machine Learning. ACS Nano 2017, 11 (2) , 2266-2274. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.7b00105
  34. Wei Wen, Xu Yan, Chengzhou Zhu, Dan Du, and Yuehe Lin . Recent Advances in Electrochemical Immunosensors. Analytical Chemistry 2017, 89 (1) , 138-156. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b04281
  35. Samiksha Nayak, Nicole R. Blumenfeld, Tassaneewan Laksanasopin, and Samuel K. Sia . Point-of-Care Diagnostics: Recent Developments in a Connected Age. Analytical Chemistry 2017, 89 (1) , 102-123. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b04630
  36. Qingqing Miao and Kanyi Pu . Emerging Designs of Activatable Photoacoustic Probes for Molecular Imaging. Bioconjugate Chemistry 2016, 27 (12) , 2808-2823. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.6b00641
  37. Hong Du, Ruiyi Chen, Jianjun Du, Jiangli Fan, and Xiaojun Peng . Gold Nanoparticle-Based Colorimetric Recognition of Creatinine with Good Selectivity and Sensitivity. Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research 2016, 55 (48) , 12334-12340. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.6b03433
  38. Li-Ju Wang, Rongrong Sun, Tina Vasile, Yu-Chung Chang, and Lei Li . High-Throughput Optical Sensing Immunoassays on Smartphone. Analytical Chemistry 2016, 88 (16) , 8302-8308. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b02211
  39. Yuanyuan Yang, Ahmad A. Ibrahim, Parastoo Hashemi, and Jennifer L. Stockdill . Real-Time, Selective Detection of Copper(II) Using Ionophore-Grafted Carbon-Fiber Microelectrodes. Analytical Chemistry 2016, 88 (14) , 6962-6966. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.6b00825
  40. Ho Nam Chan, Yiwei Shu, Bin Xiong, Yangfan Chen, Yin Chen, Qian Tian, Sean A. Michael, Bo Shen, and Hongkai Wu . Simple, Cost-Effective 3D Printed Microfluidic Components for Disposable, Point-of-Care Colorimetric Analysis. ACS Sensors 2016, 1 (3) , 227-234. https://doi.org/10.1021/acssensors.5b00100
  41. Xiaojun Liu, Zhangjian Wu, Qingquan Zhang, Wenfeng Zhao, Chenghua Zong, and Hongwei Gai . Single Gold Nanoparticle-Based Colorimetric Detection of Picomolar Mercury Ion with Dark-Field Microscopy. Analytical Chemistry 2016, 88 (4) , 2119-2124. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b03653
  42. Mustafa Salih Hizir, Meryem Top, Mustafa Balcioglu, Muhit Rana, Neil M. Robertson, Fusheng Shen, Jia Sheng, and Mehmet V. Yigit . Multiplexed Activity of perAuxidase: DNA-Capped AuNPs Act as Adjustable Peroxidase. Analytical Chemistry 2016, 88 (1) , 600-605. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b03926
  43. Dionysios C. Christodouleas, Alex Nemiroski, Ashok A. Kumar, and George M. Whitesides . Broadly Available Imaging Devices Enable High-Quality Low-Cost Photometry. Analytical Chemistry 2015, 87 (18) , 9170-9178. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b01612
  44. Neil M. Robertson, Mustafa Salih Hizir, Mustafa Balcioglu, Rui Wang, Mustafa Selman Yavuz, Hasan Yumak, Birol Ozturk, Jia Sheng, and Mehmet V. Yigit . Discriminating a Single Nucleotide Difference for Enhanced miRNA Detection Using Tunable Graphene and Oligonucleotide Nanodevices. Langmuir 2015, 31 (36) , 9943-9952. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.5b02026
  45. Brandon Berg, Bingen Cortazar, Derek Tseng, Haydar Ozkan, Steve Feng, Qingshan Wei, Raymond Yan-Lok Chan, Jordi Burbano, Qamar Farooqui, Michael Lewinski, Dino Di Carlo, Omai B. Garner, and Aydogan Ozcan . Cellphone-Based Hand-Held Microplate Reader for Point-of-Care Testing of Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assays. ACS Nano 2015, 9 (8) , 7857-7866. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsnano.5b03203
  46. Jon R. Askim and Kenneth S. Suslick . Hand-Held Reader for Colorimetric Sensor Arrays. Analytical Chemistry 2015, 87 (15) , 7810-7816. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b01499
  47. Aidan Wade, Pierre Lovera, Deirdre O’Carroll, Hugh Doyle, and Gareth Redmond . Luminescent Optical Detection of Volatile Electron Deficient Compounds by Conjugated Polymer Nanofibers. Analytical Chemistry 2015, 87 (8) , 4421-4428. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.5b00309
  48. Neil M. Robertson, Mustafa Salih Hizir, Mustafa Balcioglu, Muhit Rana, Hasan Yumak, Ozgur Ecevit, and Mehmet V. Yigit . Monitoring the Multitask Mechanism of DNase I Activity Using Graphene Nanoassemblies. Bioconjugate Chemistry 2015, 26 (4) , 735-745. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.bioconjchem.5b00067
  49. Xiao Xu, Tian Li, Zhongxing Xu, Hejia Wei, Ruoyun Lin, Bin Xia, Feng Liu, and Na Li . Automatic Enumeration of Gold Nanomaterials at the Single-Particle Level. Analytical Chemistry 2015, 87 (5) , 2576-2581. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac503756f
