Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1 -- 8332 2022-08-18 05:34:46 |
2 format correct -67 word(s) 8265 2022-08-19 04:38:48 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?


Are you sure to Delete?
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Wang, X.;  Lu, D.;  Liu, Y.;  Wang, W.;  Ren, R.;  Li, M.;  Liu, D.;  Liu, Y.;  Liu, Y.;  Pang, G. Electrochemical Signal Amplification in Olfactory and Taste Evaluation. Encyclopedia. Available online: (accessed on 15 April 2024).
Wang X,  Lu D,  Liu Y,  Wang W,  Ren R,  Li M, et al. Electrochemical Signal Amplification in Olfactory and Taste Evaluation. Encyclopedia. Available at: Accessed April 15, 2024.
Wang, Xinqian, Dingqiang Lu, Yuan Liu, Wenli Wang, Ruijuan Ren, Ming Li, Danyang Liu, Yujiao Liu, Yixuan Liu, Guangchang Pang. "Electrochemical Signal Amplification in Olfactory and Taste Evaluation" Encyclopedia, (accessed April 15, 2024).
Wang, X.,  Lu, D.,  Liu, Y.,  Wang, W.,  Ren, R.,  Li, M.,  Liu, D.,  Liu, Y.,  Liu, Y., & Pang, G. (2022, August 18). Electrochemical Signal Amplification in Olfactory and Taste Evaluation. In Encyclopedia.
Wang, Xinqian, et al. "Electrochemical Signal Amplification in Olfactory and Taste Evaluation." Encyclopedia. Web. 18 August, 2022.
Electrochemical Signal Amplification in Olfactory and Taste Evaluation

Biosensors are powerful analytical tools used to identify and detect target molecules. Electrochemical biosensors, which combine biosensing with electrochemical analysis techniques, are efficient analytical instruments that translate concentration signals into electrical signals, enabling the quantitative and qualitative analysis of target molecules. Electrochemical biosensors have been widely used in various fields of detection and analysis due to their high sensitivity, superior selectivity, quick reaction time, and inexpensive cost. However, the signal changes caused by interactions between a biological probe and a target molecule are very weak and difficult to capture directly by using detection instruments. Therefore, various signal amplification strategies have been proposed and developed to increase the accuracy and sensitivity of detection systems. 

electrochemical biosensors olfactory and taste evaluation signal amplification strategies nanomaterials enzymes nucleic acid amplification techniques

1. Electrochemical Biosensors

In the 1960s, Leland C. Clark Jr, an American scholar in electroanalytical chemistry, suggested that that the determination of biochemicals could be found using a method as convenient as pH electrodes, which led to the introduction of enzyme electrodes, the first biosensors [1][2][3]. For half a century, biosensing has developed into a classic converging technology with the incorporated principles and technologies of multiple disciplines such as life sciences, chemistry, physics, information, and materials [4]. In the 1970s to 1980s, various biomolecules and biomaterials were used as the molecular recognition elements for biosensors, enabling the rapid detection of a variety of biochemical and immunological substances [4]. In addition, various physical and chemical transduction principles were adopted, driving the formation of the biosensing field. In the second wave of development, second-generation enzyme electrodes were commercially successful [4], surface plasmon resonance (SPR) biosensors were widely used for biomolecular interaction studies [5], while DNA microarrays enabled high-throughput analysis of gene expression [4]. Since the 21st century, the introduction of nanotechnology has endowed biosensing with many new properties such as high sensitivity, a multiparameter nature, and microenvironmental applications [6]. Biosensors are powerful pieces of analytical equipment used to identify and detect target molecules, and are usually composed of a biosensing material and a physicochemical sensor [7]. Biosensors are generally used as detectors, and utilize a bioactive substance as a biofunctional sensitive element fixed to a signal transducer, which transmits a signal that is then converted to corresponding optical, thermal, and electrical signals with good sensitivity, selectivity, and specificity when a specific target is added. However, a bottleneck in the application of the biological receptor elements is the maintenance of their vitality, stability and shelf-life upon bonding with the electronic elements [8].
Among the known types of biosensors, electrochemical biosensors are efficient analytical tools that combine biosensing and electrochemical analysis techniques [9] and are generally built in three-electrode electrochemical cells that consist of a working electrode, a counter electrode, and a standard electrode with a stable and fixed potential [10]. Analytical methods for electrochemical biosensors are usually based on the electron transfer process between an electrode surface and an electroactive material in an electrolyte [7]. Electrochemical biosensors use a fixed electrode as the base electrode and fixed bioactive molecules on their surfaces, capturing target molecules onto the electrode surface through specific recognition between biomolecules, where the base electrode converts the concentration signal into measurable electrical signals such as current, potential, and resistance. This enables the quantitative and qualitative analysis of a target. The basic principle of electrochemical biosensors is shown in Figure 1. Four signal conversion types exist for electrochemical biosensors: current, potential, impedance, and ion charge (field effect). Among the current-based electrochemical biosensors, commonly used detection methods include cyclic voltammetry (CV) [11], square wave voltammetry (SWV) [12], differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) [11], and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) [12]. Electrochemical biosensors have been widely studied in simple or complex detection environments and in a variety of fields due to their high selectivity for the molecules they can identify, as well as their high sensitivity [13], fast response time, miniaturized and portable properties [14], compatibility with impurity matrices [15][16], simplicity of operation, and low cost [17][18].
Figure 1. Basic principles of electrochemical biosensors.
Although electrochemical biosensors are already highly sensitive, their sensitivity must be further improved for the detection of certain molecules at low concentrations or molecules that are difficult to isolate from biological samples [19][20][21][22]. In recent years, detection methods for specific interactions between biological recognition elements, such as antibodies, nucleotides, enzymes, and target analytes have been proposed and developed to improve the sensitivity and selectivity of detection systems [23]. In addition, signal amplification technology is often used as a critical technology in biosensor manufacturing because it plays a crucial role in improving the sensitivity, selectivity and stability of biosensors. Several signal amplification strategies, such as the use of nanomaterials with unique physicochemical properties, as well as the use of enzymatic labeling and nucleic acid amplification techniques, have become widespread. This entry will present several aspects of signal amplification strategies commonly used in electrochemical biosensors (Figure 2), as well as present recent results regarding their use in olfactory and taste determination.
Figure 2. Signal amplification strategies commonly used in electrochemical biosensors.

2. Advances in Electrochemical Signal Amplification Strategies for Olfactory and Taste Measurements

The detection of gases, including malodorous molecules and volatile organic compounds (VOCs), has attracted great interest in recent years and there has been a growing demand for it in various fields. Volatile organic compounds (VOCs) are a large class of low molecular weight (<300 Da) carbon-containing compounds. These small volatile molecules have a wide range of sources, both natural (plants, animals, bacteria, etc.) and anthropogenic (fossil fuels, automobile exhaust, etc.) [24]. Studies have shown that most VOCs have adverse effects on human health, causing symptoms such as headaches, and nose, eye and throat irritation [25]. They are also considered chemical messengers, and studies have identified different gases associated with different diseases. In addition, VOC and odor analysis can be used for quality assessment in the food, beverage, and flavor industries. Therefore, it is crucial to monitor the nature and concentration of these compounds in indoor or outdoor environments [24].

