journal article·2013-04-24Open access

Influence of Luminescence Quantum Yield, Surface Coating, and Functionalization of Quantum Dots on the Sensitivity of Time-Resolved FRET Bioassays

K. David Wegner, Phung Thi Lanh, Travis Jennings, Eunkeu Oh, Vaibhav Jain, Simon M. Fairclough, Jason M. Smith, Emerson Giovanelli, Nicolas Lequeux, Thomas Pons, Niko Hildebrandt

Abstract

In clinical diagnostics, homogeneous time-resolved (TR) FRET immunoassays are used for fast and highly sensitive detection of biomarkers in serum samples. The most common immunoassay format is based on europium chelate or cryptate donors and allophycocyanin acceptors. Replacing europium donors with terbium complexes and the acceptors with QDs offers large photophysical advantages for multiplexed diagnostics, because the Tb-complex can be used as FRET donor for QD acceptors of different colors. Water-soluble and biocompatible QDs are commercially available or can be synthesized in the laboratory using many available recipes from the literature. Apart from the semiconductor material composition, an important aspect of choosing the right QD for TR-FRET assays is the thickness of the QD coating, which will influence the photophysical properties and long-term stability as well as the donor-acceptor distance and FRET efficiency. Here we present a detailed time-resolved spectroscopic study of three different QDs with an emission maximum around 605 nm for their application as FRET acceptors (using a common Tb donor) in TR-bioassays: (i) Invitrogen/Life Technologies Qdot605, (ii) eBioscience eFluorNC605 and iii) ter-polymer stabilized CdSe/CdS/ZnS QDs synthesized in our laboratories. All FRET systems are very stable and possess large Förster distances (7.4-9.1 nm), high FRET efficiencies (0.63-0.80) and low detection limits (0.06-2.0 pM) within the FRET-bioassays. Shapes, sizes and the biotin/QD ratio of the biocompatible QDs could be determined directly in the solution phase bioassays at subnanomolar concentrations. Both commercial amphiphilic polymer/lipid encapsulated QDs and self-made ligand-exchanged QDs provide extremely low detection limits for highly sensitive TR-FRET bioassays.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Quantum Dots Synthesis And Properties · Advanced biosensing and bioanalysis techniques · Advanced Biosensing Techniques and Applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

Affiliations

Institut d’Electronique Fondamentale, Université Paris-Sud, 91405 Orsay Cedex, France

eBioscience, Inc., 10255 Science Center Drive San Diego, California 92121, United States

Optical Sciences Division, Code 5600, U.S. Naval Research Laboratory, Washington, D.C. 20375, United States

Sotera Defense Solutions, Annapolis Junction, Maryland 20701, United States

Department of Materials, University of Oxford, Oxford, Oxfordshire, OX1 3PH, United Kingdom

Laboratoire de Physique et d’Etude des Matériaux, ESPCI-CNRS-UPMC UMR8213, 75005 Paris, France

References (33)

Show source-provided references
1. Algar W. R. · Anal. Chem. · 2011 · 83 · 882610.1021/ac201331r ↗
2. Gill R. · Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. · 2008 · 47 · 760210.1002/anie.200800169 ↗
3. Jin Z. · Trends Biotechnol. · 2012 · 30 · 39410.1016/j.tibtech.2012.04.005 ↗
4. Rosenthal S. J. · Chem. Biol. · 2011 · 18 · 1010.1016/j.chembiol.2010.11.013 ↗
5. Reiss P. · Small · 2009 · 5 · 15410.1002/smll.200800841 ↗
6. Hildebrandt N. · ACS Nano · 2011 · 5 · 528610.1021/nn2023123 ↗
7. Hezinger A. F. E. · Eur. J. Pharm. Biopharm. · 2008 · 68 · 13810.1016/j.ejpb.2007.05.013 ↗
8. Medintz I. L. · Nat. Mater. · 2005 · 4 · 43510.1038/nmat1390 ↗
9. Wild D. · 2005
10. Bünzli J.-C. G. · Chem. Rev. · 2010 · 110 · 272910.1021/cr900362e ↗
11. Eliseeva S. V. · Chem. Soc. Rev. · 2010 · 39 · 18910.1039/B905604C ↗
12. Hemmilä I. · Crit. Rev. Clin. Lab. Sci. · 2001 · 38 · 44110.1080/20014091084254 ↗
13. Selvin P. R. · Annu. Rev. Biopharm. Biomed. · 2002 · 31 · 27510.1146/annurev.biophys.31.101101.140927 ↗
14. Mathis G. · Clin. Chem. · 1993 · 39 · 195310.1093/clinchem/39.9.1953 ↗
15. Mathis G. · J. Biomol. Screen. · 1999 · 4 · 30910.1177/108705719900400605 ↗
16. Hemmilä I. · J. Biomol. Screen. · 1999 · 4 · 30310.1177/108705719900400604 ↗
17. Algar W. R. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2012 · 134 · 187610.1021/ja210162f ↗
18. Charbonnière L. J. · Eur. J. Inorg. Chem. · 2008 · 324110.1002/ejic.200800332 ↗
19. Charbonnière L. J. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2006 · 128 · 1280010.1021/ja062693a ↗
20. Geißler D. · Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. · 2010 · 49 · 139610.1002/anie.200906399 ↗
21. Hildebrandt N. · Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. · 2005 · 44 · 761210.1002/anie.200501552 ↗
22. Xu J. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2011 · 133 · 1990010.1021/ja2079898 ↗
23. Li J. J. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2003 · 125 · 1256710.1021/ja0363563 ↗
24. Yu W. W. · Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. · 2002 · 41 · 236810.1002/1521-3773(20020703)41:13<2368::AID-ANIE2368>3.0.CO;2-G ↗
25. Giovanelli E. · Langmuir · 2012 · 28 · 1517710.1021/la302896x ↗
26. Lakowicz J. R. · 199910.1007/978-1-4757-3061-6 ↗
27. Pace C. N. · Protein Sci. · 1995 · 4 · 241110.1002/pro.5560041120 ↗
28. Wu P. G. · Anal. Biochem. · 1994 · 218 · 110.1006/abio.1994.1134 ↗
29. Sillen A. · Photochem. Photobiol. · 1998 · 67 · 47510.1111/j.1751-1097.1998.tb09082.x ↗
30. Liu W. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2008 · 130 · 127410.1021/ja076069p ↗
31. Uyeda H. T. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2005 · 127 · 387010.1021/ja044031w ↗
32. Morgner F. · Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. · 2010 · 49 · 757010.1002/anie.201002943 ↗
33. Geißler D. · J. Am. Chem. Soc. · 2013 · 135 · 110210.1021/ja310317n ↗