DOI:
10.1039/C6RA00701E
(Paper)
RSC Adv., 2016,
6, 37681-37688
Label-free electrochemiluminescent detection of transcription factors with hybridization chain reaction amplification†
Received
9th January 2016
, Accepted 28th March 2016
First published on 30th March 2016
Abstract
Because of the intrinsic importance of transcription factors (TFs) as targets in clinical diagnosis and drug development, the simple and sensitive detection of TFs is very essential for biological studies and medical diagnostics. However, most of the reported methods involve complicated operations or labelling processes and in addition, an electrochemiluminescence (ECL) method with various distinct advantages hasn't been developed for TF detection until now. In this work, we describe a novel simple and efficient strategy for label-free ECL detection of transcription factors with hybridization chain reaction (HCR) signal amplification. Based on the Ag+-stabilized self-assembly triplex DNA, in the presence of TFs, TFs specifically bond to the duplex DNA (dsDNA) recognition probes, resulting in the separation of target DNA from the triplex structure. With the SH-capture probe DNA assembled gold electrode, the presence of the target DNA and helper DNA-1 and helper DNA-2 leads to the formation of long chain dsDNA polymers on the gold electrode surface through hybridization chain reaction, which allows the intercalation of numerous ECL indicators Ru(phen)32+ (phen = 1,10-phenanthroline) into the dsDNA grooves, resulting in significantly amplified ECL signal output. The proposed strategy combines the amplification power of the HCR and the inherent high sensitivity of the ECL technique, resulting in the sensitive detection of transcription factors with a detection limit of as low as 0.017 nM and a broad dynamic range from 0.05 to 2 nM. The distinct advantage of the method is that it is label-free, has high sensitivity and requires no separation of the signal generation strand, which boosts the potential application for real sample detection.
Introduction
Transcription factors (TFs) are a set of administrative proteins that play important roles in regulating various essential cellular processes by binding to a specific DNA sequence, such as genome replication, gene transcription, cell division and DNA repair.1–4 Whereas the transcription misregulation5 and the mutations in transcription factors6 might lead to a variety of diseases such as cancer,7 diabetes,8 congenital heart disease,9 autoimmune diseases10,11 and developmental syndromes.12 Nuclear factor-kappa B (NF-κB), an important inducible transcription factor, has already become a critical target in recent research owing to their regulation in genes expression that involved in many important biological processes.13 Therefore, the methods for sensitive detection of NF-κB have been highly valued for early diagnosis of diseases and drug developments.
There are many methods developed for NF-κB detection, for example, electrophoretic mobility shift assay (EMSA), the most widely used golden-standard method for analysing TF activity.14,15 DNA footprinting16 and Western blotting assay.14 Despite their widespread applications, these methods are usually laborious and time-consuming with poor sensitivity. The enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA)17 is comparatively sensitive, but it requires the special antibody against the target. To solve these problems, the methods based on fluorescence have been employed for the detection of NF-κB.18,19 Even though the fluorescence-based methods are more sensitive and convenient than traditional approaches, their complicated procedures in both labelling the DNA probes20 and designing the proper half-sited DNA molecular beacon limit their broad applications. Therefore, the development of new methods for sensitive, label-free and simple detection of NF-κB is highly desirable.
Due to their many promising advantages such as simplicity, high sensitivity, rapidity and spatial controllability, electrochemiluminescence (ECL) has been extensively used in the areas ranging from clinical diagnostics to environmental and food analysis.21 Recently various ECL systems have been investigated. One of the most popular ECL system—Ru(phen)32+ (phen = 1,10-phenanthroline) (or its derivatives)/coreactant has been developed successfully22,23 due to their intense emission and excellent stability. Since Michael T. Carter et al. first reported that the Ru(phen)32+ could interact with duplex DNA (dsDNA) by intercalation and/or groove binding in 1989,24 because it's free of signal labelling process, Ru(phen)32+ and its derivatives, rather than the modification of some other signal labels, have been usually used as the signal probe with ECL emission for DNA related ECL sensor.25 Therefore, the construction of a label-free ECL biosensing method based on the intercalation of Ru(phen)32+ for the detection of NF-κB has a manifold possibility.
Nucleic acid-based biosensing platforms for the amplified analysis of various analytes have attracted substantial research efforts in the past decades. Till now, various signal amplification strategies such as polymerase chain reaction (PCR),26 ligase chain reaction (LCR),27 rolling circle amplification (RCA),28 polymerization/scission-based strand-displacement amplification (SDA)29 and hybridization chain reaction (HCR)30 have been rationally designed, combining with electrical,31 optical,32 and micro gravimetric33,34 readouts for interrogating the extreme detection capability toward nucleic acid related bio-analytes. Among these signal amplified strategies, HCR, an enzyme-free nucleic acid-based signal amplification where the hybridization event is triggered by a target and results the polymerization of oligonucleotides into a long dsDNA molecule, has gained considerable attention as a novel amplification strategy. It possesses attractive advantages such as isothermal and non-enzyme, low background and high amplified efficiency. Therefore, various fluorescent,35 colorimetric,36 and electrochemical37 biosensors with HCR amplification have been developed. For instance, Song's group reported a fluorescent method for detection of DNA based on hybridization chain reaction and dsDNA-templated copper nanoparticles.38 Tang's group reported a novel label free colorimetric sensor for the detection of Hg2+ based on HCR reaction and silver nanowire amplification.39 Zhao's group reported an electrochemical method for detection of protein based on hybridization chain reaction-assisted formation of copper nanoparticles.40 It is noteworthy that HCR based ECL amplification of Ru(phen)32+ is esp. favourable to the construction of sensitive and convenient biosensors because it not only provides efficient signal amplification but also involves no enzyme and label, which could work under mild conditions with no specific demand for either ionic strength or temperature.
