Nanomaterials: Comparison
View Latest Version
Please note this is a comparison between Version 2 by Fanny Huang and Version 1 by Zala Štukovnik.

Nanomaterials can be employed to modify the biosensor’s surface to increase the surface area available for biorecognition events, thereby improving the sensitivity and detection limits of the biosensor. Various nanomaterials, such as carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers, quantum dots, metal nanoparticles, and graphene oxide nanoparticles, have been investigated for impedimetric biosensors.

  • nanomaterials
  • impedimetric biosensors
  • carbon nanofibers
  • carbon nanotubes
  • graphene oxide
  • quantum dots
  • nanoparticles
  • metal nanoparticles
  • metal oxide nanoparticles
  • two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenides

1. Metal and Metal Oxide Nanoparticles and Two-Dimensional Transition Metal Dichalcogenides

There are several good reasons for using nanoparticles in the biosensor design, including a large surface area, a flexible surface for molecular functionalization, electrocatalytic properties, and the facilitation of a direct electron transfer [67][1]. Due to their resistance to oxidation and high biocompatibility, precious metals like Au, Ag, Pt, and Pd are commonly selected for electrode modification [68,69][2][3]. In addition, metal oxide nanoparticles such as NiO, ZnO, CuO, and TiO2 provide similar advantages. Nevertheless, they are less expensive and have simple production protocols. They have been widely used in faradaic biosensors to enable rapid electron transfer kinetics between the electrode and the active sites of biomolecules [70][4]. These nanoparticles can alter the sensing substrate by depositing them on the electrode surface or by combining them with the remaining elements of the constructed electrode matrix.
The large and flexible surface area of metal nanoparticles allows for a greater deposition of biomolecules during immobilization, resulting in a greater impedance response. This is one of the main purposes of using these nanoparticles [69,70][3][4].
It is also possible to improve detection performance by using two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenides (2D TMDs), which exhibit promising features like biocompatibility, a large surface area for detection, and numerous electrochemical property-modifying possibilities [71][5]. Two-dimensional TMDs represent MX2-type compounds with layered structures formed by covalent bonds and weak interlayer interactions. Each MX2 monolayer consists of two layers of chalcogen atoms and a layer of a transition metal atom (M) [72][6]. Two-dimensional TMDs include molybdenum disulfide (MoS2), molybdenum diselenide (MoSe2), tungsten disulfide (WS2), tungsten diselenide (WSe2), hexagonal boron nitride (h-BN), borophene (2D boron), silicene (2D silicon), germanene (2D germanium), and MXenes (2D carbides/nitrides) [73][7]. Due to their larger surface area, 2D TMDs can immobilize large amounts of biomolecules per unit area [74][8].

2. Graphene and Graphene Oxide (GO)

Compared to other sensors made of nanomaterials, graphene-based biosensors exhibit several unique advantages. For example, the unique 2D structure and thickness of graphene sheets of only one atom allow each carbon atom to interact directly with the analyte, making graphene-based biosensors very sensitive to changes in environmental conditions [42][9]. GO represents a multilayer, oxygenated graphene sheet with a carbon-to-oxygen ratio of roughly 3:1. It contains oxygen functional groups, including epoxides, carboxyls, hydroxyls, and alcohols at the sheet’s edge and surface [42,75][9][10]. By increasing the rate of heterogeneous electron and charge transfer, oxygen functional groups on the graphene surface may make GO more water-soluble and biocompatible [42,76][9][11]. Following reduction, GO changes into rGO, which contains some residual oxygen and structural defects. Reduction yields a material with high-thermal conductivity comparable to doped conductive polymers, which is about 36 times greater than silicon and around 100 times better than GaAs [42,77][9][12]. Compared to CNTs, graphene has two major advantages in terms of its application in electrochemical sensors. Firstly, graphene is produced from graphite, a widely available and inexpensive material, and does not include any metallic impurities that would interfere with the electrochemical properties of the material. Secondly, π–π stacking and hydrophobic interactions make it simple to immobilize biomolecules on graphene. The benefits of graphene as a channel material include a decreased noise ratio, ease of functionalization, processability in solutions, and biocompatibility [42,78][9][13].

