Determination of the Limits of Detection for Acetamiprid Based on Gold Nanoparticle Aptasensor: Comparison Between Four-Parameter and Five-Parameter Logistics Equations
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.54987/jebat.v5i2.767Keywords:
Acetamiprid, sigmoidal calibration curve, Four-parameter logistic equation, Five-parameter logistic equation, Error functions analysisAbstract
Acetamiprid is a kind of broad-spectrum systemic pesticide that works on the nicotinic acetylcholine receptor. This chemical disrupts the transmission of a signal and causes a buildup of neurotransmitters, which leads to pests being paralyzed and eventually dying as a result. The calibration curve for the detection of acetamiprid utilizing a gold nanoparticle-based visual aptasensor showed a sigmoidal shape profile; hence, the 5-PL or 4-PL model should be used to fit the data rather than a linear model. The result of the error function analysis shows that the simpler 4-PL model is more reliable having smaller AICc, R2 and adjR2, values whilst the other error functions such as RMSE, BIC and HQF, BF and AF values indicated that the 5-PL model shows that the 5-PL model was marginally superior to the 4-PL. As the 95% confidence interval overlap, the IC50 values were deemed not significantly different, and when this occur, based on Occam’s razor, the model having a lower number of parameters, which was 4-PL, should be chosen instead. The 4-PL equation produced a value for the LOD of 0.159 mM, and the confidence interval for 95 percent of the results ranged from 0.132 to 0.177. According to the first study, the LOD was 3.81 mM, and the calculated LOD using 4-PL model with pooled standard deviations was much more sensitive. This indicates that utilizing only the linear portion of a sigmoidal curve to report the LOD values gave a less sensitive value than it should be.
References
Xu C, Lin M, Song C, Chen D, Bian C. A gold nanoparticle-based visual aptasensor for rapid detection of acetamiprid residues in agricultural products using a smartphone. RSC Adv. 2022;12(9):5540-5.
Kimura-Kuroda J, Komuta Y, Kuroda Y, Hayashi M, Kawano H. Nicotine-Like Effects of the Neonicotinoid Insecticides Acetamiprid and Imidacloprid on Cerebellar Neurons from Neonatal Rats. PLOS ONE. 2012 Feb 29;7(2):e32432.
Liu Z, Dai Y, Huang G, Gu Y, Ni J, Wei H, et al. Soil microbial degradation of neonicotinoid insecticides imidacloprid, acetamiprid, thiacloprid and imidaclothiz and its effect on the persistence of bioefficacy against horsebean aphid Aphis craccivora Koch after soil application. Pest Manag Sci. 2011;67(10):1245-52.
Imamura T, Yanagawa Y, Nishikawa K, Matsumoto N, Sakamoto T. Two cases of acute poisoning with acetamiprid in humans. Clin Toxicol Phila Pa. 2010 Oct;48(8):851-3.
Chen T, Dai YJ, Ding JF, Yuan S, Ni JP. N-demethylation of neonicotinoid insecticide acetamiprid by bacterium Stenotrophomonas maltophilia CGMCC 1.1788. Biodegradation. 2008;19(5):651-8.
Nakayama A, Sukekawa M, Eguchi Y. Stereochemistry and active conformation of a novel insecticide, acetamiprid. Pestic Sci. 1997;51(2):157-64.
US EPA O. Evaluating Pesticides for Carcinogenic Potential [Internet]. 2015 [cited 2023 Jan 10]. Available from: https://www.epa.gov/pesticide-science-and-assessing-pesticide-risks/evaluating-pesticides-carcinogenic-potential
Casida JE. Neonicotinoid Metabolism: Compounds, Substituents, Pathways, Enzymes, Organisms, and Relevance. J Agric Food Chem. 2011 Apr 13;59(7):2923-31.
Padrilah SN, Masdor NA. Limits of Detection Based on the Four-Parameter Logistic Model for E. coli Determined using a Fluorescent-based Sensor. J Environ Microbiol Toxicol. 2021 Jul 31;9(1):1-2.
Masdor NA. Determination of the Detection Limit of the Detection of GMO in Food Using the Isothermal Solid-Phase Recombinase Polymerase Amplification on Microfluidic DVDs. Asian J Plant Biol. 2021 Dec 31;3(2):17-9.