  50. Mustafa Balcioglu, Burak Zafer Buyukbekar, Mustafa Selman Yavuz, and Mehmet V. Yigit . Smart-Polymer-Functionalized Graphene Nanodevices for Thermo-Switch-Controlled Biodetection. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2015, 1 (1) , 27-36. https://doi.org/10.1021/ab500029h
  51. David M. Cate, Jaclyn A. Adkins, Jaruwan Mettakoonpitak, and Charles S. Henry . Recent Developments in Paper-Based Microfluidic Devices. Analytical Chemistry 2015, 87 (1) , 19-41. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac503968p
  52. Qingshan Wei, Wei Luo, Samuel Chiang, Tara Kappel, Crystal Mejia, Derek Tseng, Raymond Yan Lok Chan, Eddie Yan, Hangfei Qi, Faizan Shabbir, Haydar Ozkan, Steve Feng, and Aydogan Ozcan . Imaging and Sizing of Single DNA Molecules on a Mobile Phone. ACS Nano 2014, 8 (12) , 12725-12733. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn505821y
  53. Tushar Kumeria, Abel Santos, Mohammad Mahbubur Rahman, Josep Ferré-Borrull, Lluís F. Marsal, and Dusan Losic . Advanced Structural Engineering of Nanoporous Photonic Structures: Tailoring Nanopore Architecture to Enhance Sensing Properties. ACS Photonics 2014, 1 (12) , 1298-1306. https://doi.org/10.1021/ph500316u
  54. Hanna Sopha, Jérome Roche, Ivan Švancara, and Alexander Kuhn . Wireless Electrosampling of Heavy Metals for Stripping Analysis with Bismuth-Based Janus Particles. Analytical Chemistry 2014, 86 (21) , 10515-10519. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac5033897
  55. M. Omair Noor and Ulrich J. Krull . Camera-Based Ratiometric Fluorescence Transduction of Nucleic Acid Hybridization with Reagentless Signal Amplification on a Paper-Based Platform Using Immobilized Quantum Dots as Donors. Analytical Chemistry 2014, 86 (20) , 10331-10339. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac502677n
  56. Mustafa Salih Hizir, Mustafa Balcioglu, Muhit Rana, Neil M. Robertson, and Mehmet V. Yigit . Simultaneous Detection of Circulating OncomiRs from Body Fluids for Prostate Cancer Staging Using Nanographene Oxide. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2014, 6 (17) , 14772-14778. https://doi.org/10.1021/am504190a
  57. Mustafa Balcioglu, Muhit Rana, Neil Robertson, and Mehmet V. Yigit . DNA-Length-Dependent Quenching of Fluorescently Labeled Iron Oxide Nanoparticles with Gold, Graphene Oxide and MoS2 Nanostructures. ACS Applied Materials & Interfaces 2014, 6 (15) , 12100-12110. https://doi.org/10.1021/am503553h
  58. Xiaodong Cheng, Dinggui Dai, Zhiqin Yuan, Lan Peng, Yan He, and Edward S. Yeung . Color Difference Amplification between Gold Nanoparticles in Colorimetric Analysis with Actively Controlled Multiband Illumination. Analytical Chemistry 2014, 86 (15) , 7584-7592. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac501448w
  59. Steve Feng, Romain Caire, Bingen Cortazar, Mehmet Turan, Andrew Wong, and Aydogan Ozcan . Immunochromatographic Diagnostic Test Analysis Using Google Glass. ACS Nano 2014, 8 (3) , 3069-3079. https://doi.org/10.1021/nn500614k
  60. Li Sheng, Xingli Ding, Yulin Tang, Xu Cheng, Ge Zhang, Yuqiao Zhang, Min Ji, Jianming Zhang, Long Zhang. From laboratory to outdoor: Construction of an integrated Fe3+ smart sensing platform and its agricultural applications. Chemical Engineering Science 2025, 312 , 121650. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ces.2025.121650
  61. Anshu Kumar, Kumari Seema, Ambika Kumar. Sensors and Biosensors for Emerging Contaminants in Industrial Wastewater. 2025, 11-41. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-82579-8_2
  62. Sandeep K. Vashist, John H.T. Luong. Lab-on-a-chip immunoassays. 2025, 401-417. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-95509-6.00011-2
  63. Sandeep K. Vashist, John H.T. Luong. Smartphone-based immunoassays. 2025, 419-440. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-95509-6.00017-3
  64. Abhishek Tiwari, Nishtha Khansili. Recent trends in the nanomaterial based chemo dosimeter for colorimetric detection of mercury. Environmental Nanotechnology, Monitoring & Management 2024, 22 , 100978. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.enmm.2024.100978
  65. Joana Galhano, Atanas Kurutos, Georgi M. Dobrikov, Maria Paula Duarte, Hugo M. Santos, Jose Luis Capelo-Martínez, Carlos Lodeiro, Elisabete Oliveira. Fluorescent polymers for environmental monitoring: Targeting pathogens and metal contaminants with naphthalimide derivatives. Journal of Hazardous Materials 2024, 480 , 136107. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jhazmat.2024.136107
  66. Rajeshwari Pal, Riyanka Das, Adwitiya Pal, Bishwajit Singh Kapoor, Krishnendu Kundu, Arunabha Thakur, Sudit Sekhar Mukhopadhyay, Priyabrata Banerjee. Real time monitoring of heavy metal adulteration in biodiesel using Arduino UNO platform@A promising multi-purpose stimuli-responsive azomethine based chemoreceptor for hierarchical tri-ionic sensing. Microchemical Journal 2024, 207 , 111739. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2024.111739