3. Carbon Nanotubes (CNTs)

Carbon nanotubes (CNTs) represent one of the most popular nanomaterials made of cylindrical structures comprising a corrugated graphene layer [79][14]. Due to their unique structure and nanoscale dimensions, CNTs have many properties that can be employed for chemical and biological sensing applications. As an example of a chemical sensor application, Giordano et al. [80][15] developed a sensor with a film of multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) that can be used to monitor alcohol concentration in liquid solutions such as alcoholic beverages. CNTs are structurally comparable to a sheet of graphene that has been rolled up. Single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) and multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) represent the two main forms of CNTs [18][16]. From the perspective of biosensor analysis, both types of CNTs have their advantages. While MWCNTs exhibit excellent corrosion resistance, SWCNTs have strong elastic modulus and tensile strength [81][17]. Certain limitations make SWCNTs harder to function as biosensors than other materials. For example, they are very small to bind to some biomolecules, such as cells. Nevertheless, some neurotransmitters or DNA biosensors nowadays use SWCNT as a modification material [43][18].
CNTs exhibit good mechanical properties and have a modulus of elasticity equivalent to that of a diamond, as well as good conductivity because their sheet structure is similar to that of graphene. Moreover, this material has great potential in terms of thermal conduction. Furthermore, CNTs exhibit many advantages, such as their light weight, large specific surface area, chemical stability, and good electrochemical properties, which offer a promising research potential for biomolecular detection in medicine. The CNTs’ large specific surface area offers a variety of reactive sites that make it easier for them to interact with different biomolecules. Additionally, because CNTs’ electrical conductivity is sensitive to analyte absorption, they can also be used to create sensitive, label-free biosensors [82][19].

4. Carbon Nanofibers (CNFs)

Among the numerous nanomaterials, carbon nanofibers (CNFs) have become one of the most investigated areas in nanomaterial science due to their excellent biological and physicochemical properties, such as biocompatibility, large specific surface area, and easy functionalization [83][20]. CNFs are represented by cylindrical nanocarbon structures with different arrangements in stacked graphene sheets [84][21]. The cylindrical structure of CNFs can be solid or hollow, with a length of up to 10 μm and with a diameter of 10 to 500 nm [48][22].
Graphite, glassy carbon, carbon fibers, nanotubes, amorphous powders, and diamonds represent only a few examples of the different microstructures found in carbon materials [48,84][21][22]. CNFs are similar to CNTs in terms of electrical and mechanical properties. However, the size and layout of CNFs may be precisely adjusted. Nevertheless, the size and graphite arrangement of CNFs can be well controlled [48,85][22][23].
Furthermore, compared to other structures like CNTs, CNFs with more edges on their outer wall exhibit a better potential for electron transmission [86][24]. CNFs have been widely used in developing biosensors due to their unique physical and chemical properties, including excellent electrical conductivity, large surface area, biocompatibility, and the ease of production [87,88][25][26].

5. Quantum Dots (QDs)

Due to their extremely large surface area and dangling bonds, QDs represent zero-dimensional semiconductor nanoparticles with diameters typically ranging from 1 to 20 nm and many active sites [89][27]. Typically, QDs are made of II, VI, B, or III, V, or their alloyed semiconductor materials [90][28].
The popularity of QDs, including carbon quantum dots (CQDs) and graphene quantum dots (GQDs), has increased as a result of their distinctive qualities, including good biocompatibility, electrocatalytic activity, tunable size, good signal amplification, and multiplex detection capacity [91][29]. In contrast to the majority of carbon allotropes, such as CNTs or graphene, CDs also exhibit excellent stability, high solubility, low toxicity, amplified adsorption ability, and high-quantum yield [92][30]. CQDs were unintentionally discovered in 2004 while single-walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs) were being purified [93][31].