Herein, based on the principle of HCR signal amplification and Ru(phen)32+ intercalation in dsDNA,25d,e,41 we propose a novel label-free and efficient ECL strategy for sensitive detection of NF-κB. The presence of the NF-κB leads to the formation of dsDNA polymers on the sensing surface through in situ HCR. Numerous ECL indicators, Ru(phen)32+, thus can be efficiently intercalated into the grooves of the dsDNA polymers to achieve universal detection of TFs avoiding the extra labelling process. The low background signal and integration of the label-free HCR signal amplification with the high sensitivity of the ECL technique has led to low picomolar detection of NF-κB. In addition, this approach requires no extra separation steps of the signal generation strand, which may be conveniently applied in biological studies and medical diagnostics.
Experimental
Materials and reagents
Dichlorotris(1,10-phenanthroline)ruthenium hydrate (Ru(phen)3Cl2·H2O), 6-mercapto-1-hexanol (MCH) and tripropylamine (TPrA) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO). The purified recombinant NF-κB p50 protein was purchased from Cayman Chemical (Ann Arbor, MI, USA).
All synthetic oligonucleotides were ordered from Shanghai Sangon Biological Engineering Technology and Services Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China), and the sequences were listed below.
Target DNA: 5′-TTTTTTTTCCCTTTC-3′,
DNA-1: 5′-TTTTTTTTCCCTTTCAGGGGAGTA-3′,
DNA-2: 5′-AAAAAAAAGGGAAAGTCCCCTCAT-3′,
SH-capture probe (SH-CP): 5′-SH-GAAAGGG-3′,
Helper DNA-1 (H1): 5′-AAAAAAAAGTACTATTTTTTTT-3′,
Helper DNA-2 (H2): 5′-TTTTTTTTTCGTACAAAAAAAA-3′.
The purified recombinant NF-κB p50 protein was purchased from Cayman Chemical (Ann Arbor, MI, USA). HeLa nuclear extract and HeLa nuclear extract (TNF-α stimulated) were purchased from Active Motif (Carlsbad, CA, USA). Human thrombin, human immunoglobulin G (IgG) and bovine serum albumin were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich Co. (St. Louis, MO, USA).
All reagents were analytical grade and solutions were prepared using ultrapure water (specific resistance of 18 MΩ cm). All the single-stranded DNA stock solutions (100 μM) were prepared by solving them in ultrapure water and stored in the dark at −20 °C. The following buffer solutions were prepared. A 10 mM phosphate buffer solution (PBS) (pH 7.4) was used as the DNA washing buffer (WB).
Apparatus
All electrochemical measurements were performed on a CHI-660B electrochemical analyzer (CHI Instruments Co., Shanghai). All ECL measurements were performed on an MPI-E ECL analyzer (Xi'an Remax Electronic Science & Technology Co. Ltd., Xi'an, China). All experiments were carried out at room temperature using a conventional three-electrode system with a modified gold electrode (2 mm diameter) as the working electrode, a platinum wire as the auxiliary electrode, and an Ag/AgCl electrode as the reference electrode. A commercial cylindroid glass cell was used as an ECL cell, and it was placed directly in the front of the photomultiplier tube (PMT) which was biased at 500 V. Quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) experiments were proceeded with a CHI440A workstation coupled with a Au electrode (GE) (Φ = 5 mm) covered AT-cut 7.995 MHz quartz crystal (Φ = 13.7 mm).
Preparation of duplex DNA
The corresponding complementary single-stranded DNA (DNA-1 and DNA-2) were mixed at the same molar ratios with the final concentration of 1.25 μM in the hybridization buffer (10 mM Tris–HCl, pH 7.4, 100 mM NaCl, 1 mM EDTA). The mixture was heated at 95 °C for 5 minutes and then slowly cooled down to room temperature.
Preparation of triplex DNA
2 μL dsDNA (1.25 μM) was mixed with 10 μL target DNA (2.5 μM) and 2 μL AgNO3 (500 μM) for 30 minutes at 37 °C in 10 mM PBS buffer (pH 7.4, 200 mM NaNO3). For the detection of purified recombinant NF-κB p50, 10 μL purified recombinant NF-κB p50 (500 nM) were added to the above system to incubate 10 minutes at 37 °C. For the detection of real samples, 2.5 μL TNF-α stimulated HeLa nuclear extracts (0.5 μg μL−1) were added to above system to incubate 10 minutes at 37 °C. The final volume was 50 μL. The final concentrations were 50 nM of dsDNA, 500 nM of target DNA, 20 μM of AgNO3, 100 nM of purified recombinant NF-κB p50 and 25 ng μL−1 of TNF-α stimulated HeLa nuclear extract, respectively.