  67. Mark Ferris, Gary Zabow. Quantitative, high-sensitivity measurement of liquid analytes using a smartphone compass. Nature Communications 2024, 15 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-024-47073-2
  68. Vittorio Bianco, Lisa Miccio, Daniele Pirone, Elena Cavalletti, Jaromir Behal, Pasquale Memmolo, Angela Sardo, Pietro Ferraro. Multi-scale fractal Fourier Ptychographic microscopy to assess the dose-dependent impact of copper pollution on living diatoms. Scientific Reports 2024, 14 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52184-3
  69. Shaghayegh Mirhosseini, Aryanaz Faghih Nasiri, Fatemeh Khatami, Akram Mirzaei, Seyed Mohammad Kazem Aghamir, Mohammadreza Kolahdouz. A digital image colorimetry system based on smart devices for immediate and simultaneous determination of enzyme-linked immunosorbent assays. Scientific Reports 2024, 14 (1) https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-024-52931-6
  70. Ramanjaneyulu Mala, Dhakshinamurthy Divya, Manivannan Nandhagopal, Sathiah Thennarasu. Restricted Intramolecular Rotation: A Dual Fluorescence Response to Hg2+ Quenching and Ag+ Enhancement in Live Rhizoctonia Solani Cells. Journal of Fluorescence 2024, 152 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10895-024-03976-3
  71. Tanmay Vyas, Abhijeet Joshi. Carbon Quantum Dots (CQDs)-Diphenyl Carbazone (DPCO) loaded thin film sensors for fluorescent and colorimetric dual mode detection of mercury in various water resources. Optical Materials 2024, 154 , 115700. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.optmat.2024.115700
  72. Renato Soares de Oliveira Lins, Anandhakumar Sukeri, Mauro Bertotti. A home-made nanoporous gold microsensor for lead( ii ) detection in seawater with high sensitivity and anti-interference properties. Analytical Methods 2024, 16 (26) , 4415-4420. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4AY00698D
  73. Serra Lale Çiçek Özkul, İbrahim Kaba, Fatos Ayca Ozdemir Olgun. Unravelling the potential of magnetic nanoparticles: a comprehensive review of design and applications in analytical chemistry. Analytical Methods 2024, 16 (23) , 3620-3640. https://doi.org/10.1039/D4AY00206G
  74. R. Ridhi, G.S.S. Saini, S.K. Tripathi. Nanotechnology as a sustainable solution for proliferating agriculture sector. Materials Science and Engineering: B 2024, 304 , 117383. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mseb.2024.117383
  75. Jing Sun, Wenwen Fang, Afroza Akter Liza, Rui Gao, Junlong Song, Jiaqi Guo, Orlando J. Rojas. Photoluminescent Nanocellulosic Film for Selective Hg2+ Ion Detection. Polymers 2024, 16 (11) , 1583. https://doi.org/10.3390/polym16111583
  76. Athraa A. Abass, Akram S. Alyessary. Discoloration of stretched colored elastomeric modules. Journal of Orofacial Orthopedics / Fortschritte der Kieferorthopädie 2024, 85 (S1) , 1-6. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00056-022-00444-0
  77. Monisha Elumalai, Andrey Ipatov, Joana Guerreiro, Marta Prado. Automated lab-on-chip for the specific detection of invasive species through environmental DNA. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2024, 398 , 134722. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2023.134722
  78. Cormac D. Fay, Liang Wu. Critical importance of RGB color space specificity for colorimetric bio/chemical sensing: A comprehensive study. Talanta 2024, 266 , 124957. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2023.124957
  79. Changbao Gong, Denghao Wang, Huimin Zhao. Biomimetic Metal‐Pyrimidine Nanoflowers: Enzyme Immobilization Platforms with Boosted Activity. Small 2023, 19 (49) https://doi.org/10.1002/smll.202304077
  80. Anju Pavoor Veedu, Satheesh Kuppusamy, Akhila Maheswari Mohan, Prabhakaran Deivasigamani. Chromogenic probe adhered porous polymer monolith as real-time solid-state sensor for the detection of ultra-trace toxic mercury ions. Environmental Research 2023, 239 , 117399. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2023.117399
  81. C.A. Ospina-Delacruz, V. Castillo-Gallardo, D. Ariza-Flores, N.K.R. Bogireddy, V. Agarwal. Porous silicon structures passivated with 10-undecenoic acid for possible ethanol sensing. Materials Letters 2023, 352 , 135117. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.matlet.2023.135117
  82. Liping Zhao, Linsen Li, Yi Zhao, Chao Zhu, Ruiqi Yang, Mengqi Fang, Yunxia Luan. Aptamer-based point-of-care-testing for small molecule targets: From aptamers to aptasensors, devices and applications. TrAC Trends in Analytical Chemistry 2023, 169 , 117408. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2023.117408
  83. Tahir ul Gani Mir, Atif Khurshid Wani, Nahid Akhtar, Vaidehi Katoch, Saurabh Shukla, Ulhas Sopanrao Kadam, Jong Chan Hong. Advancing biological investigations using portable sensors for detection of sensitive samples. Heliyon 2023, 9 (12) , e22679. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.heliyon.2023.e22679
