Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Antibody, Aptamer and Affimer-Based Affinity Tools for Marine Toxin Biosensing

  • Chapter
  • First Online:
Biosensors for the Marine Environment

Part of the book series: The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry ((HEC,volume 122))

  • 184 Accesses

Abstract

Antibody-based detection systems have long been chosen to facilitate on-site monitoring of environmental markers such as marine toxins. Antibodies were the first detection molecules to be seen as effective replacements to mouse bioassays, high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) and mass-spectrometry (MS)-based systems in the detection of harmful marine toxins. Thereby satisfying European Union regulatory standard 853/2004, legislation that states that all shellfish produced must be routinely monitored and tested for the presence of regulated marine toxins before they can reach the market. Antibodies have progressed significantly in their capabilities over the past 70 years, with much investigative research being carried out with regard to their production, purification, sensitivity enhancement and their incorporation into sensor platforms. However, reports of new small-molecule detectors such as affimers and aptamers over the past 20 years may now herald a ‘changing of the guard’. Many reports of aptamers being used for the detection of marine biotoxins have been produced and suggest that their sensitivities equal or surpass that of antibodies. The next stage for the use of aptamers lies in assessing and enhancing their incorporation into sensor platforms as well as investigating their capacity to detect multiple forms of marine congeners, of which there are many.

Graphical Abstract

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this chapter

Log in via an institution
Chapter
USD 29.95
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
eBook
USD 259.00
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Available as EPUB and PDF
  • Read on any device
  • Instant download
  • Own it forever
Softcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Compact, lightweight edition
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info
Hardcover Book
USD 329.99
Price excludes VAT (USA)
  • Durable hardcover edition
  • Dispatched in 3 to 5 business days
  • Free shipping worldwide - see info

Tax calculation will be finalised at checkout

Purchases are for personal use only

Institutional subscriptions

References

  1. European Commission (2004) Regulation (EC) No 853/2004 of the European Parliament and of the Council of 29 April 2004 laying down specific hygiene rules for the hygiene of foodstuffs. Off J Eur Union 139:55

    Google Scholar 

  2. SafeFood (2018) The benefits of eating fish. Safefoodeu [cited 2018 16.08.2018]; Available from: https://www.safefood.eu/Healthy-Eating/Food,-Diet-and-Health/Eating-In/The-benefits-of-eating-fish.aspx

  3. Qiang L, Zhang Y, Guo X, Gao YK, Han YK, Sun J, Han L (2020) A rapid and ultrasensitive colorimetric biosensor based on aptamer functionalized Au nanoparticles for detection of saxitoxin. RSC Adv 10(26):15293–15298

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  4. McCall JR, Holland WC, Keeler DM, Hardison DR, Litaker RW (2019) Improved accuracy of saxitoxin measurement using an optimized enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay. Toxins 11(632)

    Google Scholar 

  5. Li L, Zhao Y, Yan X, Qi X, Wang L, Ma R, Wang S, Mao X (2021) Development of a terminal-fixed aptamer and a label-free colorimetric aptasensor for highly sensitive detection of saxitoxin. Sens Act B Chem:344

    Google Scholar 

  6. Garthwaite I, Ross KM, Miles CO, Briggs LR, Towers NR, Borrell T, Busby P (2001) Integrated enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay screening system for amnesic, neurotoxic, diarrhetic, and paralytic shellfish poisoning toxins found in New Zealand. J AOAC Int 84(5):1643–1648

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  7. Garthwaite I, Ross KM, Miles CO, Hansen RP, Foster D, Wilkins AL, Towers NR (1998) Polyclonal antibodies to domoic acid, and their use in immunoassays for domoic acid in seawater and shellfish. Nat Toxins 6(3–4):93–104

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  8. Dubois M, Demoulin L, Charlier C, Singh G, Godefroy SB, Campbell K, Elliott CT, Delahaut P (2010) Development of ELISAs for detecting domoic acid, okadaic acid, and saxitoxin and their applicability for the detection of marine toxins in samples collected in Belgium. Food Addit Contam Part A Chem Anal Control Expo Risk Assess 27(6):859–868

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  9. Gu H, Duan N, Xia Y, Hun X, Wang H, Wang Z (2018) Magnetic separation-based multiple SELEX for effectively selecting aptamers against saxitoxin, domoic acid, and tetrodotoxin. J Agric Food Chem 66(37):9801–9809

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  10. Briggs LR, Miles CO, Fitzgerald JM, Ross KM, Garthwaite I, Towers NR (2004) Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay for the detection of yessotoxin and its analogues. J Agric Food Chem 52(19):5836–5842

