Comparison of the stem-loop and linear probe-based electrochemical DNA sensors by alternating current voltammetry and cyclic voltammetry

Weiwei Yang, Rebecca Y. Lai

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

43 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Here we systematically characterized the sensor performance of the stem-loop probe (SLP) and linear probe (LP) electrochemical DNA sensors using alternating current voltammetry (ACV) and cyclic voltammetry (CV), with the goal of generating the set of operational criteria that best suits each sensor architecture, in addition to elucidating the signaling mechanism behind these sensors. Although the LP sensor shows slightly better % signal suppression (SS) upon hybridization with the perfect match target at 10 Hz, our frequency-dependent study suggests that it shows optimal % SS only in a very limited AC frequency range. Similar results are observed in CV studies in which the LP sensor, when compared to the SLP sensor, displays a narrower range of voltammetric scan rates where the optimal % SS can be achieved. More importantly, the difference between the two sensors' performance is particularly pronounced if the change in integrated charge (Q) upon target hybridization, rather than the peak current (I), is measured in CV. The temperature-dependent study further highlights the differences between the two sensors, where the LP sensor, owing to the flexible linear probe architecture, is more readily perturbed by temperature changes. Both SLP and LP sensors, however, show a loss of % SS when operated at elevated temperatures, despite the significant improvement in the hybridization kinetics. In conjunction with the ACV, CV, and temperature-dependent studies, the electron-transfer kinetics study provides further evidence in support of the proposed signaling mechanism of these two sensors, in which the SLP sensor's signaling efficiency and sensor performance is directly linked to the hybridization-induced conformational change in the redox-labeled probe, whereas the performance of the LP sensor relies on the hybridization-induced change in probe dynamics.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)14669-14677
Number of pages9
JournalLangmuir
Volume27
Issue number23
DOIs
StatePublished - Dec 6 2011

Fingerprint

Voltammetry
stems
Cyclic voltammetry
alternating current
DNA
deoxyribonucleic acid
probes
sensors
Sensors
retarding
Temperature
Kinetics
temperature
DNA Probes
kinetics
electron transfer

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Materials Science(all)
  • Condensed Matter Physics
  • Surfaces and Interfaces
  • Spectroscopy
  • Electrochemistry

Cite this

Comparison of the stem-loop and linear probe-based electrochemical DNA sensors by alternating current voltammetry and cyclic voltammetry. / Yang, Weiwei; Lai, Rebecca Y.

In: Langmuir, Vol. 27, No. 23, 06.12.2011, p. 14669-14677.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{9daa0d688a7744cd8ea418b102541b58,
title = "Comparison of the stem-loop and linear probe-based electrochemical DNA sensors by alternating current voltammetry and cyclic voltammetry",
abstract = "Here we systematically characterized the sensor performance of the stem-loop probe (SLP) and linear probe (LP) electrochemical DNA sensors using alternating current voltammetry (ACV) and cyclic voltammetry (CV), with the goal of generating the set of operational criteria that best suits each sensor architecture, in addition to elucidating the signaling mechanism behind these sensors. Although the LP sensor shows slightly better {\%} signal suppression (SS) upon hybridization with the perfect match target at 10 Hz, our frequency-dependent study suggests that it shows optimal {\%} SS only in a very limited AC frequency range. Similar results are observed in CV studies in which the LP sensor, when compared to the SLP sensor, displays a narrower range of voltammetric scan rates where the optimal {\%} SS can be achieved. More importantly, the difference between the two sensors' performance is particularly pronounced if the change in integrated charge (Q) upon target hybridization, rather than the peak current (I), is measured in CV. The temperature-dependent study further highlights the differences between the two sensors, where the LP sensor, owing to the flexible linear probe architecture, is more readily perturbed by temperature changes. Both SLP and LP sensors, however, show a loss of {\%} SS when operated at elevated temperatures, despite the significant improvement in the hybridization kinetics. In conjunction with the ACV, CV, and temperature-dependent studies, the electron-transfer kinetics study provides further evidence in support of the proposed signaling mechanism of these two sensors, in which the SLP sensor's signaling efficiency and sensor performance is directly linked to the hybridization-induced conformational change in the redox-labeled probe, whereas the performance of the LP sensor relies on the hybridization-induced change in probe dynamics.",
author = "Weiwei Yang and Lai, {Rebecca Y.}",
year = "2011",
month = "12",
day = "6",
doi = "10.1021/la203015v",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "27",
pages = "14669--14677",
journal = "Langmuir",
issn = "0743-7463",
publisher = "American Chemical Society",
number = "23",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of the stem-loop and linear probe-based electrochemical DNA sensors by alternating current voltammetry and cyclic voltammetry