  84. Vittorio Bianco, Daniele Pirone, Lisa Miccio, Elena Cavalletti, Jaromir Behal, Pasquale Memmolo, Angela Sardo, Pietro Ferraro. Diatoms as bio-sentinels to probe the dose-dependent impact of copper on aquatic environment: a multi-scale fractal analysis in Fourier Ptychographic Microscopy. 2023, 243-248. https://doi.org/10.1109/MetroSea58055.2023.10317522
  85. Girma Selale Geleta. A colorimetric aptasensor based on two dimensional (2D) nanomaterial and gold nanoparticles for detection of toxic heavy metal ions: A review. Food Chemistry Advances 2023, 2 , 100184. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.focha.2023.100184
  86. Sivasamy Balasubramanian, Aditya Udayabhanu, Ponnusamy Senthil Kumar, Ponnuchamy Muthamilselvi, Chidhambaram Eswari, Aalekhya Vasantavada, Shreyas Kanetkar, Ashish Kapoor. Digital colorimetric analysis for estimation of iron in water with smartphone-assisted microfluidic paper-based analytical devices. International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry 2023, 103 (11) , 2480-2497. https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2021.1893711
  87. Ying Wang, Yinyu Xu, Ruina Jiang, Quanyong Dong, Yingying Sun, Wang Li, Ying Xiong, Yanni Chen, Sili Yi, Qian Wen. A fluorescent probe based on aptamer gold nanoclusters for rapid detection of mercury ions. Analytical Methods 2023, 15 (31) , 3893-3901. https://doi.org/10.1039/D3AY00967J
  88. I Putu Sugiana, Putu Yudi Aditya Putri, Maestro Munru. Pencemaran Merkuri di Pesisir dan Laut: Dampak, Strategi Pemantauan, Mitigasi serta Arah Penelitian di Indonesia. ULIL ALBAB : Jurnal Ilmiah Multidisiplin 2023, 2 (9) , 4221-4232. https://doi.org/10.56799/jim.v2i9.2040
  89. Wei-Qun Lai, Ta-Chou Huang, Kung-Hao Liang, Yu-Fen Chang, De-Ming Yang. Portable sensing devices for smart healthcare and prevention of lead poisoning. Journal of the Chinese Medical Association 2023, 86 (5) , 459-464. https://doi.org/10.1097/JCMA.0000000000000904
  90. Marzia Hoque Tania, M. Shamim Kaiser, Kamal Abu-Hassan, M. A. Hossain. Pathological test type and chemical detection using deep neural networks: a case study using ELISA and LFA assays. Journal of Enterprise Information Management 2023, 36 (3) , 790-817. https://doi.org/10.1108/JEIM-01-2020-0038
  91. Hu hui, Subash C. B. Gopinath, Zool H. Ismail, Yeng Chen, K. Pandian, Palaniyandi Velusamy. Cardiovascular biomarker troponin I biosensor: Aptamer‐gold‐antibody hybrid on a metal oxide surface. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry 2023, 70 (2) , 581-591. https://doi.org/10.1002/bab.2380
  92. Z. A. C. Shogah, D. S. Bolshakov, V. G. Amelin. Using Smartphones in Chemical Analysis. Journal of Analytical Chemistry 2023, 78 (4) , 426-449. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1061934823030139
  93. Z. A. C. Shogah, D. S. Bolshakov, V. G. Amelin. Using Smartphones in Chemical Analysis. Журнал аналитической химии 2023, 78 (4) , 317-353. https://doi.org/10.31857/S0044450223030131
  94. Meng Xiao, Ningxia Xu, Aitong He, Zipei Yu, Bo Chen, Baohui Jin, Lelun Jiang, Changqing Yi. A smartphone-based fluorospectrophotometer and ratiometric fluorescence nanoprobe for on-site quantitation of pesticide residue. iScience 2023, 26 (4) , 106553. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isci.2023.106553
  95. Yi Hou, Shuai Yuan, Guangda Zhu, Baihao You, Ying Xu, Wenxin Jiang, Ho Cheung Shum, Philip W. T. Pong, Chia‐Hung Chen, Liqiu Wang. Photonic Crystal‐Integrated Optoelectronic Devices with Naked‐Eye Visualization and Digital Readout for High‐Resolution Detection of Ultratrace Analytes. Advanced Materials 2023, 35 (7) https://doi.org/10.1002/adma.202209004
  96. S. L. Kober, P. Schaefer, H. Hollert, M. Frohme. A novel strategy for high-throughput sample collection, analysis and visualization of explosives’ concentrations for contaminated areas. International Journal of Environmental Science and Technology 2023, 20 (2) , 1399-1410. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13762-022-04088-w
  97. Jihae Han, Mika Ishigaki, Yukiko Takahashi, Hikari Watanabe, Yasuhiro Umebayashi. Analytical chemistry toward on-site diagnostics. Analytical Sciences 2023, 39 (2) , 133-137. https://doi.org/10.1007/s44211-023-00271-2
  98. Javier Roales, Francisco G. Moscoso, Alejandro P. Vargas, Tânia Lopes-Costa, José M. Pedrosa. Colorimetric Gas Detection Using Molecular Devices and an RGB Sensor. Chemosensors 2023, 11 (2) , 92. https://doi.org/10.3390/chemosensors11020092
  99. Vivek Sharma, Monalisha Ghosh Dastidar, Sharmili Roy. Biohazardous effect associated with various pharma-effluent discharge in a biotic system. 2023, 399-422. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-323-99160-5.00002-3
  100. Julian Guercetti, J.-Pablo Salvador, M.-Pilar Marco. Bioreceptors for smartphone-based food contaminants detection. 2023, 23-57. https://doi.org/10.1016/bs.coac.2022.11.001
Load more citations