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  11. Leonardo S, Rambla-Alegre M, Samdal IA, Miles CO, Kilcoyne J, Diogene J, O'Sullivan CK, Campas M (2017) Immunorecognition magnetic supports for the development of an electrochemical immunoassay for azaspiracid detection in mussels. Biosens Bioelectron 92:200–206

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  12. Samdal IA, Lovberg KE, Briggs LR, Kilcoyne J, Xu J, Forsyth CJ, Miles CO (2015) Development of an ELISA for the detection of azaspiracids. J Agric Food Chem 63(35):7855–7861

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  13. Ye W, Liu T, Zhang W, Zhu M, Liu Z, Kong Y, Liu S (2019) Marine toxins detection by biosensors based on aptamers. Toxins (Basel) 12(1):1

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Gu H, Duan N, Wu S, Hao L, Xia Y, Ma X, Wang Z (2016) Graphene oxide-assisted non-immobilized SELEX of okadaic acid aptamer and the analytical application of aptasensor. Sci Rep 6:21665

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  15. Prego-Faraldo MV, Valdiglesias V, Mendez J, Eirin-Lopez JM (2013) Okadaic acid meet and greet: an insight into detection methods, response strategies and genotoxic effects in marine invertebrates. Mar Drug 11(8):2829–2845

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Stewart LD, Elliott CT, Walker AD, Curran RM, Connolly L (2009) Development of a monoclonal antibody binding okadaic acid and dinophysistoxins-1, -2 in proportion to their toxicity equivalence factors. Toxicon 54(4):491–498

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  17. Wang R, Zeng L, Yang H, Zhong Y, Wang J, Ling S, Farhan Saeed A, Yuan J, Wang S (2017) Detection of okadaic acid (OA) using ELISA and colloidal gold immunoassay based on monoclonal antibody. J Haz Mat 339:154–160

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  18. Baden DG, Bourdelais AJ, Jacocks H, Michelliza S, Naar J (2005) Natural and derivative Brevetoxins: historical background, multiplicity, and effects. Environ Health Perspect 113(5)

    Google Scholar 

  19. Eissa S, Siaj M, Zourob M (2015) Aptamer-based competitive electrochemical biosensor for brevetoxin-2. Biosens Bioelectron 69:148–154

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  20. Ling S, Xiao S, Xie C, Wang R, Zeng L, Wang K, Zhang D, Li X, Wang S (2018) Preparation of monoclonal antibody for Brevetoxin 1 and development of Ic-ELISA and colloidal gold strip to detect Brevetoxin 1. Toxins 10(2):75

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Friedman M, Fernandez M, Backer L, Dickey R, Bernstein J, Schrank K, Kibler S, Stephan W, Gribble M, Bienfang P et al (2017) An updated review of ciguatera fish poisoning: clinical, epidemiological, environmental, and public health management. Mar Drugs 15(3):7

    Article  Google Scholar 

  22. Friedman MA, Fleming LE, Fernandez M, Bienfang P, Schrank K, Dickey R (2008) Ciguatera fish poisoning: treatment, prevention and management. Mar Drugs 6(3):456–479

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  23. Sato S, Takaishi S, Yasumoto K, Watabe S (2019) Novel polyclonal antibody raised against tetrodotoxin using its haptenic antigen prepared from 4,9-anhydrotetrodotoxin reacted with 1,2-ethaneditiol and further reacted with keyhole limpet hemocyanin. Toxins 11(10):551

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  24. Hackett JD, Wisecaver JH, Brosnahan ML, Kulis DM, Anderson DM, Bhattacharya D, Plumley FG, Erdner DL (2013) Evolution of saxitoxin synthesis in cyanobacteria and dinoflagellates. Mol Biol Evol 30(1):70–78

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  25. Munday R, Reeve J (2013) Risk assessment of shellfish toxins. Toxins (Basel) 5(11):2109–2137

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  26. Alexander J, Benford D, Cockburn A, Cradevi JP, Dogliotti E, Domenico AD, Fernandex-Cruz ML, Fink-Gremmels J, Furst P, Galli C, Grandjean P, Gzyl J, Heinemeyer G, Johansson N, Mutti A, Schlatter J, van Leeuwen R, van Peteghem C, Verger P (2009) Marine biotoxins in shellfish – saxitoxin group. EFSA J:1–76

    Google Scholar 

  27. EFSA (2009) Opinion of the scientific panel on contaminants in the food chain on a request from the European Commission on marine biotoxins in shellfish – saxitoxin group. EFSA J 1019:1–76

    Google Scholar 

  28. FSAI (2021) Shellfish warning for castlemaine production area. Food Safety Authority of Ireland, FSAI.ie [cited 2022 27.05.2022]