Pretreatment of gold electrode
First of all, gold electrodes were immersed in a fresh warm piranha solution (volume (concentrated sulfuric acid)/volume (30% peroxide solution) = 3
:
1) for 30 min. After they were rinsed thoroughly with deionized water, the electrodes were polished with 0.3 and 0.05 μm aluminium slurry and sonicated sequentially in distilled water, ethanol and distilled water for 5 min each. Then the electrodes were electrochemically cleaned in 0.5 M H2SO4 with potential scanning from 0.2 and 1.6 V until a remarkable voltammetric peak was obtained, followed by sonication again and drying with nitrogen.
Fabrication of sensors
A droplet of 10 μL SH-CP (2 μM) was cast onto the pretreated electrode (SH-CP/Au electrode) and incubated overnight at room temperature in humidity. Then the electrode surface was rinsed with deionized water and blocked with 1 mM MCH for 2 h. After washing with WB, the modified electrode was soaked in 50 μL pretreated target DNA solution for 1 h to form target/SH-CP/Au electrode. Next, the prepared electrodes were rinsed with WB, dried with N2, and incubated with a mixture of 5 μL helper probe H1 (1 μM) and 5 μL H2 (1 μM) in the reaction buffer for 2 h. The H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode was formed. After that, a droplet of 10 μL 2 mM Ru(phen)32+ was placed on the modified electrode and incubated for 7 h. The present Ru(phen)32+ intercalated electrode was named as Ru(phen)32+/H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode. Finally, the ECL intensity of the resulting functionalized electrode was recorded in phosphate buffer solution. HCR signal amplified role was confirmed by the ECL comparison with the control electrode, which was fabricated the same as that of Ru(phen)32+/H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode except without the addition of H1 and H2, denoted as Ru(phen)32+/target/SH-CP/Au electrode.
Measurements procedure
The ECL measurements were performed in 0.1 M phosphate buffer solution (pH 7.4) containing 20 mM TPrA. When a potential was scanned on the gold electrode from 0 to 1.2 V at 0.1 V s−1, with the voltage of the PMT set at 500 V, an ECL signal was generated. The curves of ECL intensity versus applied potential and the cyclic voltammograms were recorded simultaneously. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) was performed in the presence of a 5.0 mmol L−1 [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− solution containing 0.1 mol L−1 KCl with the bias potential at 0.18 V, frequency range of 0.1 to 105 Hz and amplitude set at 5 mV to obtain the electrochemical impedance spectra (Nyquist plots). CV for characterization of modifying process was performed in the 5.0 mmol L−1 [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− solution containing 0.1 mol L−1 KCl with potential scanned from −0.2 to 0.6 V at a scan rate of 50 mV s−1.
Results and discussion
Principle of the assay
The goal of this work is to develop a new highly sensitive strategy for label-free ECL detection of TFs. As illustrated in Scheme 1, the proposed HCR-amplified protocol for TFs detection is based on the formation of dsDNA polymers in HCR in the presence of the TFs, which results in the intercalation of numerous ECL probe, Ru(phen)32+, into the dsDNA polymer and generates significantly amplified ECL signals. First, the SH-CP was self-assembled on the pretreated gold electrode via the formation of Au–S bonds, and the modified electrode surface was further blocked with MCH. Meanwhile, a triplex DNA was formed by the target DNA binding to the dsDNA via Hoogsteen bond containing C•G°C and T•A°T triads (• denotes Hoogsteen bond, ° denotes Watson–Crick bond).42 Ag+ can specifically recognize the C•G°C triads to form AgC•G°C and enhance the stability of triplex DNA.43 In the absence of the TFs, the triplex DNA are stable at room temperature and it is difficult to hybridize with the capture probe on the electrode and HCR would not happen, which could lead only weak interaction between the ECL probe (Ru(phen)32+) and the single stranded capture probe. A considerably low ECL background signal would be obtained in the case without the TFs. In the presence of TFs, it would conjugate with the dsDNA liberating the target DNA from the triplex. Thus, upon the addition of the TFs pretreated triplex DNA, the released target DNA would hybridize with the capture probe on the modified electrode. Then with H1 and H2, in situ HCR would occur resulting in the formation of long chain dsDNA. The intercalation of Ru(phen)32+ into the DNA polymer would result in intense ECL signals. Therefore, a small amount of TFs is expected to efficiently trigger the DNA polymerization and generates a long dsDNA for the successful intercalation of Ru(phen)32+, leading to a substantial increase in the corresponding ECL intensity. The ECL signal from the intercalated Ru(phen)32+ is closely related to the quantity of the TFs, implying the possibility of TFs determination. Scheme 1 Schematic diagram of the proposed label-free ECL biosensor for TFs detection with HCR amplification.