ACS Nano

Cite this: ACS Nano 2014, 8, 2, 1121–1129
Click to copy citationCitation copied!
https://doi.org/10.1021/nn406571t
Published January 20, 2014

Copyright © 2014 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under these Terms of Use.

Article Views

18k

Altmetric

-

Citations

Learn about these metrics

Article Views are the COUNTER-compliant sum of full text article downloads since November 2008 (both PDF and HTML) across all institutions and individuals. These metrics are regularly updated to reflect usage leading up to the last few days.

Citations are the number of other articles citing this article, calculated by Crossref and updated daily. Find more information about Crossref citation counts.

The Altmetric Attention Score is a quantitative measure of the attention that a research article has received online. Clicking on the donut icon will load a page at altmetric.com with additional details about the score and the social media presence for the given article. Find more information on the Altmetric Attention Score and how the score is calculated.

  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Design of the ratiometric optical reader on a smart-phone. (a) 3D schematic illustration of the internal structure of the opto-mechanical attachment. The inset image shows the same attachment with a slightly different observation angle. (b) Photograph of the actual optical reader installed on an Android-based smart-phone. The screen of the smart-phone displays a typical image of the sample and control cuvettes when illuminated by red (625 nm) and green (523 nm) LEDs simultaneously.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Principle of dual-color dual-cuvette colorimetric detection. (a) Scheme of the mercury sensing mechanism by using plasmonic Au NPs and aptamer. (b) Representative image captured on the smart-phone under dual-wavelength illumination. The left cuvette (control) contained a mixture of Au NPs (0.64 nM) and aptamer (30 nM), while the right cuvette (sample) contained a mixture of Au NPs and aptamer plus 500 nM Hg2+ (representative of a contaminated water sample). (c) Flow of image-processing steps to compute normalized green-to-red signal ratio (i.e., normalized G/R signal).

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. Screen shots of our mercury detection application running on an Android phone. (a) Main menu; (b) calibration menu; (c) preview of a captured or selected colorimetric image before proceeding to analyze/quantify the sample; (d) display of the results; (e) spatiotemporal mapping of mercury contamination using a Google Maps-based interface; (f) tracking of mercury levels as a function of time per location.

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. Dose–response curve of the Au NP and aptamer based plasmonic colorimetric assay running on a smart-phone. Each measurement at a given concentration was repeated three times. The curve was fitted by an exponential function with a coefficient of determination (R2) of 0.96. An LOD of 3.5 ppb for Hg2+ was obtained based on the G/R ratios of a control sample ([Hg2+] = 0) plus 3 times the standard deviation of the control (blue dashed line).

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. Specificity tests of the Au NP and aptamer based plasmonic mercury assay for different metal ions (500 nM). Each measurement was repeated three times.