AU - Yang, Weiwei

AU - Lai, Rebecca Y.

PY - 2011/12/6

Y1 - 2011/12/6

N2 - Here we systematically characterized the sensor performance of the stem-loop probe (SLP) and linear probe (LP) electrochemical DNA sensors using alternating current voltammetry (ACV) and cyclic voltammetry (CV), with the goal of generating the set of operational criteria that best suits each sensor architecture, in addition to elucidating the signaling mechanism behind these sensors. Although the LP sensor shows slightly better % signal suppression (SS) upon hybridization with the perfect match target at 10 Hz, our frequency-dependent study suggests that it shows optimal % SS only in a very limited AC frequency range. Similar results are observed in CV studies in which the LP sensor, when compared to the SLP sensor, displays a narrower range of voltammetric scan rates where the optimal % SS can be achieved. More importantly, the difference between the two sensors' performance is particularly pronounced if the change in integrated charge (Q) upon target hybridization, rather than the peak current (I), is measured in CV. The temperature-dependent study further highlights the differences between the two sensors, where the LP sensor, owing to the flexible linear probe architecture, is more readily perturbed by temperature changes. Both SLP and LP sensors, however, show a loss of % SS when operated at elevated temperatures, despite the significant improvement in the hybridization kinetics. In conjunction with the ACV, CV, and temperature-dependent studies, the electron-transfer kinetics study provides further evidence in support of the proposed signaling mechanism of these two sensors, in which the SLP sensor's signaling efficiency and sensor performance is directly linked to the hybridization-induced conformational change in the redox-labeled probe, whereas the performance of the LP sensor relies on the hybridization-induced change in probe dynamics.

AB - Here we systematically characterized the sensor performance of the stem-loop probe (SLP) and linear probe (LP) electrochemical DNA sensors using alternating current voltammetry (ACV) and cyclic voltammetry (CV), with the goal of generating the set of operational criteria that best suits each sensor architecture, in addition to elucidating the signaling mechanism behind these sensors. Although the LP sensor shows slightly better % signal suppression (SS) upon hybridization with the perfect match target at 10 Hz, our frequency-dependent study suggests that it shows optimal % SS only in a very limited AC frequency range. Similar results are observed in CV studies in which the LP sensor, when compared to the SLP sensor, displays a narrower range of voltammetric scan rates where the optimal % SS can be achieved. More importantly, the difference between the two sensors' performance is particularly pronounced if the change in integrated charge (Q) upon target hybridization, rather than the peak current (I), is measured in CV. The temperature-dependent study further highlights the differences between the two sensors, where the LP sensor, owing to the flexible linear probe architecture, is more readily perturbed by temperature changes. Both SLP and LP sensors, however, show a loss of % SS when operated at elevated temperatures, despite the significant improvement in the hybridization kinetics. In conjunction with the ACV, CV, and temperature-dependent studies, the electron-transfer kinetics study provides further evidence in support of the proposed signaling mechanism of these two sensors, in which the SLP sensor's signaling efficiency and sensor performance is directly linked to the hybridization-induced conformational change in the redox-labeled probe, whereas the performance of the LP sensor relies on the hybridization-induced change in probe dynamics.

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=82455188717&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=82455188717&partnerID=8YFLogxK

U2 - 10.1021/la203015v

DO - 10.1021/la203015v

M3 - Article

C2 - 21981414

AN - SCOPUS:82455188717

VL - 27

SP - 14669

EP - 14677

JO - Langmuir

JF - Langmuir

SN - 0743-7463

IS - 23

ER -