2.1. Classical Analytical Techniques for Olfactory and Taste Detection

Olfactory and taste sensation are widespread in nature, and they play a major role in the survival and reproduction of natural organisms [26][27]. Olfactory and taste receptors mainly consist of cellular, tissue, or biological sensing receptors for various signals around the body, especially for food and its nutrients. Studies have shown that olfactory perception and taste are dependent on the sensing effect of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs), making them the most important targets for drug screening. GPCRs are a superfamily of thousands of members that plays an extremely important role as nutrient sensor receptors in the metabolism of substances, capacity metabolism, and signal communication in the body or cells [28]. Methods commonly used for olfactory and taste detection include gas chromatography (GC), gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), electronic nose (EN), electronic tongue (ET) [29], near-infrared spectrum (NIR), and other biosensors based on olfactory receptors (OR) or taste receptors (TR) [30][31]. In addition, natural elements such as odor-binding protein (OBP) or its analogs, such as peptides, are often used in the construction of olfactory electrochemical biosensors [8][24][32][33].
GC is a separation and analysis method using gas as a mobile phase, which has the advantages of high separation efficiency, fast analysis, high sensitivity and good selectivity, etc. [34]. It has been widely used in various fields and plays an important role in various aspects of modern society. GC consists of five systems: the gas circuit system, the sample injection system, the separation system, the temperature control system and the detection and recording system, of which the separation system and the detection and recording system are the core. With an inert gas as the mobile phase, GC takes advantage of the fact that the partition coefficient of components in a sample varies with the gas and stationary phases [34]. As the sample is carried into the column by the carrier gas, the components undergo repeated alternating distribution between the two phases. The components in the stationary phase have different absorption capacities and therefore the analytes pass through the column at different rates. After a certain column length, the components of the sample are separated from each other and enter the detector. The ion current signal generated by each component is amplified to produce a peak for each component. In this way, the purpose of separation and detection is achieved. Gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS), a highly sensitive and accurate analytical technique, allows the separation, identification, and quantification of different VOCs in a mixture [34]. NIR is an electromagnetic spectrum between visible light (VIS) and mid-infrared (MIR). NIR is a method that uses chemical bonds containing hydrogen groups to stretch and relax frequencies, resulting in vibrational and combined frequencies. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) requires a spectrometer and scanning means to analyze gases. FTIR can measure and analyze the concentration of toxic gases in a wide range of infrared regions [34].
Although GC and GC-MS have good odor detection capabilities, they are not olfactory sensors. In addition, they are bulky and expensive and require highly time-consuming laboratory operations [34]. FTIR is highly sensitive and enables simultaneous analytical measurements of multiple gases, but its gas measurement and analysis can only be performed in the laboratory, thus making it impossible to achieve online real-time gas detection using FTIR [34]. Such a background has prompted many researchers to work on developing alternative techniques to overcome the various drawbacks mentioned above. Therefore, there is a need for an affordable, reliable, portable and sensitive device that can rapidly analyze gases, including VOCs [24].

2.2. Olfactory and Taste Detection Based on Biosensor Technology

Electronic noses and electronic tongues can detect odors and taste by using chemically sensitive materials and are based on chemical interactions [35][36][37]. They are fast, simple, and portable detection tools. However, they are unable to distinguish between chemicals with similar structures [37]. Linda B. Buck and Richard Axel have conducted numerous research efforts on biological olfaction, which has shown that in order to distinguish between various odors, biological noses exploit the cross-reactivity of olfactory receptors (OR), prompting each receptor to interact with different odor molecules [38].Thus, as with barcodes, odors are encoded by combinations of olfactory receptors, prompting the nose to have a wide detection range [24]. In addition, Linda B. Buck and Richard Axel demonstrated that ORs belong to the large family of G-protein-coupled receptors (GPCRs) [24]. In bioelectronic noses (B-EN) and bioelectronic tongues (B-ET), more selective odor detection can be achieved by using specific receptors, and transistor-based nanomaterials can be used to amplify sensory signals, such as carbon nanotubes [39], conductive polymers [40], and GR [41]. Bioelectronic noses-based nanomaterials are small, highly portable, and can be used for field odor analysis by combining them with portable current measurement devices [42]. In recent years, bioelectronic devices that use human sensory receptors as molecular recognition elements have been developed and have been commonly used to characterize food quality and safety. In addition, multi-channel bioelectronic noses have been developed that consist of arrays of olfactory receptors capable of individually analyzing various odor information [42][43]. However, most current EN systems use chemical layers as sensing elements and, therefore, have the disadvantage of limited diversity of sensor coatings and poor selectivity [24]. In addition, EN, B-EN, ET, and B-ET instruments not only have the disadvantage of a lack of sensor stability, but also the difficulty of having identical sensing characteristics of the instrument in different production batches. Recent research trends suggest that natural elements, such as ORs, OBP and peptides, can also be used as sensitive materials in biosensors to improve odor sensing performance [44][45].
Since the discovery of the vertebrate olfactory receptor (ORs) gene family by Buck and Axel, much progress has been made in the study of the molecular mechanisms of olfaction and signal transduction pathways [31][38]. The process of biological olfactory is the selective recognition of odors by ORs, triggering the intracellular signal transduction pathways that lead to the depolarization of the OSN, and ultimately the transmission of information to the brain for processing via neuronal axonal connections. Olfactory biosensors use similar signal transduction mechanisms to recognize different odors and convert odor chemical signals into readable signals, such as electrical, and optical signals [31]. Technologies such as microelectrodes, light addressable potential sensors (LAPS), field effect transistors (FETs), and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) have been commonly used in OR-based electrochemical biosensors for olfactory signal conversion. FETs have inherent signal amplification, making them particularly suitable for the detection of weak signals in OR-based biosensors [31].
In biosensors, the characteristics and properties of the sensing material should be maintained by adopting an appropriate immobilization strategy, depending on the biometric parts. Methods that couple biological elements to appropriate transduction systems can often be used to obtain measurable and detectable signals [8]. However, combining ORs with signal transducers is a major challenge as ORIS membranes are bound to volatile organic compounds (VOCs), making it difficult to obtain configurations where ORs can bind to VOCs under membrane-free conditions [8]. To facilitate the incorporation of ORs into sensors, six materials have been typically utilized for binding, including cells and tissues, nanovesicles, nanodiscs, artificial lipid bilayers, odorant binding proteins, and biomimetic materials [8]. When embedding ORs using nanovesicles, the cell membrane containing an OR can be constructed as a nanoscale phospholipid bilayer structure to maintain the natural environment of the OR [46][47]. In addition, when the OR is integrated into a sensor using nanodiscs, these nanodiscs can provide a stable environment for ORs. However, this will separate the OR from the downstream proteins that promote the olfactory process [47]. Artificial lipid bilayers can simulate cell membranes, maintaining intact membrane proteins, such as ORs, and keeping their function intact. Biomimetic materials allow for the immobilization of synthetic peptides based on ORs and OBP rather than entire proteins, as they do not require tertiary structures or lipid membranes, thus improving stability and repeatability. Artificial receptors, such as molecularly imprinted polymers (MIP), can also be used as sensing elements due to their high stability [8].
Compared to traditional odor analysis techniques, electronic noses, electronic tongues, and olfactory and gustatory electrochemical biosensors are fast, convenient, and economical, and are widely used in food, medicine, agriculture, and environmental monitoring [34]. In addition, gas sensing plays an important role in security applications (detection of drugs, explosives, etc.), environmental monitoring, and other applications under development, such as augmented or virtual reality [48]. Nevertheless, research on biosensors for olfaction and taste determination is still in the early experimental stages and further research is still needed as commercial OR biosensors are not yet available in the market due to the fragility of biosensing elements and the lack of portable signal transduction systems.