    Figure 6

    Figure 6. Smart-phone-based mercury detection results for 11 tap water samples and eight natural samples collected in California, USA. Each measurement was repeated three times. Note that the measurements are plotted against the G/R ratios, which makes the presented scale of the mercury concentration (ppb) nonlinear, between 0.8 and 9.1 ppb.

    Figure 7

    Figure 7. Spatiotemporal mapping of mercury contamination in Los Angeles coastal area. (a–c) Geospatial mercury concentration maps with different sampling densities; (b) zoomed-in area of the red ROI in (a); (c) enlarged region of the red ROI in (b). (d–f) Corresponding mercury concentration readings in (a)–(c). All the data points were measured three times. p values were calculated via two-sample Student’s t test by setting target data set as one population and the rest of the data sets as the other. ** represents p < 0.01, and *** represents p < 0.001.

  • References


    This article references 52 other publications.

    1. 1
      International Programme on Chemical Safety (IPCS). Methylmercury; World Health Organization, 1990. http://www.inchem.org/documents/ehc/ehc/ehc101.htm.
    2. 2
      Tsubaki, T. Minamata Disease: Methylmercury Poisoning in Minamata and Niigata, Japan; Elsevier Scientific: Amsterdam, 1977.
    3. 3
      Harada, M. Minamata Disease: Methylmercury Poisoning in Japan Caused by Environmental Pollution Crit. Rev. Toxicol. 1995, 25, 1 24
    4. 4
      TEACH. Organic Mercury, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. http://www.epa.gov/teach/chem_summ/mercury_org_summary.pdf.
    5. 5
      Clarkson, T. W. The Toxicology of Mercury Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. 1997, 34, 369 403
    6. 6
      Wolfe, M. F.; Schwarzbach, S.; Sulaiman, R. A. Effects of Mercury on Wildlife: A Comprehensive Review Environ. Toxicol. Chem. 1998, 17, 146 160
    7. 7
      TEACH. Inorganic Mercury, U.S. Environmental Protection Agency, 2007. http://www.epa.gov/teach/chem_summ/mercury_inorg_summary.pdf.
    8. 8
      Blum, J. D.; Popp, B. N.; Drazen, J. C.; Anela Choy, C.; Johnson, M. W. Methylmercury Production below the Mixed Layer in the North Pacific Ocean Nat. Geosci. 2013, 6, 879 884
    9. 9
      Stacchiotti, A.; Morandini, F.; Bettoni, F.; Schena, I.; Lavazza, A.; Grigolato, P. G.; Apostoli, P.; Rezzani, R.; Aleo, M. F. Stress Proteins and Oxidative Damage in a Renal Derived Cell Line Exposed to Inorganic Mercury and Lead Toxicology 2009, 264, 215 224
    10. 10
      Harnly, M.; Seidel, S.; Rojas, P.; Fornes, R.; Flessel, P.; Smith, D.; Kreutzer, R.; Goldman, L. Biological Monitoring for Mercury within a Community with Soil and Fish Contamination Environ. Health Perspect. 1997, 105, 424 429
    11. 11
      Legrand, M.; Sousa Passos, C. J.; Mergler, D.; Chan, H. M. Biomonitoring of Mercury Exposure with Single Human Hair Strand Environ. Sci. Technol. 2005, 39, 4594 4598
    12. 12
      Hightower, J. M.; Moore, D. Mercury Levels in High-End Consumers of Fish Environ. Health Perspect. 2003, 111, 604 608
    13. 13
      McDowell, M. A.; Dillon, C. F.; Osterloh, J.; Bolger, P. M.; Pellizzari, E.; Fernando, R.; de Oca, R. M.; Schober, S. E.; Sinks, T.; Jones, R. L.et al. Hair Mercury Levels in U.S. Children and Women of Childbearing Age: Reference Range Data from NHANES 1999–2000 Environ. Health Perspect. 2004, 112, 1165 1171
    14. 14
      Lee, J.-S.; Mirkin, C. A. Chip-Based Scanometric Detection of Mercuric Ion Using DNA-Functionalized Gold Nanoparticles Anal. Chem. 2008, 80, 6805 6808
    15. 15
      Cho, E. S.; Kim, J.; Tejerina, B.; Hermans, T. M.; Jiang, H.; Nakanishi, H.; Yu, M.; Patashinski, A. Z.; Glotzer, S. C.; Stellacci, F.et al. Ultrasensitive Detection of Toxic Cations through Changes in the Tunnelling Current across Films of Striped Nanoparticles Nat. Mater. 2012, 11, 978 985
    16. 16
      Gartia, M. R.; Braunschweig, B.; Chang, T.-W.; Moinzadeh, P.; Minsker, B. S.; Agha, G.; Wieckowski, A.; Keefer, L. L.; Liu, G. L. The Microelectronic Wireless Nitrate Sensor Network for Environmental Water Monitoring J. Environ. Monit. 2012, 14, 3068 3075