References

  1. Tran, T.B.; Son, S.J.; Min, J. Nanomaterials in label-free impedimetric biosensor: Current process and future perspectives. BioChip J. 2016, 10, 318–330.
  2. Estananto; Septiani, N.L.W.; Iqbal, M.; Suyatman; Nuruddin, A.; Yuliarto, B. Nanocomposite of graphene and WO3 nanowires for carbon monoxide sensors. Nanocomposites 2021, 7, 225–236.
  3. Pingarrón, J.M.; Villalonga, R.; Yáñez-Sedeño, P. Nanoparticle-Modified Electrodes for Sensing; CRC: Boca Raton, FL, USA, 2014.
  4. Patra, D.C.; Deka, N.; Dash, A.; Khan, S.A.; Misra, T.K.; Mondal, S.P. Noninvasive Electrochemical Nitric Oxide Detection in Human Saliva Using Pt and TiO2 Nanoparticle Composite Electrodes. ACS Appl. Electron. Mater. 2023, 5, 832–845.
  5. Mitrevska, K.; Milosavljevic, V.; Gagic, M.; Richtera, L.; Adam, V. 2D transition metal dichalcogenide nanomaterial-based miRNA biosensors. Appl. Mater. Today 2021, 23, 101043.
  6. Hu, Y.; Huang, Y.; Tan, C.; Zhang, X.; Lu, Q.; Sindoro, M.; Huang, X.; Huang, W.; Wang, L.; Zhang, H. Two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenide nanomaterials for biosensing applications. Mater. Chem. Front. 2017, 1, 24–36.
  7. Choi, W.; Choudhary, N.; Han, G.H.; Park, J.; Akinwande, D.; Lee, Y.H. Recent development of two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenides and their applications. Mater. Today 2017, 20, 116–130.
  8. Hu, H.; Zavabeti, A.; Quan, H.; Zhu, W.; Wei, H.; Chen, D.; Ou, J.Z. Recent advances in two-dimensional transition metal dichalcogenides for biological sensing. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2019, 142, 111573.
  9. Justino, C.I.L.; Gomes, A.R.; Freitas, A.C.; Duarte, A.C.; Rocha-Santos, T.A.P. Graphene based sensors and biosensors. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2017, 91, 53–66.
  10. Chang, J.; Zhou, G.; Christensen, E.R.; Heideman, R.; Chen, J. Graphene-based sensors for detection of heavy metals in water: A review. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2014, 406, 3957–3975.
  11. Deng, X.; Tang, H.; Jiang, J. Recent progress in graphene-material-based optical sensors. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2014, 406, 6903–6916.
  12. Bao, Q.; Loh, K.P. Graphene photonics, plasmonics, and broadband optoelectronic devices. ACS Nano 2012, 6, 3677–3694.
  13. He, Q.; Wu, S.; Yin, Z.; Zhang, H. Graphene-based electronic sensors. Chem. Sci. 2012, 3, 1764–1772.
  14. Sakellariou, G.; Priftis, D.; Baskaran, D. Surface-initiated polymerization from carbon nanotubes: Strategies and perspectives. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2013, 42, 677–704.
  15. Giordano, C.; Filatrella, G.; Sarno, M.; Di Bartolomeo, A. Multi-walled carbon nanotube films for the measurement of the alcoholic concentration. Micro Nano Lett. 2019, 14, 304–308.
  16. Katz, E.; Willner, I. Probing Biomolecular Interactions at Conductive and Semiconductive Surfaces by Impedance Spectroscopy: Routes to Impedimetric Immunosensors, DNA-Sensors, and Enzyme Biosensors. Electroanalysis 2003, 15, 913–947.