2.3. Taste Electrochemical Sensors Based on a Cellular Signal Cascade Amplification System

Currently, most studies that are focused on taste receptor sensors are based on changes in ion channels such as Ga2+ inward flow resulting from receptor–ligand interactions in living cells, which are dependent on a variety of complex factors such as cell type, physiological activity, environment, and intercellular interactions [34]. Although molecular interaction instruments based on SPR technology that can be used to detect non-standard receptor–ligand interactions are on the market, they are costly, technically complex, and struggle to achieve high throughput, making conventional taste detection difficult [34]. In current research, the methods for quantifying taste sensation have usually been based on three mechanisms, namely: labeling based on ion channels or cellular active components in living cells, non-standard-SPR methods, where the binding and dissociation properties of receptor–ligands are measured, and electronic tongues. In modern biotechnology, multiple molecular signal transduction components can be co-expressed in heterogeneous cell systems, thereby converting chemical signals into electrical signals [31].
Lee et al. [49] designed a miniature planar electrode to record the general membrane potential changes of a heterogeneous olfactory system based on the co-expression of ORI7 and taste cyclic nucleotide gate (CNG) channels in HEK-293 cells. An olfactory biosensor based on the multipoint detection of the electrical activity of olfactory cells and tissues combined signal processing methods with olfactory decoding theory and showed excellent potential for the simultaneous detection of multiple odors in complex environments with high sensitivity and selectivity [31]. Xu et al. [50] constructed a novel hGPR120 fatty acid receptor sensor based on the self-assembly of the hGPR120 receptor onto the surface of bilayer-modified gold nanoparticles and bovine taste buds, which successfully detected the G protein signals generated by the interaction of this sensor with 14 different natural fatty acids. Pang et al. [34] self-assembled the T1R1 umami receptor protein expressed in vitro by rats onto nanogold, and constructed an electrochemical biosensor based on signal amplification using horseradish peroxidase for the quantitative determination of glutamate monosodium salt concentrations.
An electrochemical taste sensor based on cell signal amplification has the advantages of high sensitivity, strong specificity, quantification, simple operation, low price, and good repeatability, and this technology can provide a good platform for the study of GPCRs and their interaction patterns with ligands and biological functions, which can then be used for taste determination in humans and animals [34].

2.4. Olfactory Electrochemical Sensors Based on a Cellular Signal Cascade Amplification System

Compared to other detection methods, OR electrochemical sensors based on the signal cascade amplification systems of the cell itself should be more sensitive by several orders of magnitude for detecting their respective ligands [51]. Studies have shown that ORCO expression will lead to an increase in ligand sensitivity and a decrease in the lower limit of detection [52]. The use of OR-expressing cells and tissues as biosensing elements is based on the generation of signal cascades of ions transferred from the outside to the inside of cells caused by the combination of OR odor [46]. In addition, OR electrochemical sensors can be coupled with enzymatic and nanomaterial electrochemical signal amplification methods. Given the natural diversity of the olfactory system and the compounds that can bind to gas molecules, a wider range of biosensors can be constructed for different application aspects [8]. Lu et al. [31] prepared a sandwich electrochemical olfactory sensor to detect sex differences in male and female rats, using the vomeronasal organ tissue of rats as a reference. The results showed that the vomeronasal organ sensors of male and female rats had different dynamic curves for their respective urine and were able to distinguish between their own urine and the urine from other rats. Lu et al. [53] simulated intracellular receptor signal processes based on an electrochemical signal amplification system of gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) and HRP. Using gold nanoparticles self-assembled twice and the subsequent adsorption of Bombyx olfactory receptor 1 (BmOR1), a sex pheromone binding protein, an electrochemical upper nanogold membrane receptor sensor was constructed. Kang et al. [54] constructed an H2O2 electrochemical biosensor based on the nanogold adsorption of immobilized horseradish peroxidase HRP with thionine-chitosan as a bridging agent. On this basis, a bilayer nanogold-modified Bacillus cereus immunosensor was prepared based on the nanogold adsorption of HRP for electrochemical signal amplification using Bacillus cereus monoclonal antibody as the biomolecular recognition element and chitosan as the bridging agent [55][56].
In recent years, there have been tremendous advances in conductor technology, nanomaterials, carbon nanotubes, and GR, which have had some impact on the quality of signals obtained from electrochemical biosensors and their process improvements. Thus, various biometric materials based on olfactory sensing elements are expected to eventually be used to construct more sensitive and ultra-selective nanobiosensors by integrating them with various nanomaterials [8]. Biosensors based on OR have great potential for development and have promising applications in numerous fields due to their high sensitivity and specificity. For example, they can be applied to drug discovery by detecting interactions between ORs and drugs, as well as detecting specific interactions between ORs and odor substances, providing a useful platform for basic olfactory research. However, this research is still at an early experimental stage, and commercial OR biosensors are not yet available on the market due to the fragility of the biosensing components and the lack of small, portable signal transduction systems. As researchers gain a better understanding of odor binding sites, synthetic proteins, and peptides with higher stability and reliability, these will likely replace tissues and cells for odor detection. In addition, microfabrication technology improvement will also accelerate the miniaturization of OR-based biosensors, and synthetic biology will likely facilitate their further development. Thus, with the development and combination of multiple disciplines, commercial OR biosensors are bound to emerge and show promising applications in many fields of application [31].

3. Commonly Used Signal Amplification Strategies for Electrochemical Biosensors

3.1. Signal Amplification Strategies Based on Nanomaterials

Nanomaterials are a type of material of an at least one-dimensional nanometer size (1–100 nm) in a three-dimensional space, and are characterized by their high electrical conductivity, good chemical stability, large specific surface area, and structural flexibility. Nanomaterials are endowed with unique surfaces, quantum size, and have been found to manifest macroscopic quantum tunneling effects [57], as well as having unique electronic and optical properties [58].
Nanomaterials allow direct contact with a sensing environment, enabling rapid signal conduction and thus increasing system sensitivity and reducing detection limits [59]. Nanomaterials have been commonly used as carriers or capture carriers to immobilize a large number of markers (e.g., antibodies, nucleic acids, and enzymes) based on their unique properties, such as their nanostructures or superparamagnetic activities [60]. In addition, nanomaterials have been used as novel luminescent reagents to enhance signals by modulating the luminescence of nanomaterials, such as by adjusting their size or ligands [61], thereby enabling signal amplification. Among the common nanomaterials, metal nanomaterials (e.g., gold and silver nanomaterials), carbon nanomaterials, quantum dots, and metal-organic frameworks can be directly used as electroactive substances to achieve signal amplification in sensors [62]Table 1 lists some of the applications of nanomaterial-based signal amplification electrochemical biosensors for practical detection.