 |
| Scheme 1 Schematic diagram of the proposed label-free ECL biosensor for TFs detection with HCR amplification. | |
CV and EIS characterization of the biosensor
The CV was selected to characterize the interfacial changes of the gold electrode in the fabrication process in the presence of 5.0 mM [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− solution containing 0.1 M KCl. As shown in Fig. 1A, a pair of well-defined redox peaks was observed at bare Au electrode (curve a). After the immobilization of the capture DNA probe and surface blocked with MCH, the current response of [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− on the modified electrode (curve b) is weaker than that of the bare Au electrode because the negative charges on the DNA backbone and MCH repel [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− from the electrode. After TFs treated triplex was added, the adsorption of the target DNA onto the electrode results in a markedly decreased peak current owing to its feature of obstructing the electron transfer (curve c). When H1 and H2 was introduced onto the modified electrode, there was a further decrease of the response (curve d), testifying that the interaction of the combination of H1, H2 and the target DNA for the formation of the dsDNA polymers inhibited the transmission of electrons at the electrode interface. The results are in accordance with what we designed.
 |
| Fig. 1 (A) Cyclic voltammograms at the (a) bare Au electrode, (b) SH-CP/Au electrode, (c) target/SH-CP/Au electrode, (d) H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode in 5.0 mM [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− containing 0.1 M KCl by scanning the potential from −0.2 to 0.6 V at a scan rate of 50 mV s−1. (B) EIS spectra for each immobilization step in the presence of a 5.0 mmol L−1 [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− solution containing 0.1 mol L−1 KCl for different electrodes: (a) bare Au electrode; (b) SH-CP/Au electrode, (c) target/SH-CP/Au electrode, (d) H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode, (e) Ru(phen)32+/H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode. | |
EIS is effectively used to probe the features of the modified electrode surface. There is a semicircle and a linear portion in the impedance spectra. The semicircle diameter at higher frequencies agrees with the resistance to electron transfer, and the linear part at lower frequencies remains with the diffusion process. The semicircle diameter equals the charge transfer resistance (Rct). Fig. 1B illustrates the EIS of different electrodes in the presence of a 5.0 mmol L−1 [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− solution containing 0.1 mol L−1 KCl. When SH-CP was modified on the electrode, the resistance obviously increased (curve b) compared with that of the bare Au electrode (curve a). The reason was that SH-CP as a poor conducting material could hinder electron transfer. After incubation with target DNA, the semicircle increased remarkably (curve c) implying the formation of dsDNA successfully fixed on the electrode and hindered electron transfer. After that, a larger semicircle diameter was observed (curve d), indicating that the nonconductive helper DNA triggering the HCR leaded a high resistance. Furthermore, when Ru(phen)32+ was incubated with the electrode after HCR, the Rct has a decrease which may be due to that lots of Ru(phen)32+ was intercalated into the long chain dsDNA and the positive charge of Ru(phen)32+ may attract the negative charged probe [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− because of the electrostatic interaction, favourable to the charge transfer. Control experiments was carried out to testify the HCR reaction could not occur in the absence of TFs because there was little change in the following assembling process after the capture probe modified electrode. The EIS result is in accordance with the CV which further confirms our assumption of the strategy.
To further characterization of the biosensors assembly process, quartz crystal microbalance (QCM) in real time experiments were carried out. Fig. S1† shows the frequency change for the QCM electrode in response to TFs pre-treated triplex DNA. After adding TFs pre-treated triplex DNA toward the blank substrate solution, a gradual decrease of the frequency response was observed, demonstrating that the binding of the target DNA with the capture DNA of the gold electrode surface. It was suggested that the target DNA adsorbed on the gold electrode surface. Furthermore, as the figure shows, with the injection of H1 and H2 into the above solution, the signal frequency decreased fast and then began to flatten gradually. The reason was suggested as the long duplex DNA conjugates were formation on the modified electrode and increased the weight of substrate gold electrode.
