Advertisement

Environmental Science and Pollution Research

, Volume 25, Issue 11, pp 10567–10576 | Cite as

Fluorescence quenching of MoS2 nanosheets/DNA/silicon dot nanoassembly: effective and rapid detection of Hg2+ ions in aqueous solution

  • Krishnan Srinivasan
  • Kathavarayan Subramanian
  • Kadarkarai Murugan
  • Giovanni Benelli
  • Kannaiyan Dinakaran
Plant-borne compounds and nanoparticles: challenges for medicine, parasitology and entomology

Abstract

Mercury (Hg) contamination of aquatic sites represents a serious risk for human health and the environment. Therefore, effective and rapid monitoring of Hg in aqueous samples is a challenge of timely importance nowadays. In the present study, a rapid and sensitive mercury sensor based on the fluorescence quenching of MoS2 nanosheets/DNA/silicon dot nanoassembly has been developed for the efficient detection of mercury(II) in aquatic environments. In this process, silicon dots were synthesized through one-step high-temperature calcinations and thermomagnesium reduction method at 900 °C using rice husk as a silicon source, which demonstrates superior photophysical properties and excitation-dependent fluorescence behavior. The interaction between MoS2 nanosheets/DNA/silicon dot nanoassembly and Hg2+ ions was studied using photoluminescence spectroscopy. The addition of Hg2+ ions to the assay solution induced the detachment of fluorescent probe from the surface of MoS2 nanosheets. Thus, the fluorescent probes sustained its fluorescence intensity. The developed sensor was tested on various concentrations of Hg2+ ions ranging from 0 to 1000 nM as well as on various metal ions. In addition, MoS2 nanosheets/DNA/silicon dot nanoassembly fluorescent Hg sensor efficiently detected the presence of Hg2+ ions in real-time water samples, which was comparably detected by the conventional atomic absorbance spectrometer (AAS). Overall, our results highlighted the high reliability of the present approach for environmental monitoring of Hg2+ ions, if compared to that of the customary method with a lowest detection limit of 0.86 nM.

Keywords

Mercury MoS2 nanosheets Fluorescence Nanoassembly Silicon dots FRET 

Notes

Funding information

K. Dinakaran acknowledges the financial support of SERB, Department of Science and Technology, New Delhi, India, through Grant No. EEQ/2016/000049.