  1. Clark, L.C., Jr.; Lyons, C. Electrode systems for continuous monitoring in cardinovascular surgery. Ann. N. Y. Acad. Sci. 1962, 102, 29–45.
  2. Updike, S.J.; Hicks, G.P. Reagentless substrate analysis with immobilizsed enzymes. Science 1967, 158, 270–272.
  3. Updike, S.J.; Hicks, G.P. The enzyme electrode. Nature 1967, 214, 986–988.
  4. Zhang, X.-E. Biosensors: 50 Years Development and Future Perspectives. Bull. Chin. Acad. Sci. 2017, 32, 1271–1280.
  5. Homola, J.; Yee, S.S.; Gauglitz, G. Surface plasmon resonance sensors: Review. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 1999, 54, 3–15.
  6. Anker, J.N.; Hall, W.P.; Lyandres, O.; Shah, N.C.; Zhao, J.; Van Duyne, R.P. Biosensing with plasmonic nanosensors. Nat. Mater. 2008, 7, 442–453.
  7. Mohammadniaei, M.; Park, C.; Min, J.; Sohn, H.; Lee, T. Fabrication of Electrochemical-Based Bioelectronic Device and Biosensor Composed of Biomaterial-Nanomaterial Hybrid. Nat. Public Health Emerg. Collect. 2018, 1064, 263–296.
  8. Wasilewski, T.; Brito, N.F.; Szulczyński, B.; Wojciechowski, M.; Buda, N.; Melo, A.C.A.; Kamysz, W.; Gębicki, J. Olfactory receptor-based biosensors as potential future tools in medical diagnosis. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2022, 150, 116599.
  9. Zhang, M.; Ding, Q.; Zhu, M.; Yuan, R.; Yuan, Y. An ultrasensitive electrochemical biosensor with amplification of highly efficient triple catalytic hairpin assembly and tetris hybridization chain reaction. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2022, 361, 131683.
  10. Thevenot, D.R.; Toth, K.; Durst, R.A.; Wilson, G.S. Electrochemical biosensors: Recommended definitions and classification. Pure Appl. Chem. 1999, 71, 2333–2348.
  11. Zouari, M.; Campuzano, S.; Pingarrón, J.M.; Raouafi, N. Femtomolar direct voltammetric determination of circulating miRNAs in sera of cancer patients using an enzymeless biosensor. Anal. Chim. Acta 2020, 1104, 188–198.
  12. Salahandish, R.; Ghaffarinejad, A.; Omidinia, E.; Zargartalebi, H.; Majidzadeh-A, K.; Naghib, S.M.; Sanati-Nezhad, A. Label-free ultrasensitive detection of breast cancer miRNA-21 biomarker employing electrochemical nano-genosensor based on sandwiched AgNPs in PANI and N-doped graphene. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2018, 120, 129–136.
  13. Li, G.; Qi, X.; Wu, J.; Xu, L.; Wan, X.; Liu, Y.; Chen, Y.; Li, Q. Ultrasensitive, label-free voltammetric determination of norfloxacin based on molecularly imprinted polymers and Au nanoparticle-functionalized black phosphorus nanosheet nanocomposite. J. Hazard. Mater. 2022, 436, 129107.
  14. Li, G.; Qi, X.; Zhang, G.; Wang, S.; Li, K.; Wu, J.; Wan, X.; Liu, Y.; Li, Q. Low-cost voltammetric sensors for robust determination of toxic Cd(II) and Pb(II) in environment and food based on shuttle-like α-Fe2O3 nanoparticles decorated β-Bi2O3 microspheres. Microchem. J. 2022, 179, 107515.
  15. Bakker, E.; Qin, Y. Electrochemical sensors. Anal. Chem. 2006, 78, 3965–3984.
  16. Wang, Z.; Guo, H.; Gui, R.; Jin, H.; Zhang, F. Simultaneous and selective measurement of dopamine and uric acid using glassy carbon electrodes modified with a complex of gold nanoparticles and multiwall carbon nanotubes. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2017, 255, 2069–2077.
  17. El-Moghazy, A.Y.; Wisuthiphaet, N.; Yang, X.; Sun, G.; Nitin, N. Electrochemical biosensor based on genetically engineered bacteriophage T7 for rapid detection of Escherichia coli on fresh produce. Food Control 2022, 135, 108811.
  18. El-Moghazy, A.Y.; Soliman, E.A.; Ibrahim, H.Z.; Marty, J.L.; Istamboulie, G.; Noguer, T. Biosensor based on electrospun blended chitosan-poly (vinyl alcohol) nanofibrous enzymatically sensitized membranes for pirimiphos-methyl detection in olive oil. Talanta 2016, 155, 258–264.
  19. Ju, H. Signal Amplification for Highly Sensitive Immunosensing. J. Anal. Test. 2017, 1, 7.
  20. Plaks, V.; Koopman, C.D.; Werb, Z. Circulating Tumor Cells. Science 2013, 341, 1186–1188.
  21. Pantel, K.; Alix-Panabières, C. Circulating tumour cells and cell-free DNA in gastrointestinal cancer. Nat. Rev. Gastroenterol. Hepatol. 2017, 14, 73–74.
  22. Rezaei, B.; Irannejad, N. Electrochemical Detection Techniques in Biosensor Applications//Electrochemical Biosensors; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2019; pp. 11–43.
  23. Koyappayil, A.; Lee, M.H. Ultrasensitive Materials for Electrochemical Biosensor Labels. Sensors 2020, 21, 89.
  24. Kazzy, M.E.; Weerakkody, J.S.; Hurot, C.; Mathey, R.; Hou, Y. An Overview of Artificial Olfaction Systems with a Focus on Surface Plasmon Resonance for the Analysis of Volatile Organic Compounds. Biosensors 2021, 11, 244.
  25. He, C.; Liu, L.; Korposh, S.; Correia, R.; Morgan, S.P. Volatile Organic Compound Vapour Measurements Using a LocalisedSurface Plasmon Resonance Optical Fibre Sensor Decorated with a Metal-Organic Framework. Sensors 2021, 21, 1420.
  26. Fabre, H.J.H.; Legros, G.V. Souvenirs Entomologiques: E’tude sur l’instinct et les Moeurs des Insectes; Robert Laffont: Paris, France, 1989; Volume 2, p. 1.
  27. Rau, P.; Rau, N. The Sex Attraction and Rhythmic Periodicity in Giant Saturnid Moths. Trans. Acad. Sci. St. Louis 1929, 26, 83.
  28. Fredriksson, R.; Lagerstrom, M.C.; Lundin, L.G.; Schiöth, H.B. The G-proteincoupled receptors in the human genome form five main families. Phylogenetic analysis, paralogon groups, and fingerprints. Mol. Pharmacol. 2003, 63, 1256–1272.
  29. Rüffer, D.; Hoehne, F.; Bühler, J. New Digital Metal-Oxide (MOx) Sensor Platform. Sensors 2018, 18, 1052.
  30. Wasilewski, T.; Kamysz, W.; Gebicki, J. Bioelectronic tongue: Current status and perspectives. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2020, 150, 111923.
  31. Du, L.; Wu, C.; Liu, Q.; Huang, L.; Wang, P. Recent advances in olfactory receptor-based biosensors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2013, 42C, 570–580.
  32. Wasilewski, T.; Gebicki, J.; Kamysz, W. Bio-inspired approaches for explosives detection. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2021, 142, 116330.