The importance of TPrA oxidation on the electrodes also was investigated to characterize the electrode modification processes. CVs of different electrode surface in 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4) containing 20 mM TPrA were investigated. As can be seen from Fig. 2, TPrA generated a slight oxidation wave (curve b) at about 0.86 V on bare gold electrode, while the peak is not observed in the absence of TPrA (curve a), indicating that the peak at 0.86 V was due to TPrA oxidation.31 After self-assembly of the capture probes onto the gold electrode, a significantly improved anodic current for TPrA oxidation is observed (curve c). This current increase could be ascribed to the fact that TPrA presented in the form of TPrAH+ at pH 7.4 and approached to the anionic phosphate backbone of DNA via electrostatic interaction,43 resulting in the preconcentration of TPrA on the electrode surface and easy transfer of proton from TPrAH+ to phosphate ions.21d,25a,e,44,45
 |
| Fig. 2 Cyclic voltammograms recorded in 0.1 M phosphate buffer solution (pH 7.4) in the absence (a) and presence (b–f) of 20 mM TPrA on different electrodes (a and b) bare Au electrode, (c) SH-CP/Au electrode, (d) target/SH-CP/Au electrode, (e) H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode and (f) Ru(phen)32+/H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode. Scan rate: 50 mV s−1. | |
Therefore, the DNA assembled electrode displays a considerable improvement on TPrA oxidation. In the presence of TFs, the capture of the target DNA and subsequent HCR leaded to further increase in the oxidation current of TPrA (Fig. 2, curve d and e). The modified electrode after HCR exhibited maximum current enhancement, and would contribute to the ECL emission which was related to the reaction between TPrA and numerous intercalated Ru(phen)32+. At last, after the Ru(phen)32+ was intercalated in the long chain dsDNA polymer, the oxidation current decreased obviously (curve f) which may be due to the electrostatic repulsion between the positive charged Ru(phen)32+ and the TPrAH+. However, in the absence of the TFs, as shown in Fig. 3, it was also found that there was no obvious difference between the CP/Au and the following electrodes, as the result in [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− solution.
 |
| Fig. 3 ECL intensity–potential curves on bare gold (a), SH-CP/Au (b), Ru(phen)32+/target/SH-CP/Au electrode (c), Ru(phen)32+/H1/H2/target/SH-CP/Au electrode (d). | |
Feasibility investigation
In order to investigate the feasibility of the biosensor, several experiments were performed. As we can see from Fig. 3, (curve a corresponds to the background signal), in the presence of TFs, with the assistance of H1 and H2, the HCR is triggered by the target DNA, after incubation with Ru(phen)32+, the ECL intensity of the biosensor increased evidently (curve e) compared with that of the bare Au electrode (curve a). Reversely, when the TFs are absent, even with the intercalation of Ru(phen)32+, the ECL intensity was still very low (curve b). It may be due to that without TFs, the target DNA could not be released from the triplex and the further HCR reaction could not happen resulting in few Ru(phen)32+ onto the capture ssDNA on the electrode. In order to study the signal amplified role of HCR, control experiment was also carried out without the addition of H1 and H2. As shown in curve c, in the appearance of TFs and with the intercalation of Ru(phen)32+ on the capture probe modified electrode, although there is an increase of the ECL signal (curve c) compared with that without TFs (curve b), the ECL intensity is much lower than curve d, originated from the produced long-chain DNA could load numerous units of Ru(phen)32+, demonstrating that excellent amplification performance of the HCR.
Analytical performance of the biosensor
Based on the above investigation, ECL detection of TFs was carried out by the label-free biosensor with the signal amplification of HCR. Under the optimized experimental conditions, the ECL signal was evaluated with different concentrations of TFs and the quantitative range of the proposed ECL biosensor was explored. Fig. 4 showed the relationship between ECL intensity and concentrations of TFs. It was obvious that the anodic ECL intensity of Ru(phen)32+ increased with increasing concentration of TFs. A linear relationship between ECL signals and the concentrations of TFs was obtained in the range from 0 to 2000 pM with the detection limit of 0.017 nM (S/N = 3). The linear relationship can be represented as I (a.u.) = 1066.5 + 7.9200C (pM) with the correlation coefficient of 0.9990, where I is the ECL intensity and C is the concentration of TFs. Generally, the biosensor had a relative low detection limit and could be employed for highly sensitive detection in a wide concentration range, and hence, might have a promising future for highly sensitive bioassays used in clinical detection. The developed method achieves comparable or even better sensitivity against some other common TFs detection schemes listed in Table S3.† From this table, we can see that the present work for TFs label-free detection based on the HCR amplification technique shows about 10–100 fold improvement on detection limit over other approaches.
 |
| Fig. 4 (A) ECL-potential curves and (B) ECL-time curves of the developed biosensor for different TFs concentrations (pM): (a) 0, (b) 50, (c) 100, (d) 200, (e) 300, (f) 600, (g) 1000, and (h) 2000. Inset: calibration curve for TFs detection. | |
Stability and selectivity of the ECL biosensor
The operation stability of the proposed HCR-based TFs assay under continuous CV scanning for 20 cycles and a series of sharp ECL peaks with almost constant intensity could be observed (shown in Fig. 5A), suggesting good stability of the sensor. The repeatability of the method has been investigated by analysis of eight different electrodes prepared under the same conditions with 100 pM TFs as a model, and a relative standard deviation (RSD) of 5.9% was obtained. This indicated that the designed method for TFs detection exhibited an acceptable repeatability.
 |
| Fig. 5 (A) ECL profiles of the sensor for 1000 pM NF-κB p50 under continuous 20 CV cycles. (B) Selectivity investigation for NF-κB p50 and various proteins: (a) human thrombin, (b) human IgG, (c) BSA, and (d) NF-κB p50. | |
To further investigate the selectivity of the proposed method for detection of TFs, the developed biosensor incubated with various proteins was investigated. As presented in Fig. 5B, the ECL intensities for human thrombin, human IgG and BSA were much lower than that for NF-κB p50. These results clearly demonstrated the high specificity of the proposed strategy for NF-κB p50 detection.
