Comparison of a Time-Resolved Fluorescence Immunoassay and an Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay for the Analysis of Atrazine in Water

Gerry J. Reimer, Shirley J. Gee, Bruce D. Hammock

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

18 Citations (Scopus)

Abstract

Immunoassays for atrazine based on a time-resolved fluorescent label and an enzyme label were optimized and utilized to measure atrazine in water. The time-resolved fluorescent immunoassay (TRFIA) was based on a polyclonal antibody and a europium label, whereas the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) utilized a monoclonal antibody and horseradish peroxidase as the label. Detection limits and IC50 values calculated from standard curves were 0.05 ± 0.03 and 0.17 ± 0.08 ng/mL (n = 8) for the TRFIA, respectively, and 0.05 ± 0.04 and 0.3 ± 0.2 ng/mL (n = 17) for the ELISA, respectively. Four different environmental water samples were fortified at various levels of atrazine. When these samples were analyzed, the % RSD for replicate fluorescence or absorbance readings was small (5 and 6%, respectively). The average accuracies for the TRFIA and ELISA were 1.4 ± 0.42 (n = 13) and 1.0 ± 0.38 (n = 13), respectively, reflecting the slight bias of the TRFIA. TRFIA offers an advantage over ELISA in that the fluorescent label is less susceptible to interferences that inhibit enzyme activity and reagents may be more stable than enzyme reagents.

Original languageEnglish (US)
Pages (from-to)3353-3358
Number of pages6
JournalJournal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
Volume46
Issue number8
StatePublished - Aug 1998

Fingerprint

Atrazine
Immunosorbents
atrazine
immunoassays
Immunoassay
Assays
Fluorescence
Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay
Labels
enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
fluorescence
Water
Enzymes
water
europium
Europium
Enzyme activity
Horseradish Peroxidase
enzymes
polyclonal antibodies

Keywords

  • Atrazine
  • Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay
  • Herbicide
  • Immunoassay
  • Time-resolved fluorescence
  • Triazine

ASJC Scopus subject areas

  • Agricultural and Biological Sciences (miscellaneous)
  • Food Science
  • Chemistry (miscellaneous)

Cite this

Comparison of a Time-Resolved Fluorescence Immunoassay and an Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay for the Analysis of Atrazine in Water. / Reimer, Gerry J.; Gee, Shirley J.; Hammock, Bruce D.

In: Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry, Vol. 46, No. 8, 08.1998, p. 3353-3358.

Research output: Contribution to journalArticle

@article{ed505017ef13415f8aabc9a7dcb70650,
title = "Comparison of a Time-Resolved Fluorescence Immunoassay and an Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay for the Analysis of Atrazine in Water",
abstract = "Immunoassays for atrazine based on a time-resolved fluorescent label and an enzyme label were optimized and utilized to measure atrazine in water. The time-resolved fluorescent immunoassay (TRFIA) was based on a polyclonal antibody and a europium label, whereas the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) utilized a monoclonal antibody and horseradish peroxidase as the label. Detection limits and IC50 values calculated from standard curves were 0.05 ± 0.03 and 0.17 ± 0.08 ng/mL (n = 8) for the TRFIA, respectively, and 0.05 ± 0.04 and 0.3 ± 0.2 ng/mL (n = 17) for the ELISA, respectively. Four different environmental water samples were fortified at various levels of atrazine. When these samples were analyzed, the {\%} RSD for replicate fluorescence or absorbance readings was small (5 and 6{\%}, respectively). The average accuracies for the TRFIA and ELISA were 1.4 ± 0.42 (n = 13) and 1.0 ± 0.38 (n = 13), respectively, reflecting the slight bias of the TRFIA. TRFIA offers an advantage over ELISA in that the fluorescent label is less susceptible to interferences that inhibit enzyme activity and reagents may be more stable than enzyme reagents.",
keywords = "Atrazine, Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay, Herbicide, Immunoassay, Time-resolved fluorescence, Triazine",
author = "Reimer, {Gerry J.} and Gee, {Shirley J.} and Hammock, {Bruce D.}",
year = "1998",
month = "8",
language = "English (US)",
volume = "46",
pages = "3353--3358",
journal = "Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry",
issn = "0021-8561",
publisher = "American Chemical Society",
number = "8",

}

TY - JOUR

T1 - Comparison of a Time-Resolved Fluorescence Immunoassay and an Enzyme-Linked Immunosorbent Assay for the Analysis of Atrazine in Water

AU - Reimer, Gerry J.

AU - Gee, Shirley J.

AU - Hammock, Bruce D.

PY - 1998/8

Y1 - 1998/8

N2 - Immunoassays for atrazine based on a time-resolved fluorescent label and an enzyme label were optimized and utilized to measure atrazine in water. The time-resolved fluorescent immunoassay (TRFIA) was based on a polyclonal antibody and a europium label, whereas the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) utilized a monoclonal antibody and horseradish peroxidase as the label. Detection limits and IC50 values calculated from standard curves were 0.05 ± 0.03 and 0.17 ± 0.08 ng/mL (n = 8) for the TRFIA, respectively, and 0.05 ± 0.04 and 0.3 ± 0.2 ng/mL (n = 17) for the ELISA, respectively. Four different environmental water samples were fortified at various levels of atrazine. When these samples were analyzed, the % RSD for replicate fluorescence or absorbance readings was small (5 and 6%, respectively). The average accuracies for the TRFIA and ELISA were 1.4 ± 0.42 (n = 13) and 1.0 ± 0.38 (n = 13), respectively, reflecting the slight bias of the TRFIA. TRFIA offers an advantage over ELISA in that the fluorescent label is less susceptible to interferences that inhibit enzyme activity and reagents may be more stable than enzyme reagents.

AB - Immunoassays for atrazine based on a time-resolved fluorescent label and an enzyme label were optimized and utilized to measure atrazine in water. The time-resolved fluorescent immunoassay (TRFIA) was based on a polyclonal antibody and a europium label, whereas the enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) utilized a monoclonal antibody and horseradish peroxidase as the label. Detection limits and IC50 values calculated from standard curves were 0.05 ± 0.03 and 0.17 ± 0.08 ng/mL (n = 8) for the TRFIA, respectively, and 0.05 ± 0.04 and 0.3 ± 0.2 ng/mL (n = 17) for the ELISA, respectively. Four different environmental water samples were fortified at various levels of atrazine. When these samples were analyzed, the % RSD for replicate fluorescence or absorbance readings was small (5 and 6%, respectively). The average accuracies for the TRFIA and ELISA were 1.4 ± 0.42 (n = 13) and 1.0 ± 0.38 (n = 13), respectively, reflecting the slight bias of the TRFIA. TRFIA offers an advantage over ELISA in that the fluorescent label is less susceptible to interferences that inhibit enzyme activity and reagents may be more stable than enzyme reagents.

KW - Atrazine

KW - Enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay

KW - Herbicide

KW - Immunoassay

KW - Time-resolved fluorescence

KW - Triazine

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/record.url?scp=0001436208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

UR - http://www.scopus.com/inward/citedby.url?scp=0001436208&partnerID=8YFLogxK

M3 - Article

AN - SCOPUS:0001436208

VL - 46

SP - 3353

EP - 3358

JO - Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

JF - Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry

SN - 0021-8561

IS - 8

ER -