  33. Ren, X.; Sun, Y.; Wang, Z.; Barceló, D.; Wang, Q.; Zhang, Z.; Zhang, Y. Abundance and characteristics of microplastic in sewage sludge: A case study of Yangling, Shaanxi province, China. Case Stud. Chem. Environ. Eng. 2020, 2, 100050.
  34. Lu, D.; Lu, F.; Geng, L.; Pang, G. Recent Advances in Olfactory Receptor Biosensors and Cell Signaling Cascade Amplification Systems. Sens. Mater. Int. J. Sens. Technol. 2018, 30, 67–87.
  35. Röck, F.; Barsan, N.; Weimar, U. Electronic Nose: Current Status and Future Trends. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 705–725.
  36. Tahara, K.; Toko, K. Electronic tongues—A review. IEEE Sens. J. 2013, 13, 3001–3011.
  37. Son, M.; Park, T.H. The bioelectronic nose and tongue using olfactory and taste receptors: Analytical tools for food quality and safety assessment. Biotechnol. Adv. 2017, 36, 371–379.
  38. Buck, L.; Axel, R. A novel multigene family may encode odorant receptors: A molecular basis for odor recognition. Cell 1991, 65, 175–187.
  39. Kotlowski, C.; Aspermair, P.; Khan, H.U.; Rozman, C.R.; Breu, J.; Szunerits, S.; Kim, J.J.; Bao, Z.; Kleber, C.; Pelosi, P. Electronic biosensing with flexible organic transistor devices. Flex. Print. Electron. 2018, 3, 034003.
  40. D’Onofrio, C.; Zaremska, V.; Zhu, J.; Knoll, W.; Pelosi, P. Ligand-Binding Assays with OBPs and CSPs. Methods Enzymol. 2020, 642, 229–258.
  41. Park, S.J.; Kwon, O.S.; Lee, S.H.; Song, H.S.; Park, T.H.; Jang, J. Ultrasensitive flflexible graphene based field-effect transistor (FET)-type bioelectronic nose. Nano Lett. 2012, 12, 5082–5090.
  42. Son, M.; Kim, D.; Ko, H.J.; Hong, S.; Park, T.H. A portable and multiplexed bioelectonic sensor using human olfactory and taste receptors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2017, 87, 901–907.
  43. Kwon, O.S.; Song, H.S.; Park, S.J.; Lee, S.H.; An, J.H.; Park, J.W.; Yang, H.; Yoon, H.; Bae, J.; Park, T.H.; et al. An Ultrasensitive, Selective, Multiplexed Superbioelectronic Nose That Mimics the Human Sense of Smell. Nano Lett. 2015, 15, 6559–6567.
  44. Barbosa, A.J.M.; Oliveira, A.R.; Roque, A.C.A. Protein- and Peptide-Based Biosensors in Artifificial Olfaction. Trends Biotechnol. 2018, 36, 1244–1258.
  45. El kazzy, M.; Hurot, C.; Weerakkody, J.S.; Buhot, A.; Hou, Y. Biomimetic Olfactory Biosensors and Bioelectronic Noses. In Advances in Biosensors: Reviews; Yurish, S.Y., Ed.; IFSA Publishing: Barcelona, Spain, 2020; Volume 3, pp. 15–54.
  46. Cave, J.W.; Wickiser, J.K.; Mitropoulos, A.N. Progress in the development of olfactory-based bioelectronic chemosensors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2018, 123, 211–222.
  47. Bohbot, J.D.; Vernick, S. The Emergence of Insect Odorant Receptor-Based Biosensors. Biosensors 2020, 10, 26.
  48. Ward, R.J.; Jjunju, F.P.M.; Griffifith, E.J.; Wuerger, S.M.; Marshall, A. Artifificial Odour-Vision Syneasthesia via Olfactory Sensory Argumentation. IEEE Sens. J. 2021, 21, 6784–6792.
  49. Lee, S.H.; Jun, S.B.; Ko, H.J.; Kim, S.J.; Park, T.H. Cell-based olfactory biosensor using microfabricated planar electrode. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2009, 24, 2659–2664.
  50. Xu, Q.; Lu, D.; Pang, G. Comparative study of hGPR120 receptor self-assembled nano-gold sensor and tissue sensor. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2020, 320, 128382.
  51. Glatz, R.; Bailey-Hill, K. Mimicking nature’s noses: From receptor deorphaning to olfactory biosensing. Prog. Neurobiol. 2011, 93, 270–296.
  52. Khadka, R.; Carraher, C.; Hamiaux, C.; Travas-Sejdic, J.; Kralicek, A. Synergisticimprovement in the performance of insect odorant receptor based biosensors in the presence of Orco. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2020, 153, 112040.
  53. Lu, D.; Xu, Q.; Pang, G. A bombykol electrochemical receptor sensor and its kinetics. Bioelectrochemistry 2019, 128, 263–273.
  54. Xiao, B.K.; Pang, G.C.; Xin, Y.L.; Meng, W.; Wei, M.Z. Study on a hydrogen peroxide biosensor based on horseradish peroxidase/GNPs-thionine/chitosan. Electrochim. Acta 2012, 62, 327–334.
  55. Kang, X.B.; Pang, G.C.; Chen, Q.S.; Liang, X.Y. Fabrication of Bacilluscereus electrochemical immunosensor based on double-layer gold nanoparticles and chitosan. Sens. Actuators B 2013, 177, 1010–1016.
  56. Lu, D.; Lu, F.; Pang, G. A novel glutathione-S transferase immunosensor based on horseradish peroxidase and double-layer gold nanoparticles. Biomed. Microdevices 2016, 18, 1–9.
  57. Qi, Y.; Zhang, T.; Jing, C.Y.; Liu, S.J.; Chen, W. Nanocrystal facet modulation to enhance transferrin binding and cellular delivery. Nat. Commun. 2020, 11, 1262.
  58. Li, W.; Zhan, X.; Song, X.A. Review of Recent Applications of Ion Beam Techniques on Nanomaterial Surface Modification: Design of Nanostructures and Energy Harvesting. Small 2019, 15, 1901820.
  59. Cheng, J. Electrochemical Biosensing of microRNA Based on Multiple Signal Amplification Strategy. Master’s Thesis, Nanjing University of Posts and Telecommunications, Nanjing, China, 2021.
  60. Wang, X.; Pang, G. Amplification systems of weak interaction biosensors: Applications and prospects. Sens. Rev. 2015, 35, 30–42.
  61. Nawaz, N.; Abu Bakar, N.K.; Mahmud, H.N.M.E.; Jamaludin, N.S. Molecularly imprinted polymers-based DNA biosensors. Anal. Biochem. 2021, 630, 114328.
  62. Vilian, A.T.E.; Dinesh, B.; Kang, S.M.; Krishnan, U.M.; Huh, Y.S.; Han, Y.K. Recent advances in molybdenum disulfide-based electrode materials for electroanalytical applications. Microchim. Acta 2019, 186, 203.1–203.29.
  63. Li, S.; Yang, Z.; Chen, Y.; Chen, L.; Li, X. An ultrasensitive ATP electrochemical sensor for cells assay based on bio-nanoassembly and signal amplification. J. Guangxi Med. Univ. 2020, 37, 2276–2281.
  64. Mazloum-Ardakani, M.; Hosseinzadeh, L.; Taleat, Z. Synthesis and electrocatalytic effect of core–shell nanoparticles supported on reduced graphene oxide for sensitive and simple label-free electrochemical aptasensor. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2015, 74, 30–36.
  65. Wang, Z.; Si, L.; Bao, J.; Dai, Z. A reusable microRNA sensor based on the electrocatalytic property of heteroduplex-templated copper nanoclusters. Chem. Commun. 2015, 51, 6305–6307.