    17. 17
      Lafleur, J. P.; Senkbeil, S.; Jensen, T. G.; Kutter, J. P. Gold Nanoparticle-Based Optical Microfluidic Sensors for Analysis of Environmental Pollutants Lab Chip 2012, 12, 4651 4656
    18. 18
      Chung, E.; Gao, R.; Ko, J.; Choi, N.; Lim, D. W.; Lee, E. K.; Chang, S.-I.; Choo, J. Trace Analysis of Mercury(II) Ions Using Aptamer-Modified Au/Ag Core-Shell Nanoparticles and SERS Spectroscopy in a Microdroplet Channel Lab Chip 2013, 13, 260 266
    19. 19
      Lin, Y.-W.; Huang, C.-C.; Chang, H.-T. Gold Nanoparticle Probes for the Detection of Mercury, Lead and Copper Ions Analyst 2011, 136, 863 871
    20. 20
      Liu, D.; Wang, Z.; Jiang, X. Gold Nanoparticles for the Colorimetric and Fluorescent Detection of Ions and Small Organic Molecules Nanoscale 2011, 3, 1421 1433
    21. 21
      Du, J.; Jiang, L.; Shao, Q.; Liu, X.; Marks, R. S.; Ma, J.; Chen, X. Colorimetric Detection of Mercury Ions Based on Plasmonic Nanoparticles Small 2013, 9, 1467 1481
    22. 22
      El Kaoutit, H.; Estévez, P.; García, F. C.; Serna, F.; García, J. M. Sub-ppm Quantification of Hg(II) in Aqueous Media Using Both the Naked Eye and Digital Information from Pictures of a Colorimetric Sensory Polymer Membrane Taken with the Digital Camera of a Conventional Mobile Phone Anal. Methods 2013, 5, 54 58
    23. 23
      U.S. EPA. National Primary Drinking Water Regulations. US EPA, 2009. http://water.epa.gov/drink/contaminants/index.cfm#List.
    24. 24
      World Health Organization. Guidelines for Drinking Water Quality, 4th ed.; World Health Organization: Geneva, 2011. http://whqlibdoc.who.int/publications/2011/9789241548151_eng.pdf.
    25. 25
      Vashist, S.; Mudanyali, O.; Schneider, E. M.; Zengerle, R.; Ozcan, A. Cellphone-Based Devices for Bioanalytical Sciences Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2013,  DOI: 10.1007/s00216-013-7473-1
    26. 26
      Coskun, A. F.; Ozcan, A. Computational Imaging, Sensing and Diagnostics for Global Health Applications Curr. Opin. Biotechnol. 2013, 25, 8 16
    27. 27
      Tseng, D.; Mudanyali, O.; Oztoprak, C.; Isikman, S. O.; Sencan, I.; Yaglidere, O.; Ozcan, A. Lensfree Microscopy on a Cellphone Lab Chip 2010, 10, 1787 1792
    28. 28
      Zhu, H.; Mavandadi, S.; Coskun, A. F.; Yaglidere, O.; Ozcan, A. Optofluidic Fluorescent Imaging Cytometry on a Cell Phone Anal. Chem. 2011, 83, 6641 6647
    29. 29
      Zhu, H.; Yaglidere, O.; Su, T.-W.; Tseng, D.; Ozcan, A. Cost-Effective and Compact Wide-Field Fluorescent Imaging on a Cell-Phone Lab Chip 2011, 11, 315 322
    30. 30
      Preechaburana, P.; Gonzalez, M. C.; Suska, A.; Filippini, D. Surface Plasmon Resonance Chemical Sensing on Cell Phones Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2012, 51, 11585 11588
    31. 31
      Shen, L.; Hagen, J. A.; Papautsky, I. Point-of-Care Colorimetric Detection with a Smartphone Lab Chip 2012, 12, 4240 4243
    32. 32
      Mudanyali, O.; Dimitrov, S.; Sikora, U.; Padmanabhan, S.; Navruz, I.; Ozcan, A. Integrated Rapid-Diagnostic-Test Reader Platform on a Cellphone Lab Chip 2012, 12, 2678 2686
    33. 33
      Zhu, H.; Sikora, U.; Ozcan, A. Quantum Dot Enabled Detection of Escherichia coli Using a Cell-Phone Analyst 2012, 137, 2541 2544
    34. 34
      Gallegos, D.; Long, K. D.; Yu, H.; Clark, P. P.; Lin, Y.; George, S.; Nath, P.; Cunningham, B. T. Label-Free Biodetection Using a Smartphone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 2124 2132
    35. 35
      O’Driscoll, S.; MacCraith, B. D.; Burke, C. S. A Novel Camera Phone-Based Platform for Quantitative Fluorescence Sensing Anal. Methods 2013, 5, 1904 1908
    36. 36
      Oncescu, V.; O’Dell, D.; Erickson, D. Smartphone Based Health Accessory for Colorimetric Detection of Biomarkers in Sweat and Saliva Lab Chip 2013, 13, 3232 3238
    37. 37
      Lillehoj, P. B.; Huang, M.-C.; Truong, N.; Ho, C.-M. Rapid Electrochemical Detection on a Mobile Phone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 2950 2955
