Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry

, Volume 406, Issue 14, pp 3297–3304 | Cite as

Developing new materials for paper-based diagnostics using electrospun nanofibers

  • S. J. Reinholt
  • A. Sonnenfeldt
  • A. Naik
  • M. W. Frey
  • A. J. Baeumner
Research Paper
Part of the following topical collections:
  1. Multiplex Platforms in Diagnostics and Bioanalytics


The use of electrospun nanofibers as functional material in paper-based lateral flow assays (LFAs) was studied. Specific chemical features of the nanofibers were achieved by doping the base polymer, poly(lactic acid) (PLA), with poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG) and polystyrene8K-block-poly(ethylene-ran-butylene)25K-block-polyisoprene10K-Brij76 (K3-Brij76) (KB). The LFAs were assembled such that the sample flowed through the nanofiber mat via capillary action. Initial investigations focused on the sustainable spinning and assembly of different polymer structures to allow the LFA format. Here, it was found that the base polymer poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA), which was shown to function well in microfluidic biosensors, did not work in the LFA format. In contrast, PLA-based nanofibers enabled easy assembly. Three relevant features were chosen to study nanofiber-based functionalities in the LFA format: adsorption of antibodies, quantification of results, and nonspecific binding. In particular, streptavidin-conjugated sulforhodamine B (SRB)-encapsulating liposomes were captured by anti-streptavidin antibodies adsorbed on the nanofibers. Varying the functional polymer concentration within the PLA base enabled the creation of distinct capture zones. Also, a sandwich assay for the detection of Escherichia coli O157:H7 was developed using anti-E. coli antibodies as capture and reporter species with horseradish peroxidase for signal generation. A dose–response curve for E. coli with a detection limit of 1.9 × 104 cells was achieved. Finally, functional polymers were used to demonstrate that nonspecific binding could be eliminated using antifouling block copolymers. The enhancement of paper-based devices using functionalized nanofibers provides the opportunity to develop a broad spectrum of sensitive and specific bioassays with significant advantages over their traditional counterparts.


Schematic of LFA format and single-step binding assay. A 1.75 × 5-mm nanofiber mat was placed directly on a backing card 4.5 mm in width, and a 1 × 20-cm absorbent pad was placed on the backing card overlapping the nanofiber mat by approximately 2 mm (a). The LFAs ran vertically in glass culture tubes. In the E. coli sandwich assay, E. coli (green) flowed through the anti-E. coli-modified nanofiber mat, followed by horseradish peroxidase (HRP)-conjugated (pink) anti-E. coli. When E. coli is present, a colorimetric signal results upon addition of HRP substrate (b), and when no E. coli is present, the HRP flows through the nanofiber mat and no signal is observed (c)


Electrospun nanofibers LFA Poly(lactic acid) Point-of-care Immunoassay Liposomes 



The authors acknowledge the support through the Cornell University, College of Engineering Lester B. Knight Fellowship. The authors are grateful for the support provided by the National Science Foundation (NSF) under grant no. CBET-0852900. Also, this work made use of the Cornell Center for Materials Research Shared Facilities which are supported through the NSF MRSEC program (DMR-1120296), and this work was performed in part at the Cornell NanoScale Facility, a member of the National Nanotechnology Infrastructure Network, which is supported by the National Science Foundation (grant ECCS-0335765). The authors also appreciate partial funding through the NC1194 Multistate Federal Hatch Project on Nanobiosensors.