  66. Posha, B.; Nambiar, S.R.; Sandhyarani, N. Gold atomic cluster mediated electrochemical aptasensor for the detection of lipopolysaccharide. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2018, 101, 199–205.
  67. Li, Y.; Si, S.; Huang, F.; Wei, J.; Dong, S.; Yang, F.; Li, H.; Liu, S. Ultrasensitive label-free electrochemical biosensor for detecting linear microcystin-LR using degrading enzyme MlrB as recognition element. Bioelectrochemistry 2021, 144, 108000.
  68. Bonanni, A.; Chua, C.K.; Zhao, G.; Sofer, Z.; Pumera, M. Inherently Electroactive Graphene Oxide Nanoplatelets as Labels for Single Nucleotide Polymorphism Detection. ACS Nano 2012, 6, 8546–8551.
  69. Liu, X.; Cheng, H.; Zhao, Y.; Wang, Y.; Li, F. Portable electrochemical biosensor based on laser-induced graphene and MnO2 switch-bridged DNA signal amplification for sensitive detection of pesticide. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2021, 199, 113906.
  70. Hu, T.; Zhang, L.; Wen, W.; Zhang, X.; Wang, S. Enzyme catalytic amplification of miRNA-155 detection with graphene quantum dot-based electrochemical biosensor. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2016, 77, 451–456.
  71. Medina-Sánchez, M.; Miserere, S.; Morales-Narváez, E.; Merkoçi, A. On-chip magneto-immunoassay for Alzheimer’s biomarker electrochemical detection by using quantum dots as labels. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2014, 54, 279–284.
  72. Zhu, L.; Yang, B.; Qian, K.; Qiao, L.; Liu, Y.; Liu, B. Sensitive electrochemical aptasensor for detecting EpCAM with silica nanoparticles and quantum dots for signal amplification. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2019, 856, 113655.
  73. Lahcen, A.A.; Baleg, A.A.; Baker, P.; Iwuoha, E.; Amine, A. Synthesis and electrochemical characterization of nanostructured magnetic molecularly imprinted polymers for 17-beta-Estradiol determination. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2017, 241, 698–705.
  74. Yuan, Y.H.; Wu, Y.D.; Chi, B.Z.; Wen, S.H.; Liang, R.P.; Qiu, J.D. Simultaneously electrochemical detection of microRNAs based on multifunctional magnetic nanoparticles probe coupling with hybridization chain reaction. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2017, 97, 325–331.
  75. Ye, Z.; Wang, Q.; Qiao, J.; Xu, Y.; Li, G. In situ synthesis of sandwich MOFs on reduced graphene oxide for electrochemical sensing of dihydroxybenzene isomers. Analyst 2019, 144, 2120–2129.
  76. Ma, B.; Guo, H.; Wang, M.; Li, L.; Jia, X.; Chen, H.; Xue, R.; Yang, W. Electrocatalysis of Cu?MOF/Graphene Composite and its Sensing Application for Electrochemical Simultaneous Determination of Dopamine and Paracetamol. Electroanalysis 2019, 31, 1002–1008.
  77. Peng, B.; Cui, J.; Wang, Y.; Liu, J.Q.; Zheng, H.M.; Jin, L.; Zhang, Y.; Wu, Y.C. CeO2-x/C/rGO nanocomposites derived from Ce-MOF and graphene oxide as robust platform for highly sensitive uric acid detection. Nanoscale 2018, 10, 1939–1945.
  78. Nemiwal, M.; Zhang, T.C.; Kumar, D. Enzyme immobilized nanomaterials as electrochemical biosensors for detection of biomolecules. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2022, 156, 110006.
  79. Nguyen, H.H.; Lee, S.H.; Lee, U.J.; Fermin, C.D. Immobilized Enzymes in Biosensor Applications. Materials 2019, 12, 121.
  80. Cao, Q.; Xiao, Y.S.; Meng, Q.Y.; Yuan, X.Z.; Liu, H.; Cheng, L.J.; Dong, W.L. Research progress of enzyme-based biosensors in rapid detection. J. Food Saf. Qual. 2019, 10, 6902–6908.
  81. O’Sullivan, M.J.; Bridges, J.W.; Marks, V. Enzyme Immunoassay: A Review. Ann. Clin. Biochem. Int. J. Lab. Med. 1979, 16, 221–239.
  82. Kang, C.; Kang, J.; Lee, N.-S.; Yoon, Y.H.; Yang, H. DT-Diaphorase as a Bifunctional Enzyme Label That Allows Rapid Enzymatic Amplification and Electrochemical Redox Cycling. Anal. Chem. 2017, 89, 7974–7980.
  83. Zhao, S.; Zhou, T.; Khan, A.; Chen, Z.; Liu, P.; Li, X. A novel electrochemical biosensor for bisphenol A detection based on engineered Escherichia coli cells with a surface-display of tyrosinase. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2021, 353, 131063.
  84. Kurbanoglu, S.; Erkmen, C.; Uslu, B. Frontiers in electrochemical enzyme based biosensors for food and drug analysis. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2020, 124, 115809.
  85. Fernández, H.; Arévalo, F.J.; Granero, A.M.; Robledo, S.N.; Díaz Nieto, C.H.; Riberi, W.I.; Zon, M.A. Electrochemical biosensors for the determination of toxic substances related to food safety developed in South America: Mycotoxins and herbicides. Chemosensors 2017, 5, 23.
  86. Nguyen, H.H.; Park, J.; Park, S.J.; Lee, C.S.; Kim, M. Long-term stability and integrity of plasmid-based DNA data storage. Polymers 2018, 10, 28.
  87. Tomassetti, M.; Pezzilli, R.; Prestopino, G.; Natale, C.D.; Medaglia, P.G. Fabrication and characterization of a Layered Double Hydroxide based catalase biosensor and a catalytic sensor for hydrogen peroxide determination. Microchem. J. 2021, 170, 106700.
  88. Niu, W.; Guo, J. Novel fluorescence-based biosensors incorporating unnatural amino acids. Methods Enzymol. 2017, 589, 191–219.
  89. Das, P.; Das, M.; Chinnadayyala, S.R.; Singha, I.M.; Goswami, P. Recent advances on developing 3rd generation enzyme electrode for biosensor applications. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2016, 79, 386–397.
  90. Li, M.; Cheng, J.; Yuan, Z.; Zhou, H.; Zhang, L.; Dai, Y.; Shen, Q.; Fan, Q. Sensitive electrochemical detection of microRNA based on DNA walkers and hyperbranched HCR-DNAzyme cascade signal amplification strategy. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2021, 345, 130348.
  91. Sun, D.; Lu, J.; Luo, Z.; Zhang, L.; Liu, P.; Chen, Z. Competitive electrochemical platform for ultrasensitive cytosensing of liver cancer cells by using nanotetrahedra structure with rolling circle amplification. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2018, 120, 8–14.
  92. Zhang, Y.; Xu, G.; Lian, G.; Luo, F.; Xie, Q.; Lin, Z.; Chen, G. Electrochemiluminescence biosensor for miRNA-21 based on toehold-mediated strand displacement amplification with Ru(phen)32+ loaded DNA nanoclews as signal tags. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2019, 147, 111789.