    Google Scholar 

  29. EFSA (2009) Scientific opinion of the panel on contaminants in the food chain on a request from the European Commission on marine biotoxins in shellfish – domoic acid. EFSA J 1181:1–61

    Google Scholar 

  30. Tubaro A, Dell'Ovo V, Sosa S, Florio C (2010) Yessotoxins: a toxicological overview. Toxicon 56(2):163–172

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  31. EFSA (2008) Opinion of the scientific panel on contaminants in the food chain on a request from the European Commission on marine biotoxins in shellfish – yessotoxin group. EFSA J 907:1–62

    Google Scholar 

  32. McPartlin DA, Lochhead MJ, Connell LB, Doucette GJ, O'Kennedy RJ (2016) Use of biosensors for the detection of marine toxins. Essays Biochem 60(1):49–58

    Article  Google Scholar 

  33. EFSA (2008) Marine biotoxins in shellfish – Azaspiracid group – scientific opinion of the panel on contaminants in the food chain. EFSA J 6(10):723

    Google Scholar 

  34. Solter PF, Beasley VR (eds) (2013) Chapter 38 – phycotoxins, Haschek and Rousseaux’s handbook of toxicologic pathology.2nd edn. Academic Press, Boston, pp 1155–1186

    Google Scholar 

  35. Fu LL, Zhao XY, Ji LD, Xu J. (2019) Okadaic acid (OA): toxicity, detection and detoxification. Toxicon 160:1–7

    Google Scholar 

  36. Dorr BV (2014) Investigation of the genotoxic potential of the marine biotoxins okadaic acid and azaspiracids, PhD thesis. University College Cork

    Google Scholar 

  37. Fujiki H, Sueoka E, Watanabe T, Suganuma M (2018) The concept of the okadaic acid class of tumor promoters is revived in endogenous protein inhibitors of protein phosphatase 2A, SET and CIP2A, in human cancers. J Cancer Res Clin Oncol 144(12):2339–2349

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  38. Jordan C, Cusack C, Tomlinson MC, Meredith A, McGeady R, Salas R, Gregory C, Croot PL (2021) Using the Red Band Difference Algorithm to Detect and Monitor a Karenia spp. Bloom off the South Coast of Ireland, June 2019. Front Mar Sci:8

    Google Scholar 

  39. Turner AD, Higgins C, Davidson K, Veszelovszki A, Payne D, Hungerford J, Higman W (2015) Potential threats posed by new or emerging marine biotoxins in UK waters and examination of detection methodology used in their control: brevetoxins. Mar Drugs 13(3):1224–1254

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  40. Turner AD, Powell A, Schofield A, Lees DN, Baker-Austin C (2015) Detection of the pufferfish toxin tetrodotoxin in European bivalves, England, 2013 to 2014. Euro Surveill 20(2)

    Google Scholar 

  41. Kyle S (2018) Affimer proteins: theranostics of the future? Trends Biotechnol Sci 43(4):230–232

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  42. Tiede C, Bedford R, Heseltine SJ, Smith G, Wijetunga I, McPherson MJ, Tomlinson DC (2017) Affimer proteins are versatile and renewable affinity reagents. eLife 6:e24903

    Article  Google Scholar 

  43. Hughes DJ, Tiede C, Penswick N, Ah-San Tang A, Trinh CH, Mendal U, Zajac KZ, Gaule T, Howell G, Edwards TA, Duan J, Feyfant E, McPhereson MJ, Tomlinson DC, Whitehouse A (2017) Generation of specific inhibitors of SUMO-1–and SUMO-2/3–mediated protein-protein interactions using Affimer (Adhiron) technology. Sci Signal 10(505)

    Google Scholar 

  44. Bayat P, Nosrati R, Alibolandi M, Rafatpanah H, Abnous K, Khedri M, Ramezani M (2018) SELEX methods on the road to protein targeting with nucleic acid aptamers. Biochimie 154:132–155

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  45. Djordjevic M (2007) SELEX experiments: new prospects, applications and data analysis in inferring regulatory pathways. Biomol Eng 24:179–189

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  46. Alkhamis O, Canoura J, Yu H, Liu Y, Xiao Y (2019) Innovative engineering and sensing strategies for aptamer-based small-molecule detection. Trend Anal Chem 121:115699

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  47. Gopinath SCB (2007) Methods developed for SELEX. Anal Bioanal Chem 387:171e182

    Article  Google Scholar 

  48. Qi XY, Yan XC, Zhao LH, Huang YF, Wang S, Liang XG (2020) A facile label-free electrochemical aptasensor constructed with nanotetrahedron and aptamer-triplex for sensitive detection of small molecule: saxitoxin. J Electroanal Chem 858