    38. 38
      Zhu, H.; Sencan, I.; Wong, J.; Dimitrov, S.; Tseng, D.; Nagashima, K.; Ozcan, A. Cost-Effective and Rapid Blood Analysis on a Cell-Phone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 1282 1288
    39. 39
      Coskun, A. F.; Nagi, R.; Sadeghi, K.; Phillips, S.; Ozcan, A. Albumin Testing in Urine Using a Smart-Phone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 4231 4238
    40. 40
      Coskun, A. F.; Wong, J.; Khodadadi, D.; Nagi, R.; Tey, A.; Ozcan, A. A Personalized Food Allergen Testing Platform on a Cellphone Lab Chip 2013, 13, 636 640
    41. 41
      Navruz, I.; Coskun, A. F.; Wong, J.; Mohammad, S.; Tseng, D.; Nagi, R.; Phillips, S.; Ozcan, A. Smart-Phone Based Computational Microscopy Using Multi-Frame Contact Imaging on a Fiber-Optic Array Lab Chip 2013, 13, 4015 4023
    42. 42
      Wei, Q.; Qi, H.; Luo, W.; Tseng, D.; Ki, S. J.; Wan, Z.; Göröcs, Z.; Bentolila, L. A.; Wu, T.-T.; Sun, R.et al. Fluorescent Imaging of Single Nanoparticles and Viruses on a Smart Phone ACS Nano 2013, 7, 9147 9155
    43. 43
      Portio Research Limited. Portio Research Mobile Factbook 2013. http://www.portioresearch.com/media/3986/Portio%20Research%20Mobile%20Factbook%202013.pdf.
    44. 44
      Kim, Y.; Johnson, R. C.; Hupp, J. T. Gold Nanoparticle-Based Sensing of “Spectroscopically Silent” Heavy Metal Ions Nano Lett. 2001, 1, 165 167
    45. 45
      Lee, J.-S.; Han, M. S.; Mirkin, C. A. Colorimetric Detection of Mercuric Ion (Hg2+) in Aqueous Media Using DNA-Functionalized Gold Nanoparticles Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2007, 46, 4093 4096
    46. 46
      Huang, C.-C.; Chang, H.-T. Parameters for Selective Colorimetric Sensing of Mercury(II) in Aqueous Solutions Using Mercaptopropionic Acid-Modified Gold Nanoparticles Chem. Commun. 2007, 1215 1217
    47. 47
      Darbha, G. K.; Singh, A. K.; Rai, U. S.; Yu, E.; Yu, H.; Chandra Ray, P. Selective Detection of Mercury(II) Ion Using Nonlinear Optical Properties of Gold Nanoparticles J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2008, 130, 8038 8043
    48. 48
      Liu, D.; Wang, S.; Swierczewska, M.; Huang, X.; Bhirde, A. A.; Sun, J.; Wang, Z.; Yang, M.; Jiang, X.; Chen, X. Highly Robust, Recyclable Displacement Assay for Mercuric Ions in Aqueous Solutions and Living Cells ACS Nano 2012, 6, 10999 11008
    49. 49
      Li, L.; Li, B.; Qi, Y.; Jin, Y. Label-Free Aptamer-Based Colorimetric Detection of Mercury Ions in Aqueous Media Using Unmodified Gold Nanoparticles as Colorimetric Probe Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2009, 393, 2051 2057
    50. 50
      Miyake, Y.; Togashi, H.; Tashiro, M.; Yamaguchi, H.; Oda, S.; Kudo, M.; Tanaka, Y.; Kondo, Y.; Sawa, R.; Fujimoto, T.et al. MercuryII-Mediated Formation of Thymine-HgII-Thymine Base Pairs in DNA Duplexes J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 128, 2172 2173
    51. 51
      Tanaka, Y.; Oda, S.; Yamaguchi, H.; Kondo, Y.; Kojima, C.; Ono, A. 15n-15n J-Coupling across HgII: Direct Observation of HgII-Mediated T-T Base Pairs in a DNA Duplex J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2006, 129, 244 245
    52. 52
      Boening, D. W. Ecological Effects, Transport, and Fate of Mercury: A General Review Chemosphere 2000, 40, 1335 1351
  • Supporting Information

    Supporting Information


    UV–vis spectroscopic measurement results of the Au NP and aptamer based colorimetric assay (calibration curve, specificity, and dynamics test). This material is available free of charge via the Internet at http://pubs.acs.org.


    Terms & Conditions

    Most electronic Supporting Information files are available without a subscription to ACS Web Editions. Such files may be downloaded by article for research use (if there is a public use license linked to the relevant article, that license may permit other uses). Permission may be obtained from ACS for other uses through requests via the RightsLink permission system: http://pubs.acs.org/page/copyright/permissions.html.