References

  1. Alivisatos AP (1996) Semiconductor clusters, nanocrystals, and quantum dots. Science 271:933–937.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.271.5251.933 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Bernardi M, Palummo M, Grossman JC (2013) Extraordinary sunlight absorption and one nanometer thick photovoltaics using two-dimensional monolayer materials. Nano Lett 13:3664–3670.  https://doi.org/10.1021/nl401544y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Bruchez M Jr, Moronne M, Gin P, Weiss S, Alivisatos A (1998) Semiconductor nanocrystals as fluorescent biological labels. Science 281:2013–2016.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.281.5385.2013 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Buriak JM (2002) Organometallic chemistry on silicon and germanium surfaces. Chem Rev 102:1271–1308.  https://doi.org/10.1021/cr000064s CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Chakraborty B, Bera A, Muthu DVS, Bhowmick S, Waghmare UV, Sood AK (2012) Symmetry-dependent phonon renormalization in monolayer MoS2 transistor. Phys Rev B Condens Matter Mater Physics 85:161403–161408.  https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevB.85.161403 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Coleman JN, Lotya M, O'Neill A, Bergin SD, King PJ, Khan U, Young K, Gaucher A, De S, Smith RJ, Shvets IV, Arora SK, Stanton G, Kim HY, Lee K, Kim GT, Duesberg GS, Hallam T, Boland JJ, Wang JJ, Donegan JF, Grunlan JC, Moriarty G, Shmeliov A, Nicholls RJ, Perkins JM, Grieveson EM, Theuwissen K, McComb DW, Nellist PD, Nicolosi V (2011) Two-dimensional nanosheet produced by liquid exfoliation of layered materials. Science 331:568–571.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1194975 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Deng H, Yang X, Gao Z (2015) MoS2 nanosheet as an effective fluorescence quencher for DNA methyltransferase activity detection. Analyst 140:3210–3215.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C4AN02133A CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Derfus AM, Chan WCW, Bhatia SN (2004) Probing the cytotoxicity of semiconductor quantum dots. Nano Lett 4:11–18.  https://doi.org/10.1021/nl0347334 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Ding Z, Quinn MB, Haram AK, Pell LE, Korgel BA, Bard AL (2002) Electrochemistry and electrogenerated chemiluminescence from silicon nanocrystal quantum dots. Science 296:1293–1297.  https://doi.org/10.1126/science.1069336 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Eckhoff DA, Sutin JDB, Clegg RM, Gratton E (2005) Optical characterization of ultra small Si nanoparticles prepared through electrochemical dispersion of bulk Si. J Phys Chem B 109:19786–19797.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jp052214e CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. Eda G, Yamaguchi H, Voiry D, Fujita T, Chen M, Chhowalla M (2011) Photoluminescence from chemically exfoliated MoS2. Nano Lett 11:5111–5116.  https://doi.org/10.1021/nl201874w CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. Fujioka K, Hiruoka M, Sato K, Manabe N, Miyasaka R, Hanada S, Hoshino A, Tilley RD, Manome Y, Hirakuri K (2008) Luminescent passive-oxidized silicon quantum dots as biological staining labels and their cytotoxicity effects at high concentration. Nanotechnology 19:415102.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/19/41/415102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Gao X, Yang L, Petros JA, Marshall FF, Simons JW, Nie S (2005) In vivo molecular and cellular imaging with quantum dots. Curr Opin Biotechnol 16:63–72.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2004.11.003 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. Harada M (1995) Minamata disease: methylmercury poisoning in Japan caused by environmental pollution. Crit Rev Toxicol 25:1–24.  https://doi.org/10.3109/10408449509089885 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Huan C, Chin SSQ (2014) Silicon nanoparticles: preparation, properties, and applications. Chin Phys B 23:088102–088114.  https://doi.org/10.1088/1674-1056/23/8/088102 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Huang J, Xu Y, Qian XJ (2009) A rhodamine-based Hg2+ sensor with high selectivity and sensitivity in aqueous solution: an NS2-containing receptor. J Org Chem 74:2167–2170.  https://doi.org/10.1021/jo802297x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Ji Q, Bowei L, Xinran W, Zhong Z, Zhuo W, Jinglong H, Lingxin C (2017) Three-dimensional paper-based microfluidic 1 chip device for multiplexed fluorescence detection of Cu2+ and Hg2+ ions based on ion imprinting technology. Sens Actuators B Chem 251:224–233.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2017.05.052 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. Kashid RV, Joag PD, Thripuranthaka M, Rout CS, Late DJ, More MA (2015) Stable field emission from layered MoS2 nanosheets in high vacuum and observation of 1/f noise. Nanomater Nanotechnol 5:1–6.  https://doi.org/10.5772/60071 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Kelong AI, Changping R, Mengxia S, Lehui L (2016) MoS2 nanosheets with widened interlayer spacing for high-efficiency removal of mercury in aquatic systems. Adv Funct Mater 26:5542–5549.  https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.201601338 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Kim YJ, Johnson RC, Hupp JT (2001) Gold nanoparticle-based sensing of “spectroscopically silent” heavy metal ions. Nano Lett 1:165–167.  https://doi.org/10.1021/nl0100116 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Lakowicz JR (1999) Principles of fluorescence spectroscopy. Plenum Press, New York http://www.springer.com/us/book/9780387312781 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Li T, Dong S, Wang E (2009) Label-free colorimetric detection of aqueous mercury ion (Hg2+) using Hg2+-modulated G-quadruplex-based DNAzymes. Anal Chem 81:2144–2149.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac900188y CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. Liu J, Lu Y (2007) Rational design of “turn-on” allosteric DNAzyme catalytic beacons for aqueous mercury ions with ultrahigh sensitivity and selectivity. Angew Chem 119:7731–7734.  https://doi.org/10.1002/ange.200702006 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Lixia Y, Zhaopeng C, Zhiyang Z, Chengli Q, Lingxin C, Dazhong S (2013) Fluorescent sensing of mercury (II) based on formation of catalytic gold nanoparticles. Analyst 138:4280–4283.