Masdor NA. Detection Limit of the Four-Parameter Logistic Model for the Quantitative Detection of Serum Squamous Cell Carcinoma Antigenin Cervical Cancer Based on Surface Plasmon Resonance Biosensor. J Environ Microbiol Toxicol. 2021 Dec 31;9(2):30-2.
Masdor NA, Altintas Z, Shukor MY, Tothill IE. Subtractive inhibition assay for the detection of Campylobacter jejuni in chicken samples using surface plasmon resonance. Sci Rep. 2019 Sep 20;9(1):13642.
Romero AR, Partridge MC, Masdor NA, James SW, Tothill IE, Tatam RP. A fibre optic long period grating immunosensor for Campylobacter jejuni with enhanced sensitivity by bacterial staining. In 2018.
Masdor NA, Altintas Z, Tothill IE. Surface plasmon resonance immunosensor for the detection of Campylobacter jejuni. Chemosensors. 2017 Jun;5(2):16.
Masdor NA, Altintas Z, Tothill IE. Sensitive detection of Campylobacter jejuni using nanoparticles enhanced QCM sensor. Biosens Bioelectron. 2016;78:328-36.
Masdor NA. Determination of the detection limit using the four-parameter logistic model for the double-antibody sandwich ELISA for the rapid detection of Bacillus cereus in food. J Environ Microbiol Toxicol. 2017 Jul 31;5(1):12-3.
Holstein CA, Griffin M, Hong J, Sampson PD. Statistical method for determining and comparing limits of detection of bioassays. Anal Chem. 2015 Oct 6;87(19):9795-801.
Rohatgi A. WebPlotDigitizer. http://arohatgi.info/WebPlotDigitizer/app/ Accessed June 2 2014.; 2015.
Halmi MIE, Shukor MS, Johari WLW, Shukor MY. Mathematical modelling of the degradation kinetics of Bacillus cereus grown on phenol. J Environ Bioremediation Toxicol. 2014;2(1):1-5.
Khare KS, Phelan Jr FR. Quantitative comparison of atomistic simulations with experiment for a cross-linked epoxy: A specific volume-cooling rate analysis. Macromolecules. 2018;51(2):564-75.
Motulsky HJ, Ransnas LA. Fitting curves to data using nonlinear regression: a practical and nonmathematical review. FASEB J Off Publ Fed Am Soc Exp Biol. 1987;1(5):365-74.
Wayman M, Tseng MC. Inhibition?threshold substrate concentrations. Biotechnol Bioeng. 1976;18(3):383-7.
G?uszcz P, Petera J, Ledakowicz S. Mathematical modeling of the integrated process of mercury bioremediation in the industrial bioreactor. Bioprocess Biosyst Eng. 2011;34(3):275-85.
Kass RE, Raftery AE. Bayes Factors. J Am Stat Assoc. 1995 Jun 1;90(430):773-95.
Burnham KP, Anderson DR. Model Selection and Multimodel Inference: A Practical Information-Theoretic Approach. Springer Science & Business Media; 2002. 528 p.
Masdor NA, Altintas Z, Tothill IE. Sensitive detection of Campylobacter jejuni using nanoparticles enhanced QCM sensor. Biosens Bioelectron. 2016;78:328-36.
Schenker N, Gentleman JF. On judging the significance of differences by examining the overlap between confidence intervals. Am Stat. 2001;55(3):182-6.
Schroeder LD, Sjoquist DL, Stephan PE. Understanding Regression Analysis: An Introductory Guide. Second edition. Los Angeles: SAGE Publications, Inc; 2016. 120 p.
Hair J, Money A, Page M, Samouel P. Research methods for business. Chichester: John Wiley & sons Ltd; 2007. 448 p.
Figueiredo D, Júnior S, Rocha E. What is R2 all about? Leviathan-Cad Pesqui Polútica. 2011 Nov 16;3:60-8.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
Authors who publish with this journal agree to the following terms:
- Authors retain copyright and grant the journal right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0) that allows others to share the work with an acknowledgement of the work's authorship and initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are able to enter into separate, additional contractual arrangements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in this journal.
- Authors are permitted and encouraged to post their work online (e.g., in institutional repositories or on their website) prior to and during the submission process, as it can lead to productive exchanges, as well as earlier and greater citation of published work (See The Effect of Open Access).