  93. Yang, B.; Zhang, S.; Fang, X.; Kong, J. Double signal amplification strategy for ultrasensitive electrochemical biosensor based on nuclease and quantum dot-DNA nanocomposites in the detection of breast cancer 1 gene mutation. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2019, 142, 111544.
  94. Yu, L.; He, P.; Xu, Y.; Kou, X.; Yu, Z.; Xie, X.; Miao, P. Manipulations of DNA four-way junction architecture and DNA modified Fe3O4@Au nanomaterials for the detection of miRNA. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2020, 313, 128015.
  95. Zhang, C.; Li, D.; Li, D.; Wen, K.; Yang, X.; Zhu, Y. Rolling circle amplification-mediated in situ synthesis of palladium nanoparticles for the ultrasensitive electrochemical detection of microRNA. Analyst 2019, 144, 3817–3825.
  96. Yin, P.; Choi HM, T.; Calvert, C.R.; Pierce, N.A. Programming biomolecular self-assembly pathways. Nature 2008, 451, 318–322.
  97. Wang, W.; Zhang, C.; Guo, J.; Li, G.; Zou, L. Sensitive electrochemical detection of oxytetracycline based on target triggered CHA and poly adenine assisted probe immobilization. Anal. Chim. Acta 2021, 1181, 338895.
  98. Ikbal, J.; Lim, G.S.; Gao, Z. The hybridization chain reaction in the development of ultrasensitive nucleic acid assays. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2015, 64, 86–99.
  99. Augspurger, E.E.; Rana, M.; Yigit, M.V. Chemical and biological sensing using hybridization chain reaction. ACS Sens. 2018, 3, 878–902.
  100. Ling, P.; Wang, L.; Cheng, S.; Gao, X.; Sun, X.; Gao, F. Ultrasensitive electrochemical biosensor for protein detection based on target-triggering cascade enzyme-free signal amplification strategy. Anal. Chim. Acta 2022, 1202, 339675.
  101. Cheng, W.; Ma, J.; Cao, P.; Zhang, Y.; Li, J. Enzyme-free electrochemical biosensor based on double signal amplification strategy for the ultra-sensitive detection of exosomal microRNAs in biological samples. Talanta 2020, 219, 121242.
  102. Fozooni, T.; Ravan, H.; Sasan, H. Signal Amplification Technologies for the Detection of Nucleic Acids: From Cell-Free Analysis to Live-Cell Imaging. Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol. 2017, 183, 1224–1253.
  103. Hasanzadeh, M.; Shadjou, N.; de la Guardia, M. Electrochemical biosensing using hydrogel nanoparticles. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2014, 62, 11–19.
  104. Strehlitz, B.; Gründig, B.; Kopinke, H. Sensor for amperometric determination of ammonia and ammonia-forming enzyme reactions. Anal. Chim. Acta 2000, 403, 11.
  105. Zhybak, M.T.; Vagin, M.Y.; Beni, V.; Liu, X.; Dempsey, E.; Turner, A.P.F.; Korpan, Y.I. Direct detection of ammonium ion by means of oxygen electrocatalysis at a copper- polyaniline composite on a screen-printed electrode. Microchim. Acta 2016, 183, 1981.
  106. Uzunçar, S.; Meng, L.; Turner, A.P.F.; Mak, W.C. Processable and nanofibrous polyaniline: Polystyrene-sulphonate (nanoPANI: PSS) for the fabrication of catalyst-free ammonium sensors and enzyme-coupled urea biosensors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2021, 171, 112725.
  107. Xu, M.; Yadavalli, V.K. Flexible biosensors for the impedimetric detection of protein targets using silk-conductive polymer biocomposites. ACS Sens. 2019, 4, 1040–1047.
  108. Singh, A.; Sharma, R.; Singh, M.; Verma, N. Electrochemical determination of L-arginine in leukemic blood samples based on a polyaniline-multiwalled carbon nanotube—Magnetite nanocomposite film modified glassy carbon electrode. Instrum. Sci. Technol. 2020, 48, 400–416.
  109. Verma, N.; Singh, A.K.; Saini, N. Synthesis and characterization of ZnS quantum dots and application for development of arginine biosensor. Sens. BioSens. Res. 2017, 15, 41.
  110. Li, C.; Wang, Y.; Jiang, H.; Wang, X. Biosensors based on advanced sulfur-containing nanomaterials. Sensors 2020, 20, 3488.
  111. Zheng, J.; Zhao, H.; Ning, G.; Sun, W.; Wang, L.; Liang, H.; Xu, H.; He, C.; Zhao, H.; Li, C.-P. A novel affinity peptide–antibody sandwich electrochemical biosensor for PSA based on the signal amplification of MnO2 -functionalized covalent organic framework. Talanta 2021, 233, 122520.
  112. Liu, Y.; Ai, K.; Lu, L. Polydopamine and Its Derivative Materials: Synthesis and Promising Applications in Energy, Environmental, and Biomedical Fields. Chem. Rev. 2014, 114, 5057–5115.
  113. Hao, N.; Zhang, X.; Zhou, Z.; Hua, R.; Zhang, Y.; Liu, Q.; Qian, J.; Li, H.; Wang, K. AgBr nanoparticles/3D nitrogen-doped graphene hydrogel for fabricating all-solid-state luminol-electrochemiluminescence Escherichia coli aptasensors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2017, 97, 377–383.
  114. Huang, K.-J.; Wang, L.; Zhang, J.-Z.; Wang, L.-L.; Mo, Y.-P. One-step preparation of layered molybdenum disulfide/multi-walled carbon nanotube composites for enhanced performance supercapacitor. Energy 2014, 67, 234–240.
  115. Zhang, W.; Zhang, P.; Su, Z.; Wei, G. Synthesis and sensor applications of MoS2-based nanocomposites. Nanoscale 2015, 7, 18364–18378.
  116. Sun, Y.; Wu, X. Construction and Application of an Electrochemiluminescence Immunosensor Based on Gold Particles Modified Molybdenum Disulfide Nanocomposites. J. Instrum. Anal. 2021, 40, 363–369.
  117. Cui, F.; Zhou, Z.; Zhou, H.S. Molecularly Imprinted Polymers and Surface Imprinted Polymers Based Electrochemical Biosensor for Infectious Diseases. Sensors 2020, 20, 996.
  118. Ates, M. A review study of (bio)sensor systems based on conducting polymers. Mater. Sci. Eng. C Mater. Biol. Appl. 2013, 33, 1853–1859.
  119. Tian, L.; Qian, K.; Qi, J.; Liu, Q.; Yao, C.; Song, W.; Wang, Y. Gold nanoparticles superlattices assembly for electrochemical biosensor detection of microRNA-21. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2018, 99, 564–570.
  120. Hong, C.-Y.; Chen, X.; Liu, T.; Li, J.; Yang, H.-H.; Chen, J.-H.; Chen, G.-N. Ultrasensitive electrochemical detection of cancer-associated circulating microRNA in serum samples based on DNA concatamers. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2013, 50, 132–136.