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C3AN00725A CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Lou XH, Zhao T, Ma J, Xiao Y (2013) Self-assembled DNA monolayer buffered dynamic ranges of mercuric electrochemical sensor. Anal Chem 15:7574–7580.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac401680c CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. McKeown-Eyssen GE, Ruedy J, Neims A (1983) Methyl mercury exposure in northern Quebec. II. Neurologic findings in children. Am J Epidemiol 118:470–479 https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/6637974 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Medintz IL, Uyeda HT, Goldman ER, Mattoussi H (2005) Quantum dot bioconjugates for imaging, labelling and sensing. Nat Mater 4:435–446.  https://doi.org/10.1038/nmat1390 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Murugan K, Nataraj D, Jaganathan A, Dinesh D, Jayashanthini S, Samidoss CM, Paulpandi M, Panneerselvam C, Subramaniam J, Aziz AT, Nicoletti M, Kumar S, Higuchi A, Benelli G (2017) Nanofabrication of graphene quantum dots with high toxicity against malaria mosquitoes, Plasmodium falciparum and MCF-7 cancer cells: impact on predation of non-target tadpoles, odonate nymphs and mosquito fishes. J Clust Sci 28:393–411.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s10876-016-1107-7 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Peng X, He H, Xia J, Lou Z, Chang G, Zhang X, Wang S (2014) Visual detection and removal of mercury ions by a ferrocene derivative. Tetrahedron Lett 55:3541–3544.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tetlet.2014.04.093 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Prasad PN (2003) Introduction to biophotonics. Wiley-Interscience, Hoboken, New York.  https://doi.org/10.1002/0471465380 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Prasad PN (2004) Nanophotonics. Wiley-Interscience, New York ISBN: 978-0-471-64988-5. https://www.wiley.com/en-us/Nanophotonics-p-9780471649885 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Srinivasan K, Thiruppathiraja C, Saroja V, Kamatchiammal S, Dinakaran K (2014a) Dual labeled Ag@SiO2 core–shell nanoparticle based optical immunosensor for sensitive detection of E. coli. Mater Sci Eng C 45:337–342.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2014.09.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. Srinivasan K, Thiruppathiraja C, Subramanian K, Dinakaran K (2014b) Sensitive detection of C. parvum using near infrared emitting core-shell Ag2S@silica nanospheres. RSC Adv 4:62399–62403.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RA10833G CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Sun HZ, Wei HT, Zhang H, Ning Y, Tang Y, Zhai F, Yang B (2011) Self-assembly of CdTe nanoparticles into dendrite structure: a microsensor to Hg2+. Langmuir 27:1136–1142.  https://doi.org/10.1021/la104325s CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Wang J, Liu B (2008) Highly sensitive and selective detection of Hg (2+) in aqueous solution with mercury-specific DNA and Sybr Green I. Chem Commun 39:4759–4761.  https://doi.org/10.1039/B806885B CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Wang L, Reipa V, Blasic J (2004) Silicon nanoparticles as a luminescent label to DNA. Bioconjug Chem 15:409–412.  https://doi.org/10.1021/bc030047k CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Warner JH, Hoshino A, Yamamoto K, Tilley RD (2005) Water-soluble photoluminescent silicon quantum dots. Angew Chem 44:4550–4554.  https://doi.org/10.1002/anie.200501256 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Wegner SV, Okesli A, Chen P, He CA (2007) Design of an emission ratiometric biosensor from MerR family proteins: a sensitive and selective sensor for Hg2+. J Am Chem Soc 129:3474–3475.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ja068342d CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Wen D, Deng L, Guo SJ, Dong SJ (2011) Self-powered sensor for trace Hg2+ detection. Anal Chem 83:3968–3972.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac2001884 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Wolfgang JP, Teresa P, Christian P (2005) Labelling of cells with quantum dots. Nanotechnology 16:9–25.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0957-4484/16/2/R01 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Xiaojia L, Liping L, Yuanjie W, Yizhi Z, Qian X, Bo F (2015) Facile synthesis of boron- and nitride-doped MoS2 nanosheets as fluorescent probes for the ultrafast, sensitive, and label-free detection of Hg2+. Analyst 140:4654–4661.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C5AN00641D CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Xing A, Tian S, Tang H, Losic D, Bao Z (2013) Mesoporous silicon engineered by the reduction of biosilica from rice husk as a high-performance anode for lithium-ion batteries. RSC Adv 3:10145–10149.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C3RA41889H CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Yi Y, Zhu G, Liu C, Huang Y, Zhang Y, Li H, Zhao J, Yao S (2013) A label-free silicon quantum dots-based photoluminescence sensor for ultrasensitive detection of pesticides. Anal Chem 85:11464–11470.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ac403257p CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Zhang L, Li T, Li B, Li J, Wang E (2010) Carbon nanotube–DNA hybrid fluorescent sensor for sensitive and selective detection of mercury (II) ion. Chem Commun 46:1476–1478.  https://doi.org/10.1039/B921191H CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Zhong Z, Jinhua L, Xingliang S, Jiping M, Lingxin C (2014) Hg2+ ion-imprinted polymers sorbents based on dithizone–Hg2+ chelation for mercury speciation analysis in environmental and biological samples. RSC Adv 4:46444–46453.  https://doi.org/10.1039/C4RA08163C CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

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

Authors and Affiliations

  • Krishnan Srinivasan
    • 1
  • Kathavarayan Subramanian
    • 1
  • Kadarkarai Murugan
    • 2
    • 3
  • Giovanni Benelli
    • 4
  • Kannaiyan Dinakaran
    • 5
  1. 1.Department of ChemistryAnna UniversityChennaiIndia
  2. 2.Department of ZoologyBharathiar UniversityCoimbatoreIndia
  3. 3.Department of BiotechnologyThiruvalluvar UniversityVelloreIndia
  4. 4.Department of Agriculture, Food and EnvironmentUniversity of PisaPisaItaly
  5. 5.Department of ChemistryThiruvalluvar UniversityVelloreIndia

Personalised recommendations