↓ Skip to main content

An Ultrasensitive Gold Nanoparticle-based Lateral Flow Test for the Detection of Active Botulinum Neurotoxin Type A

Overview of attention for article published in Discover Nano, March 2017
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Above-average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (61st percentile)
  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (78th percentile)

Mentioned by

facebook
1 Facebook page
wikipedia
1 Wikipedia page

Citations

dimensions_citation
14 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
29 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
An Ultrasensitive Gold Nanoparticle-based Lateral Flow Test for the Detection of Active Botulinum Neurotoxin Type A
Published in
Discover Nano, March 2017
DOI 10.1186/s11671-017-1944-9
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jing Liu, Shan Gao, Lin Kang, Bin Ji, Wenwen Xin, Jingjing Kang, Ping Li, Jie Gao, Hanbin Wang, Jinglin Wang, Hao Yang

Abstract

Botulism is a severe and potentially lethal paralytic disease caused by several botulinum neurotoxin-producing Clostridia spp. In China, the majority of the cases caused by botulism were from less-developed rural areas. Here, we designed specific substrate peptides and reconfigured gold nanoparticle-based lateral flow test strip (LFTS) to develop an endopeptidase-based lateral flow assay for the diagnosis of botulism. We performed this lateral flow assay on botulinum neurotoxin-spiked human serum samples. The as-prepared LFTS had excellent performance in the detection of botulinum neurotoxin using only 1 μL of simulated serum, and its sensitivity and specificity were comparable to that of mouse lethality assay. Moreover, the assay takes only half a day and does not require highly trained laboratory staff, specialized facility, or equipment. Finally, our LFTS can be potentially extended to other serotypes of BoNTs by designing specific substrate peptides against the different types of BoNTs. Overall, we demonstrate a strategy by which LFTS and endopeptidase activity assays can be integrated to achieve facile and economic diagnosis of botulism in resource-limited settings.

Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 29 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 29 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 7 24%
Student > Bachelor 3 10%
Researcher 3 10%
Other 2 7%
Lecturer > Senior Lecturer 2 7%
Other 5 17%
Unknown 7 24%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Chemistry 5 17%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 14%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 2 7%
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 2 7%
Chemical Engineering 1 3%
Other 6 21%
Unknown 9 31%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 4. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 19 November 2017.
All research outputs
#8,264,793
of 25,382,440 outputs
Outputs from Discover Nano
#210
of 1,149 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#123,146
of 323,203 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Discover Nano
#6
of 28 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,382,440 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 66th percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,149 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 3.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 323,203 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 61% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 28 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.