Real sample analysis
To further demonstrate the capability of the proposed method for real sample analysis, the endogenous NF-κB p50 in HeLa cell nuclear extracts was measured. TNF-α was used to stimulate the NF-κB p50 activation in HeLa cell to increase the amount of NF-κB p50.46 As shown in Fig. 6, two large ECL intensity variances were observed in the untreated nuclear extracts spiked with NF-κB p50 (curve a) and TNF-α-treated nuclear extracts (curve b). However, the untreated cell nuclear extracts displayed a negligible ECL intensity variance (curve c) as compared with the control without the nuclear extracts (curve d). These results fully confirmed the capability of the proposed strategy for the detection of NF-κB p50 in the real sample.
 |
| Fig. 6 The ECL intensity of the NF-κB p50 in the real samples. (a) Untreated nuclear extracts (50 ng μL−1) spiked with NF-κB p50 (1 nM), (b) TNF-α-treated nuclear extracts (50 ng μL−1), (c) untreated nuclear extracts (50 ng μL−1), (d) the control without the nuclear extracts. | |
Conclusions
In summary, we have developed a novel label-free ECL biosensor for the detection of TFs activity with very high sensitivity and a low detection limit of 0.017 nM. This present ECL strategy for TFs activity boasts the following advantages: (1) the method is label-free, thus it is cheap and simple for the detection of TFs. (2) The designed ECL biosensor exhibits a low background signal for the detection of TFs helping to improve the sensitivity. (3) This approach is based on HCR signal amplification obtaining high sensitivity and a low detection limit. (4) This approach requires no separation of the signal generation strand, thus boosting its potential application for real sample detection. Our method, which is free of any conjugation or labelling process, also exhibits comparable or better detection limit against other TFs detection schemes. This simple, sensitive, label- and separation-free method for the detection of TFs may provide an alternative strategy for real sample analysis in various normal cellular activity.
Acknowledgements
This work was financially supported by projects from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (no. 21371007), Anhui Provincial Natural Science Foundation (1208085QB28), Anhui Provincial Natural Science Foundation for Distinguished Youth (1408085J03), Natural Science Foundation of Anhui (KJ2012A139) and the Program for Innovative Research Team at Anhui Normal University.
Notes and references
- R. Sen and D. Baltimore, Cell, 1986, 47, 921–928 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- A. Aboussekhra, M. Biggerstaff, M. K. K. Shivji, J. A. Vilpo, V. Moncollin, V. N. Podust, M. Protic, U. Hubscher, J. M. Egly and R. D. Wood, Cell, 1995, 80, 859–868 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- K. Helin, Curr. Opin. Genet. Dev., 1998, 8, 28–35 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- B. Ren, F. Robert, J. Wyrick, O. Aparicio, E. Jennings, I. Simon, J. Zeitlinger, J. Schreiber, N. Hannett, E. Kanin, T. L. Volkert, C. J. Wilson, S. Bell and R. A. Young, Science, 2000, 290, 2306–2309 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- J. Villard, Swiss Med. Wkly., 2004, 134, 571–579 CAS.
- D. S. Latchman, N. Engl. J. Med., 1996, 334, 28–33 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- J. E. Darnell, Nat. Rev. Cancer, 2002, 2, 740–749 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- A. P. Sanchez and K. Sharma, Expert Rev. Mol. Med., 2009, 11, e13 CrossRef PubMed.
- K. L. Clark, K. E. Yutzey and D. W. Benson, Annu. Rev. Physiol., 2006, 68, 97–121 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- M. Eggert, A. Kluter, U. K. Zettl and G. Neeck, Curr. Pharm. Des., 2004, 10, 2787–2796 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- S. L. Peng, Front. Biosci., Landmark Ed., 2008, 13, 4218–4240 CrossRef CAS.
- F. Spitz and E. E. Furlong, Nat. Rev. Genet., 2012, 13, 613–626 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- M. S. Hayden and S. Ghosh, Cell, 2008, 132, 344–362 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- M. Fried and D. M. Crothers, Nucleic Acids Res., 1981, 9, 6505–6525 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- M. M. Garner and A. Revzin, Nucleic Acids Res., 1981, 9, 3047–3060 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- D. J. Galas and A. Schmitz, Nucleic Acids Res., 1978, 5, 3157–3170 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- S. V. Gupta, R. M. McGowen, D. M. Callewaert, T. R. Brown, Y. Li and F. H. Sarkar, J. Immunoassay Immunochem., 2005, 26, 125–143 CrossRef CAS.