  121. Cai, J.; Huang, H.; Li, Z.; Gao, Y.; Liang, Q.; Chen, X.; Chu, N.; Hao, W.; Wang, D.; Jiang, Y.; et al. A rechargeable microbial electrochemical sensor for water biotoxicity monitoring. Biosens. Bioelectron. X 2022, 10, 100132.
  122. Xu, Q.; Lu, D.; Pang, G. Study on Bombykol Receptor Self-Assembly and Universality of G Protein Cellular Signal Amplification System. Acs Sens. 2019, 4, 257–264.
  123. Seger, R.; Krebs, E.G. The MAPK signaling cascade. FASEB J. 1995, 9, 726–735.
  124. Wei, L.; Qiao, L.; Pang, G.; Xie, J. A kinetic study of bitter taste receptor sensing using immobilized porcine taste bud tissues. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2017, 92, 74–80.
  125. Jang, M.; Cai, L.; Udeani, G.O.; Slowing, K.V.; Thomas, C.F.; Beecher, C.W.W.; Fong, H.H.S.; Farnsworth, N.R.; Kinghorn, A.D.; Mehta, R.G.; et al. Cancer Chemopreventive Activity of Resveratrol, a Natural Product Derived from Grapes. Science 1997, 275, 218–220.
  126. Tsai, H.-Y.; Ho, C.-T.; Chen, Y.-K. Biological actions and molecular effects of resveratrol, pterostilbene, and 3′-hydroxypterostilbene. J. Food Drug Anal. 2016, 25, 134–147.
  127. Ahmad, I.; Hoda, M. Attenuation of diabetic retinopathy and neuropathy by resveratrol: Review on its molecular mechanisms of action. Life Sci. 2020, 245, 117350.
  128. Diaz-Gerevini, G.T.; Repossi, G.; Dain, A.; Tarres, M.C.; Das, U.N.; Eynard, A.R. Beneficial action of res-veratrol: How and why? Nutrition 2016, 32, 174–178.
  129. Kim, C.-W.; Hwang, K.-A.; Choi, K.-C. Anti-metastatic potential of resveratrol and its metabolites by the inhibition of epithelial-mesenchymal transition, migration, and invasion of malignant cancer cells. Phytomedicine 2016, 23, 1787–1796.
  130. Ren, R.; Lu, D.; Liu, T. Development of a sandwich-type rat small intestine tissue sensor for detecting resveratrol and its receptors. Biomed. Microdevices 2021, 23, 1–8.
  131. Elvira, K.S. Microfluidic technologies for drug discovery and development: Friend or foe? Trends Pharmacol. Sci. 2021, 42, 518–526.
  132. Xie, Y.; Dai, L.; Yang, Y. Microfluidic technology and its application in the point-of-care testing field. Biosens. Bioelectron. X 2022, 10, 100109.
  133. Xing, G.; Zhang, W.; Li, N.; Pu, Q.; Lin, J. Recent progress on microfluidic biosensors for rapid detection of pathogenic bacteria. Chin. Chem. Lett. 2021, 4, 1743–1751.
  134. Liu, Y.; Jiang, D.; Wang, S.; Cai, G.; Xue, L.; Li, Y.; Liao, M.; Lin, J. A microfluidic biosensor for rapid detection of Salmonella typhimurium based on magnetic separation, enzymatic catalysis and electrochemical impedance analysis. Chin. Chem. Lett. 2021, 33, 3156–3160.
  135. Shenoy, V.J.; Edwards, C.E.; Helgeson, M.E.; Valentine, M.T. Design and characterization of a 3D-printed staggered herringbone mixer. BioTechniques 2021, 70, 285–289.
  136. Hadjigeorgiou, A.G.; Boudouvis, A.G.; Kokkoris, G. Thorough computational analysis of the staggered herringbone micromixer reveals transport mechanisms and enables mixing efficiency-based improved design. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 414, 128775.
  137. Schmidt-Speicher, L.M.; Lnge, K. Microfluidic Integration for Electrochemical Biosensor Applications. Curr. Opin. Electrochem. 2021, 29, 100755.
  138. Kutluk, H.; Bruch, R.; Urban, G.A.; Dincer, C. Impact of assay format on miRNA sensing: Electrochemical microfluidic biosensor for miRNA-197 detection—ScienceDirect. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2020, 148, 111824.
  139. Li, Y.; Zuo, S.; Ding, L.; Xu, P.; Wang, K.; Liu, Y.; Li, J.; Liu, C. Sensitive immunoassay of cardiac troponin I using an optimized microelectrode array in a novel integrated microfluidic electrochemical device. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2021, 412, 8325–8338.
  140. Ansari, M.H.; Hassan, S.; Qurashi, A.; Khanday, F. Microfluidic-integrated DNA nanobiosensors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2016, 85, 247–260.
  141. Liu, J.; Geng, Z.; Fan, Z.; Liu, J.; Chen, H. Point-of-care testing based on smartphone: The current state-of-the-art (2017–2018). Biosens. Bioelectron. 2019, 132, 17–37.
  142. Zhang, H.; Fan, M.; Jiang, J.; Shen, Q.; Cai, C.; Shen, J. Sensitive electrochemical biosensor for MicroRNAs based on duplex-specific nuclease-assisted target recycling followed with gold nanoparticles and enzymatic signal amplification. Anal. Chim. Acta 2019, 1064, 33–39.
  143. Dong, H.; Jin, S.; Ju, H.; Hao, K.; Xu, L.P.; Lu, H.; Zhang, X. Trace and label-free microRNA detection using oligonucleotide encapsulated silver nanoclusters as probes. Anal. Chem. 2012, 84, 8670–8674.
  144. Li, X.-M.; Wang, L.-L.; Luo, J.; Wei, Q.-L. A dual-amplified electrochemical detection of mRNA based on duplex-specific nuclease and bio-bar-code conjugates. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2014, 65, 245–250.
  145. Chen, D.; Zhang, M.; Ma, M.; Hai, H.; Li, J.; Yang, S. A novel electrochemical DNA biosensor for transgenic soybean detection based on triple signal amplification. Anal. Chim. Acta 2019, 1078, 24–31.
  146. Zhang, J.; Cui, H.; Wei, G.; Cheng, L.; Lin, Y.; Ma, G.; Hong, N.; Liao, F.; Fan, H. A double signal amplification electrochemical MicroRNA biosensor based on catalytic hairpin assembly and bisferrocene label. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2020, 858, 113816.
  147. Xiao, S.; Song, P.; Bu, F.; Pang, G.; Xie, J. The investigation of detection and sensing mechanism of spicy substance based on human TRPV1 channel protein-cell membrane biosensor. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2021, 172, 112779.
  148. Abi, A.; Mohammadpour, Z.; Zuo, X.; Safavi, A. Nucleic acid-based electrochemical nanobiosensors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2018, 102, 479–489.
  149. Lim, S.A.; Ahmed, M.U. Electrochemical immunosensors and their recent nanomaterial-based signal amplification strate-gies: A review. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 24995–25014.
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to : , , , , , , , , ,
View Times: 540
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 19 Aug 2022