    Google Scholar 

  49. Ramalingam S, Chand R, Singh CB, Singh A (2019) Phosphorene-gold nanocomposite based microfluidic aptasensor for the detection of okadaic acid. Biosens Bioelectron 135:14–21

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  50. Ma CY, Sun XY, Kong LB, Wang XY, Zhou SQ, Wei XW, Kirsanov D, Legin A, Wan H, Wang P (2021) A multi-channel handheld automatic spectrometer for wide range and on-site detection of okadaic acid based on specific aptamer binding. Anal Methods 13(38):4345–4353

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  51. Tian YL, Zhu P, Chen YT, Bai XY, Du LP, Chen W, Wu CS, Wang P (2021) Piezoelectric aptasensor with gold nanoparticle amplification for the label-free detection of okadaic acid. Sens Actuator B Chem 346

    Google Scholar 

  52. Cunha I, Biltes R, Sales MGF, Vasconcelos V (2018) Aptamer-based biosensors to detect aquatic phycotoxins and cyanotoxins. Sensors 18:2367

    Article  Google Scholar 

  53. Kohler G, Milstein C (1975) Continuous cultures of fused cells secreting antibody of predefined specificity. Nature 256(5517):495–497

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  54. Devlin S, Meneely JP, Greer B, Greef C, Lochhead MJ, Elliott CT (2013) Next generation planar waveguide detection of microcystins in freshwater and cyanobacterial extracts, utilising a novel lysis method for portable sample preparation and analysis. Anal Chim Acta 769:108–113

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  55. Hoogenboom HR (2002) Overview of antibody phage-display technology and its applications. Meth Mol Biol 178:1–37

    CAS  Google Scholar 

  56. Barbas CF, Burton DR, Scott JK, Silverman GJ (2001) Phage display: a laboratory manual. Cold Spring Harbour Press, Cold Spring Harbour

    Google Scholar 

  57. Maguire I, Fitzgerald J, Heery B, Nwankire C, O’Kennedy R, Ducrée J, Regan F (2018) Novel microfluidic analytical sensing platform for the simultaneous detection of three algal toxins in water. ACS Omega 3(6):6624–6634

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  58. Campora CE, Hokama Y, Ebesu JS (2006) Comparative analysis of purified Pacific and Caribbean ciguatoxin congeners and related marine toxins using a modified ELISA technique. J Clin Lab Anal 20(3):121–125

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  59. Murphy C, Stack E, Krivelo S, McPartlin DA, Byrne B, Greef C, Lochhead MJ, Husar G, Devlin S, Elliott CT, O'Kennedy RJ (2015) Detection of the cyanobacterial toxin, microcystin-LR, using a novel recombinant antibody-based optical-planar waveguide platform. Biosens Bioelectron 67:708–714

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  60. Fitzgerald J, Leonard P, Darcy E, Danaher M, O'Kennedy R (2011) Light-chain shuffling from an antigen-biased phage pool allows 185-fold improvement of an anti-halofuginone single-chain variable fragment. Anal Biochem 410(1):27–33

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

  61. Murphy C, Stack E, Krivelo S, Breheny M, Ma H, O'Kennedy R (2018) Enhancing recombinant antibody performance by optimally engineering its format. J Immunol Methods 463:127–133

    Article  CAS  Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgements

Caroline Murphy was supported by TechOceanS project which received funding from the European Union’s Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme under grant agreement No 101000858 (TechOceanS). This output reflects only the author’s view and the Research Executive Agency (REA) cannot be held responsible for any use that may be made of the information contained therein. Caroline Murphy would like to gratefully acknowledge the support of Dublin City University.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. School of Biotechnology, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

    Caroline Murphy

Authors
  1. Caroline Murphy
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Caroline Murphy .

Editor information

Editors and Affiliations

  1. School of Chemical Sciences, Dublin City University, Dublin, Ireland

    Fiona Regan

  2. International Consulting Ecotoxicology, Technische Universitðt Berlin, REM, Berlin, Germany

    Peter-Diedrich Hansen

  3. Catalan Institute for Water Research (ICRA-CERCA), Girona, Spain

    Damià Barceló

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

Copyright information

© 2023 The Author(s), under exclusive license to Springer Nature Switzerland AG

About this chapter

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this chapter

Murphy, C. (2023). Antibody, Aptamer and Affimer-Based Affinity Tools for Marine Toxin Biosensing. In: Regan, F., Hansen, PD., Barceló, D. (eds) Biosensors for the Marine Environment. The Handbook of Environmental Chemistry, vol 122. Springer, Cham. https://doi.org/10.1007/698_2022_953

Download citation

Publish with us

Policies and ethics

Search

Navigation