  1. 1.
    Free AH, Adams EC, Kercher ML et al (1957) Simple specific test for urine glucose. Clin Chem 3:163–168Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Martinez AW, Phillips ST, Butte MJ, Whitesides GM (2007) Patterned paper as a platform for inexpensive, low-volume, portable bioassays. Angewandte Chemie 46:1318–1320 (International ed in English)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Martinez AW, Phillips ST, Wiley BJ et al (2008) FLASH: a rapid method for prototyping paper-based microfluidic devices. Lab on a chip 8:2146–2150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Martinez AW, Phillips ST, Whitesides GM, Carrilho E (2010) Diagnostics for the developing world: microfluidic paper-based analytical devices. Anal Chem 82:3–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cheng C-M, Mazzeo AD, Gong J et al (2010) Millimeter-scale contact printing of aqueous solutions using a stamp made out of paper and tape. Lab on a chip 10:3201–3205CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cheng C-M, Martinez AW, Gong J et al (2010) Paper-based ELISA. Angew Chem 122:4881–4884CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Pelton R (2009) Bioactive paper provides a low-cost platform for diagnostics. TrAC Trends Anal Chem 28:925–942CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Liana DD, Raguse B, Gooding JJ, Chow E (2012) Recent advances in paper-based sensors. Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 12:11505–11526CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Nery EW, Kubota LT (2013) Sensing approaches on paper-based devices: a review. Anal Bioanal Chem 405:7573–7595CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Hussain D, Loyal F, Greiner A, Wendorff JH (2010) Structure property correlations for electrospun nanofiber nonwovens. Polymer 51:3989–3997CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Huang L, Bui N-N, Manickam SS, McCutcheon JR (2011) Controlling electrospun nanofiber morphology and mechanical properties using humidity. J Polym Sci B 49:1734–1744CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Baji A, Mai Y-W, Wong S-C et al (2010) Electrospinning of polymer nanofibers: effects on oriented morphology, structures and tensile properties. Compos Sci Technol 70:703–718CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cho D, Matlock-Colangelo L, Xiang C et al (2011) Electrospun nanofibers for microfluidic analytical systems. Polymer 52:3413–3421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Tamura T, Kawakami H (2010) Aligned electrospun nanofiber composite membranes for fuel cell electrolytes. Nano letters 10:1324–1328CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Li D, Frey MW, Joo YL (2006) Characterization of nanofibrous membranes with capillary flow porometry. J Membr Sci 286:104–114CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cho Y, Cho D, Park JH et al (2012) Preparation and characterization of amphiphilic triblock terpolymer-based nanofibers as antifouling biomaterials. Biomacromolecules 13:1606–1614CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Edwards KA, Curtis KL, Sailor JL, Baeumner AJ (2008) Universal liposomes: preparation and usage for the detection of mRNA. Anal Bioanal Chem 391:1689–1702CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Matlock-Colangelo L, Cho D, Pitner CL et al (2012) Functionalized electrospun nanofibers as bioseparators in microfluidic systems. Lab on a chip 12:1696–1701CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Hendrick ES and Frey MW (2013) Increasing surface hydrophilicity in poly(lactic acid) electrospun fibers by addition of PLA-b-PEG co-polymers. J Eng Fiber Fabr. (In press) (accepted April 26, 2013)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Galli M, Comfurius P, Maassen C et al (1990) Anticardiolipin antibodies (ACA) directed not to cardiolipin but to a plasma protein cofactor. Lancet 335:1544–1547CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Park S, Kim H, Paek S-H et al (2008) Enzyme-linked immuno-strip biosensor to detect Escherichia coli O157:H7. Ultramicroscopy 108:1348–1351CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Seo K-H, Holt PS, Stone HD, Gast RK (2003) Simple and rapid methods for detecting Salmonella enteritidis in raw eggs. Int J Food Microbiol 87:139–144CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Peruski AH, Peruski LF (2003) Immunological methods for detection and identification of infectious disease and biological warfare agents. Clin Vaccine Immunol 10:506–513CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Hearty S, Leonard P, Quinn J, O’Kennedy R (2006) Production, characterisation and potential application of a novel monoclonal antibody for rapid identification of virulent Listeria monocytogenes. J Microbiol Methods 66:294–312CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Vollmer T, Hinse D, Kleesiek K, Dreier J (2010) The Pan Genera Detection immunoassay: a novel point-of-issue method for detection of bacterial contamination in platelet concentrates. J Clin Microbiol 48:3475–3481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Charles PT, Stubbs VR, Soto CM et al (2009) Reduction of non-specific protein adsorption using poly(ethylene) glycol (PEG) modified polyacrylate hydrogels in immunoassays for staphylococcal enterotoxin B detection. Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) 9:645–655CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag Berlin Heidelberg 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  • S. J. Reinholt
    • 1
  • A. Sonnenfeldt
    • 1
  • A. Naik
    • 2
    • 3
  • M. W. Frey
    • 3
  • A. J. Baeumner
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Biological and Environmental EngineeringCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  2. 2.Department of Chemical and Biomolecular EngineeringCornell UniversityIthacaUSA
  3. 3.Department of Fiber Science and Apparel DesignCornell UniversityIthacaUSA

Personalised recommendations