  17. Mondal, J.; An, J.M.; Surwase, S.S.; Chakraborty, K.; Sutradhar, S.C.; Hwang, J.; Lee, J.; Lee, Y.-K. Carbon Nanotube and Its Derived Nanomaterials Based High Performance Biosensing Platform. Biosensors 2022, 12, 731.
  18. Xie, Q.-Z.; Lin, M.-W.; Hsu, W.-E.; Lin, C.-T. Advancements of Nanoscale Structures and Materials in Impedimetric Biosensing Technologies. ECS J. Solid. State Sci. Technol. 2020, 9, 115027.
  19. Dai, B.; Zhou, R.; Ping, J.; Ying, Y.; Xie, L. Recent advances in carbon nanotube-based biosensors for biomolecular detection. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2022, 154, 116658.
  20. Zhang, L.; Yin, M.; Wei, X.; Sun, J.; Xu, D. Recent advances in morphology, aperture control, functional control and electrochemical sensors applications of carbon nanofibers. Anal. Biochem. 2022, 656, 114882.
  21. Huang, J.; Liu, Y.; You, T. Carbon nanofiber based electrochemical biosensors: A review. Anal. Methods 2010, 2, 202–211.
  22. Eivazzadeh-Keihan, R.; Bahojb Noruzi, E.; Chidar, E.; Jafari, M.; Davoodi, F.; Kashtiaray, A.; Ghafori Gorab, M.; Masoud Hashemi, S.; Javanshir, S.; Ahangari Cohan, R.; et al. Applications of carbon-based conductive nanomaterials in biosensors. Chem. Eng. J. 2022, 442, 136183.
  23. Vamvakaki, V.; Tsagaraki, K.; Chaniotakis, N. Carbon Nanofiber-Based Glucose Biosensor. Anal. Chem. 2006, 78, 5538–5542.
  24. Wang, Z.; Wu, S.; Wang, J.; Yu, A.; Wei, G. Carbon Nanofiber-Based Functional Nanomaterials for Sensor Applications. Nanomaterials 2019, 9, 1045.
  25. Lu, X.; Zhou, J.; Lu, W.; Liu, Q.; Li, J. Carbon nanofiber-based composites for the construction of mediator-free biosensors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2008, 23, 1236–1243.
  26. Wu, L.; Zhang, X.; Ju, H. Detection of NADH and Ethanol Based on Catalytic Activity of Soluble Carbon Nanofiber with Low Overpotential. Anal. Chem. 2007, 79, 453–458.
  27. Zhao, Y.; Huang, J.; Huang, Q.; Tao, Y.; Gu, R.; Li, H.-Y.; Liu, H. Electrochemical biosensor employing PbS colloidal quantum dots/Au nanospheres-modified electrode for ultrasensitive glucose detection. Nano Res. 2023, 16, 4085–4092.
  28. Wu, R.; Feng, Z.; Zhang, J.; Jiang, L.; Zhu, J.-J. Quantum dots for electrochemical cytosensing. TrAC Trends Anal. Chem. 2022, 148, 116531.
  29. Mansuriya, B.D.; Altintas, Z. Graphene Quantum Dot-Based Electrochemical Immunosensors for Biomedical Applications. Materials 2020, 13, 96.
  30. Verma, C.; Alfantazi, A.; Quraishi, M.A. Quantum dots as ecofriendly and aqueous phase substitutes of carbon family for traditional corrosion inhibitors: A perspective. J. Mol. Liq. 2021, 343, 117648.
  31. Pourmadadi, M.; Rahmani, E.; Rajabzadeh-Khosroshahi, M.; Samadi, A.; Behzadmehr, R.; Rahdar, A.; Ferreira, L.F.R. Properties and application of carbon quantum dots (CQDs) in biosensors for disease detection: A comprehensive review. J. Drug Deliv. Sci. Technol. 2023, 80, 104156.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
Video Production Service
Feedback