Advertisement

Design, simulation and performance analysis bio-sensors for the detection of cholera and diarrhea using MEMS technology

  • K. Srinivasa Rao
  • K. V. Vineetha
  • B. V. S. Sailaja
  • Koushik Guha
  • N. P. Maity
  • Reshmi Maity
  • K. Girija Sravani
Technical Paper
  • 79 Downloads

Abstract

This paper presents two different types of micro channels namely one is cylindrical and the other is rectangular which are designed and simulated using FEM tool for the detection of cholera and diarrhea. Cholera is caused by vibrio cholera bacteria having dielectric constant 60 and Diarrhea is caused by E. coli bacteria having dielectric constant 40. Capacitance, flow velocity and flow rate are evaluated using FEM tool with and without bacteria cells. Along with the above analysis the performance analysis of the device also evaluated using FEM and MATLAB Tool. Sensitivity of cylindrical based micro channel is more than the rectangular micro channel because of low backward pressures in the cylindrical channel than the rectangular channel. The gap between the two electrodes are changed from 2.5, 2.4 and 2.3 μm in order to improve the performance of the device. The time taken by cylindrical channel for the detection of 150 cells of E. coli and V. cholera bacteria with a gap of 2.5 μm is (136, 205 s). The time taken by cylindrical channel for the detection of 150 cells of E. coli and V. cholera bacteria with a gap of 2.4 μm is (120, 180 s). The time taken by cylindrical channel for the detection of 150 cells of E. coli and V. cholera bacteria with a gap of 2.3 μm is (119, 178 s). The time taken by rectangular channel for the detection of 150 cells of E. coli and V. cholera bacteria with a gap of 2.5 μm is (345, 543 s). The time taken by rectangular channel for the detection of 150 cells of E. coli and V. cholera bacteria with a gap of 2.4 μm is (277, 518 s). The time taken by rectangular channel for the detection of 150 cells of E. coli and V. cholera bacteria with a gap of 2.3 μm is (165, 232 s). As the gap between the electrodes decreases the time taken for the detection also decreases. Accuracy also more for the cylindrical micro channel than the rectangular micro channel.

Notes

Acknowledgements

The Authors would like to thank to NMDC supported by NPMASS, National Institute of Technology, Silchar for providing the necessary computational tools. The corresponding author (Dr. K. Srinivasa Rao) would like to thank Science Engineering research Board (SERB), Govt. of India, New Delhi (Grant file no: ECRA/2016/000757) for providing partial financial assistance to carry out the work.