- J. Yin, P. Gan, F. Zhou and J. Wang, Anal. Chem., 2014, 86, 2572–2579 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- D. Zhu, L. Wang, X. Xu and W. Jiang, Biosens. Bioelectron., 2016, 75, 155–160 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
-
(a) L. G. Xu, W. J. Yan, W. Ma, H. Kuang, X. L. Wu, L. Q. Liu, Y. Zhao, L. B. Wang and C. L. Xu, Adv. Mater., 2015, 27, 1706–1711 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(b) J. J. Feng, X. L. Wu, W. Ma, H. Kuang, L. G. Xu and C. L. Xu, Chem. Commun., 2015, 51, 14761–14763 RSC;
(c) W. J. Yan, L. G. Xu, W. Ma, L. Q. Liu, L. B. Wang, H. Kuang and C. L. Xu, Small, 2014, 10, 4293–4297 CAS.
-
(a) I. Verschraegen, E. Anckaert, J. Schiettecatte, M. Mees, A. Garrido, D. Hermsen, E. G. W. M. Lentjes, A. Liebert, H. J. Roth, G. Stamminger and J. Smitz, Clin. Chim. Acta, 2007, 380, 75–80 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(b) S. A. Santini, C. Carrozza, C. Vulpio, E. Capoluongo, G. Luciani, P. Lulli, B. Giardina and C. Zuppi, Clin. Chem., 2004, 50, 1247–1250 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(c) E. A. Garber, J. L. Walker and T. W. O'Brien, J. Food Prot., 2008, 71, 1868–1874 Search PubMed;
(d) T. L. Pittman, B. Thomson and W. J. Miao, Anal. Chim. Acta, 2009, 632, 197–202 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- J. K. Leland and M. J. Powell, J. Electrochem. Soc., 1990, 137, 3127–3131 CrossRef CAS.
- M. M. Richter, Chem. Rev., 2004, 104, 3003–3036 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- M. T. Carter, M. Rodriguez and A. J. Bard, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1989, 111, 8901–8911 CrossRef CAS.
-
(a) M. T. Carter and A. J. Bard, Bioconjugate Chem., 1990, 1, 257–263 CrossRef CAS;
(b) T. Kuwabara, T. Noda, H. Ohtake, T. Ohtake, S. Toyama and Y. Ikariyama, Anal. Biochem., 2003, 314, 30–37 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(c) D. A. Lutterman, Y. J. Sun and C. Turro, Inorg. Chem., 2008, 47, 6427–6434 CrossRef PubMed;
(d) X. H. Xu, H. C. Yang and A. J. Bard, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1994, 116, 8386–8387 CrossRef CAS;
(e) X. B. Yin, Y. Y. Xin and Y. Zhao, Anal. Chem., 2009, 81, 9299–9305 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- R. Saiki, D. Gelfand, S. Stoffel, S. Scharf, R. Higuchi, G. Horn, K. Mullis and H. Erlich, Science, 1988, 239, 487–491 CAS.
- F. Barany, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 1991, 88, 189–193 CrossRef CAS.
- S. Beyer, P. Nickels and F. C. Simmel, Nano Lett., 2005, 5, 719–722 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- J. Van Ness, L. K. Van Ness and D. J. Galas, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2003, 100, 4504–4509 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- R. M. Dirks and N. A. Pierce, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U. S. A., 2004, 101, 15275–15278 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
-
(a) Z. Gao, S. Rafea and L. H. Lim, Adv. Mater., 2007, 19, 602–606 CrossRef CAS;
(b) L. Alfonta, A. K. Singh and I. Willner, Anal. Chem., 2001, 73, 91–102 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(c) Y. Chen, B. Y. Jiang, Y. Xiang, Y. Q. Chai and R. Yuan, Chem. Commun., 2011, 47, 12798–12800 RSC;
(d) T. G. Drummond, M. G. Hill and J. K. Barton, Nat. Biotechnol., 2003, 21, 1192–1199 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
-
(a) A. P. Abel, M. G. Weller, G. L. Duveneck, M. Ehrat and H. M. Widmer, Anal. Chem., 1996, 68, 2905–2912 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(b) M. F. Ali, R. Kirby, A. P. Goodey, M. D. Rodriguez, A. D. Ellington, D. P. Neikirk and J. T. McDevitt, Anal. Chem., 2003, 75, 4732–4739 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(c) L. Song, S. Ahn and D. R. Walt, Anal. Chem., 2006, 78, 1023–1033 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(d) V. Pavlov, Y. Xiao, R. Gill, A. Dishon, M. Kotler and I. Willner, Anal. Chem., 2004, 76, 2152–2156 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(e) F. Mannelli, A. Minunni, S. Tombelli, R. H. Wang, M. M. Spiriti and M. Mascini, Bioelectrochemistry, 2005, 66, 129–138 CrossRef PubMed;
(f) X. Yao, X. Li, F. Toledo, C. Zurita-Lopez, M. Gutova, J. Momand and F. M. Zhou, Anal. Biochem., 2006, 354, 220–228 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- Y. Okahata, Y. Matsunobu, K. Ijiro, M. Mukae, A. Murakami and K. Makino, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1992, 114, 8299–8300 CrossRef CAS.
