Content uploaded by Vineeta Rai
Author content
All content in this area was uploaded by Vineeta Rai on Nov 20, 2014
Content may be subject to copyright.
Available via license: CC BY 4.0
Content may be subject to copyright.
Journal of Biomaterials and Nanobiotechnology, 2012, 3, 315-324
doi:10.4236/jbnb.2012.322039 Published Online May 2012 (http://www.SciRP.org/journal/jbnb) 315
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture
Vineeta Rai, Sefali Acharya, Nrisingha Dey*
Institute of Life Sciences, Division of Gene Function and Regulation, Laboratory of Plant Biotechnology, Bhubaneswar (Odisha),
India.
Email: {vineeta7885, sefaliacharya}@gmail.com, *dey@ils.res.in, nrisinghad@yahoo.com
Received February 29th, 2012; revised March 28th, 2012; accepted April 12th, 2012
ABSTRACT
Nanotechnology has emerged as a boon to the society with immense potential in varied area of research and our day-
to-day life. The application of nanotechnology for the advancement of biosensor leads to an efficient nanobiosensor
with miniature structure as compared to conventional biosensors. Nanobiosensors can be effectively used for sensing a
wide variety of fertilizers, herbicide, pesticide, insecticide, pathogens, moisture, and soil pH. Taken together, proper and
controlled use of nanobiosensor can support sustainable agriculture for enhancing crop productivity.
Keywords: Nanobiotechnology; Nanobiosensors; Sustainable Agriculture
1. Introduction
Accessibility of net land and water-resources for agricul-
ture is rapidly declining, causing huge loss in agricultural
output. Besides, the ever increasing concentration of her-
bicides, pesticides and heavy metals in agricultural land is
alarming. These issues can only be dealt efficiently with
the aid and continuous flow of new technologies into this
sector. Presently, nanotechnology is visualized as a
rapidly evolving field with high potential to revolutionize
agricultural and food systems. It is viewed as a potential
tool to enhance the quality of the agricultural based
products and natural resource. It may boosts rural econo-
my by promoting sustainable agriculture, facilitating farm-
costs reduction and up lift product-values [1]. Consi-
dering the present scenario and merits of nanotechnology
the paper reviews the implications of nanobiosensors in
promoting agriculture to feed the growing populations.
Nanobiosensors may be of great value for effective
monitoring of soil quality in terms of its constituents, pH,
humidity, microbial load etc. and thus aid as an efficient
tool to enhance productivity.
Nanobiosensor is a modified version of a biosensor
which may be defined as a compact analytical device/
unit incorporating a biological or biologically derived
sensitized element linked to a physico-chemical transducer
[2]. In the year 1967, the first biosensor was invented [3]
which led to the development of several modified
biosensors. Interestingly, since early 20th century the con-
cept of biosensors existed but their uses were limited only
in laboratories and with advent of sciences several modern
biosensors were designed (Figure 1). Overall, there are
three so-called ‘generations’ of biosensors; first generation
biosensors operates on electrical response, second genera-
tion biosensors functions involving specific ‘mediators’
between the reaction and the transducer for generating
improved response, and in third generation biosensors
the reaction itself causes the response and no product or
mediator diffusion is directly involved [4-18] (Figure 1).
2. Nanobiosensors
With the progression in sciences, nanobiosensors with
superbly dedicated miniature sensors with highly minia-
turization were designed and developed in 21st century
based on the ideas of nanotechnology. Recently, re-
searchers have used an integrated approach by combining
nanosciences, electronics, computers and biology to cre-
ate biosensors with extraordinary sensing capabilities
that show unprecedented spatial and temporal resolution
and reliability. Nanosensors with immobilized biorecep-
tor probes that are selective for target analyte molecules
are called nanobiosensors. A nanobiosensor is usually
built on the nanoscale to obtain process and analyze the
data at the level of atomic scale (http://www.nanome-
dicine.com/NMI/Glossary.htm). Nanobiosensors open up
new opportunities for basic research and provide tools
for real bio-analytical applications, which was impossible
in the past [19-22]. They can be integrated into other
technologies such as lab-on-a-chip to facilitate molecular
analysis. Their applications include detection of analytes
like urea, glucose, pesticides etc., monitoring of metabo-
lites and detection of various microorganisms/pathogens.