References

  1. Bunyakul N, Edwards KA, Promptmas C, Baeumner AJ (2009) Cholera toxin subunit B detection in microfluidic devices. Anal Bioanal Chem 393(1):177–186CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Campbell GA, Mutharasan R (2005) Escherichia coli O157:H7 detection limit of millimeter-sized PZT cantilever sensor is 700 cell/ml. Anal Sci 21:235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Charles PT, Velez F, Soto CM, Goldman ER, Martin BD, Ray RI, Taitt CR (2006) A galactose polyacrylate-based hydrogel scaffold for the detection of cholera toxin and staphylococcal enterotoxin B in a sandwich immunoassay format. Anal Chim Acta 578(1):2–10CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Chen H, Zheng Y, Jiang JH, Wu HL, Shen GL, Yu RQ (2008) An ultrasensitive chemiluminescence biosensor for cholera toxin based on ganglioside-functionalized supported lipid membrane and liposome. Biosens Bioelectron 24(4):684–689CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Cheng Q, Zhu S, Song J, Zhang N (2004) Functional lipid microstructures immobilized on a gold electrode for voltammetric biosensing of cholera toxin. Analyst 129(4):309–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Dwivedi AK et al (2010) Detection of E. coli cell using capacitance modulation. In: COMSOL users conference Bengaluru, IndiaGoogle Scholar
  7. Gondran C, Orio M, Rigal D, Galland B, Bouffier L, Gulon T, Cosnier S (2010) Electropolymerized biotinylated poly (pyrrole–viologen) film as platform for the development of reagentless impedimetric immunosensors. Electrochem Commun 12(2):311–314CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Gupta SK et al (2011) Lab on chip for detection of E. coli. Bacteria in water using capacitance modulation. In: Excerpt from the proceedings of 2011 comsol conference in BangaloreGoogle Scholar
  9. Horvath R, Pedersen HC, Skivesen N (2003) Optical waveguide sensor for on-line monitoring of bacteria. Opt Lett 28:1233–1235CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Kant L (2008) Combating emerging infectious diseases in India: orchestrating a symphony. J. Biosciences 33:425–427CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Koubova V, Brynda E, Karasova L, Skvor J, Homola J (2001) Detection of food born pathogens using surface piasmon resonance biosensors. Sens Actuators, B 74:100–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Künneke S, Janshoff A (2002) Visualization of molecular recognition events on microstructured lipid-membrane compartments by in situ scanning force microscopy. Angew Chem Int Ed 41(2):314–316CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Labib M, Hedström M, Amin M, Mattiasson B (2009) A capacitive immunosensor for detection of cholera toxin. Anal Chim Acta 634(2):255–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Lee JH, Hwang KS, Park J, Yoon KH (2003) Immunoassay of prostate-specific antigen (PSA) using resonant shift of piezoelectric nanomechanical microcantilever. Biosens Bioelectron 20:2157–2162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Li L (2011) Recent development of Micro machined Biosensors. IEEE Sens J 11(2):305–311CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Liuand Y, Duan Y (2006) Encyclopaedia of sensors. Am Sci Publ 1:371–400Google Scholar
  17. Loyprasert S, Hedström M, Thavarungkul P, Kanatharana P, Mattiasson B (2010) Sub-attomolar detection of cholera toxin using a label-free capacitive immunosensor. Biosens Bioelectron 25(8):1977–1983CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Luo X, Morrin A, Killard AJ, Smyth MR (2006) Application of nanoparticles in electrochemical sensors and biosensors. Electroanalysis 18(4):319–326CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Lyon WJ (2001) Tag man PCR for detection of vibrio cholerae O1, O139, Non-O1, and Non-O139 in pure cultures, raw oysters, and synthetic sea water. Appl Environ Microbiol 67(10):4685–4693CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Mao X, Yang L, Su XL, Li Y (2006) A nanopaticle amplification based quartz crystal microbalance DNA sensor for detection of Escherichia coli O157:H7. Biosens Bioelectron 21:1178–1185CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Martinez-Govea A, Ambrosio J, Gutierrez-Cogco L, Flisser A (2001) Identification and strain differentiation of Vibrio cholerae by using polyclonal antibodies against outer membrane proteins”. Clin Diagn Lab Immunol 28(4):768–771Google Scholar
  22. Miller JC, Zhou H, Kwekel J, Cavallo R, Burke J, Butler EB, Haab BB (2003) Antibody microarray profiling of human prostate cancer sera: antibody screening and identification of potential biomarkers. Proteomics 3(1):56–63CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Nugaeva N, Gfeller KY, Backmann N, Duggelin M, Lang HP (2007) An antibody-sensitized microfabricated cantilever for the growth detection of Aspergillus niger spores. Microsc Microanal 13:13–17CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Rowe-Taitt CA, Cras JJ, Patterson CH, Golden JP, Ligler FS (2000) A ganglioside-based assay for cholera toxin using an array biosensor. Anal Biochem 281(1):123–133CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Rucker VC, Havenstrite KL, Herr AE (2005) Antibody microarrays for native toxin detection. Anal Biochem 339(2):262–270CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Schofield CL, Field RA, Russell DA (2007) Glyconanoparticles for the colorimetric detection of cholera toxin. Anal Chem 79(4):1356–1361Google Scholar
  27. Sigudu TT, Tint KS, Archer B (2015) Epidemiological description of cholera outbreak in Mpumalanga Province, South Africa, December 2008–March 2009. South Afr J Infect Dis 30(4):125–128Google Scholar
  28. Song X, Swanson BI (1999) Direct, ultrasensitive, and selective optical detection of protein toxins using multivalent interactions. Anal Chem 71(11):2097–2107CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Viswanathan S, Wu LC, Huang MR, Ho JAA (2006) Electrochemical immunosensor for cholera toxin using liposomes and poly (3, 4-ethylenedioxythiophene)-coated carbon nanotubes. Anal Chem 78(4):1115–1121CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Zayats M, Raitman OA, Chegel VI, Kharitonov AB, Willner I (2002) Probing antigen-antibody binding processes by impedance measurements on ion-sensitive field-effect transistor devices and complementary surface plasmon resonance analyses: development of cholera toxin sensors. Anal Chem 74(18):4763–4773CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • K. Srinivasa Rao
    • 1
  • K. V. Vineetha
    • 1
  • B. V. S. Sailaja
    • 1
  • Koushik Guha
    • 2
  • N. P. Maity
    • 3
  • Reshmi Maity
    • 3
  • K. Girija Sravani
    • 1
  1. 1.MEMS Research Center, Department of Electronics and Communication EngineeringKoneru Lakshmaiah Education Foundation (Demeed to be University)GunturIndia
  2. 2.National MEMS Design Centre, Department of Electronics and Communication EngineeringNational Institute of TechnologySilcharIndia
  3. 3.Department of Electronics and Communication EngineeringMizoram University (A Central University)AizawlIndia

Personalised recommendations