- X. D. Su, R. Robelek, Y. J. Wu, G. Y. Wang and W. Knoll, Anal. Chem., 2004, 76, 489–494 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
-
(a) J. Huang, Y. Wu, Y. Chen, Z. Zhu, X. Yang, C. J. Yang, K. Wang and W. Tan, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2011, 50, 401–404 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(b) W. Ren, H. Liu, W. Yang, Y. Fan, L. Yang, Y. Wang, C. Liu and Z. Li, Biosens. Bioelectron., 2013, 49, 380–386 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(c) Y. Liu, M. Luo, J. Yan, X. Xiang, X. Ji, G. Zhou and Z. He, Chem. Commun., 2013, 49, 7424–7426 RSC;
(d) S. Niu, Y. Jiang and S. Zhang, Chem. Commun., 2010, 46, 3089–3091 RSC;
(e) F. Wang, J. Elbaz, R. Orbach, N. Magen and I. Willner, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2011, 133, 17149–17151 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(f) J. Huang, X. Yang, X. He, K. Wang, Y. He and K. Quan, Chem. Commun., 2013, 49, 9827–9829 RSC;
(g) J. Choi, K. Routenberg Love, Y. Gong, T. M. Gierahn and J. C. Love, Anal. Chem., 2011, 83, 6890–6895 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(h) C. Ge, J. Chen, W. Wu, Z. Fang, L. Chen, Q. Liu, L. Wang, X. Xing and L. Zeng, Analyst, 2013, 138, 4737–4740 RSC.
-
(a) P. Liu, X. Yang, S. Sun, Q. Wang, K. Wang, J. Huang, J. Liu and L. He, Anal. Chem., 2013, 85, 7689–7695 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(b) S. Shimron, F. Wang, R. Orbach and I. Willner, Anal. Chem., 2011, 84, 1042–1048 CrossRef PubMed;
(c) J. Dong, X. Cui, Y. Deng and Z. Tang, Biosens. Bioelectron., 2012, 38, 258–263 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
-
(a) J. Zhuang, L. Fu, M. Xu, H. Yang, G. Chen and D. Tang, Anal. Chim. Acta, 2013, 783, 17–23 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(b) Y. Chen, J. Xu, J. Su, Y. Xiang, R. Yuan and Y. Chai, Anal. Chem., 2012, 84, 7750–7775 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(c) J. Zhou, W. Lai, J. Zhuang, J. Tang and D. Tang, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces, 2013, 5, 2773–2781 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(d) B. Zhang, B. Liu, D. Tang, R. Niessner, G. Chen and D. Knopp, Anal. Chem., 2012, 84, 5392–5399 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(e) J. Zhuang, L. Fu, M. Xu, Q. Zhou, G. Chen and D. Tang, Biosens. Bioelectron., 2013, 45, 52–57 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- C. Song, X. Yang, K. Wang, Q. Wang, J. Huang, J. Liu, W. Liu and P. Liu, Anal. Chim. Acta, 2014, 827, 74–79 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- S. Tang, P. Tong, M. Wang, J. Chen, G. Li and L. Zhang, Chem. Commun., 2015, 51, 15043 RSC.
- J. Zhao, S. Hu, Y. Cao, B. Zhang and G. Li, Biosens. Bioelectron., 2015, 66, 327–331 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
-
(a) X. H. Xu and A. J. Bard, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 1995, 117, 2627–2631 CrossRef CAS;
(b) C. X. Tang, Y. Zhao, X. W. He and X. B. Yin, Chem. Commun., 2010, 46, 9022–9024 RSC;
(c) D. Y. Liu, Y. Y. Xin, X. W. He and X. B. Yin, Analyst, 2011, 136, 479–485 RSC;
(d) Y. Zhao, X. W. He and X. B. Yin, Chem. Commun., 2011, 47, 6419–6421 RSC.
-
(a) Y. Chen, S. H. Lee and C. D. Mao, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2004, 43, 5335–5338 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(b) J. Tumpane, R. Kumar, E. P. Lundberg, P. Sandin, N. Gale, I. S. Nandhakumar, B. Albinsson, P. Lincoln, L. M. Wilhelmsson and T. Brown, Nano Lett., 2007, 7, 3832–3839 CrossRef CAS PubMed;
(c) Y. Takezawa, W. Maeda, K. Tanaka and M. Shionoya, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed., 2009, 48, 1081–1084 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- T. Ihara, T. Ishii, N. Araki, A. W. Wilson and A. Jyo, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2009, 131, 3826–3827 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- F. Kanoufi, Y. Zu and A. J. Bard, J. Phys. Chem. B, 2001, 105, 210–216 CrossRef CAS.
- W. J. Miao, J.-P. Choi and A. J. Bard, J. Am. Chem. Soc., 2002, 124, 14478–14485 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
- J. A. DiDonato, M. Hayakawa, D. M. Rothwarf, E. Zandi and M. Karin, Nature, 1997, 388, 548–554 CrossRef CAS PubMed.
Footnote |
† Electronic supplementary information (ESI) available. See DOI: 10.1039/c6ra00701e |
|
This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry 2016 |
Click here to see how this site uses Cookies. View our privacy policy here.