*Corresponding author.
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture
316
Figure 1. Milestone in the advancement of biosensors in 20th century.
Their portability makes them ideal for their applications
in field but they can be used in the laboratory setting as
well.
2.1. Characteristics for an Ideal Nanobiosensors
Highly specific for the purpose of the analyses i.e. a
sensor must be able to distinguish between analyte and
any ‘other’ material.
Stable under normal storage conditions.
Specific interaction between analytes should be inde-
pendent of any physical parameters such as stirring, pH
and temperature.
Reaction time should be minimal.
The responses obtained should be accurate, precise, re-
producible and linear over the useful analytical range
and also be free from electrical noise.
The nanobiosensor must be tiny, biocompatible, non-
toxic and non-antigenic.
Should be cheap, portable and capable of being used
by semi-skilled operators.
2.2. Constituents of Nanobiosensors
A typical nanobiosensor comprises of 3 components;
biologically sensitized elements (probe), transducer and
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture 317
detector [23] as described in Figure 2:
1) The biologically sensitized elements (probe) in-
cluding receptors, enzymes, antibodies, nucleic acids,
molecular imprints, lectins, tissue, microorganisms, or-
ganelles etc., which are either a biologically derived ma-
terial or bio-mimic component that receives signals from
the analytes (sample) of interest and transmits it to trans-
ducer. And such nano-receptor may play a vital role in
the development of future nanobiosensors.
Figure 2. Principle of nanobiosensor.
2) The transducer acts as an interface, measuring the
physical change that occurs with the reaction at the bio-
receptor/sensitive biological element then transforming
that energy into measurable electrical output. Depending
on the mode of action transducers may be classified into
following categories and discussed in details (Table 1).
3) The detector element traps the signals from the
transducer, which are then passed to a microprocessor
where they are amplified and analyzed; the data is then
transferred to user friendly output and displayed/stored
[24].
2.3. Advantages of Nanobiosensors over
Conventional Biosensors
These sensors are ultra sensitive and can detect single
virus particles or even ultra-low concentrations of a
substance that could be potentially harmful.
Nanobiosensors works at atomic scale with highest
efficiency.
Nanobiosensors also have increased surface to vol-
ume ratio.
2.4. Disadvantages of nanobiosensors
Nanobiosensors are very sensitive and error prone.
Nanobiosensors are still under infancy stage.
3. Types of Nanobiosensors
3.1. Mechanical Nanobiosensors
Nanoscale mechanical forces between biomolecules pro-
vide an exciting ground to measure the biomolecular in-
teraction. This helps in the development of minute, sensi-
tive and label free biosensors [25]. Microscale cantilever
Table 1.
Sl.
No. Transducer system Principle Applications
1. Enzyme electrode Amperometric Enzyme substrate and im-
munological system
2. Conductometer Conductance Enzyme substrate
3. Piezoelectric crystal Mass change Volatile gases and vapors
4. Thermistor Calorimetric
Enzyme, organelle, whole
cell or tissue sensors for
substrates,
Products, gases, pollutants,
antibiotics, vitamins, etc.
5. Optoelectronic/wave
guide and fiber optic
device Optical pH enzyme substrates and im-
munological systems
6. Ion sensitive
electrode (ISE) Potentiometric Ions in biological media,
enzyme electrodes, enzyme
immunosensors
7. Field effect transistor
(FET) Potentiometric Ions, gases, enzyme sub-
strates and immunological
analytes
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
318
(Figure 3) beams can be used to identify biomolecules
by deflecting upon interaction with a specific biomolecule.
By measuring the level of deflection each cantilever beam
experiences in response to interactions with the molecules,
the amount of analyte in the solution can be quantified and
interpreted. Basically, there are three mechanisms to
transduce the recognition of the analyte of interest into
micromechanical bending of the cantilever, a) bending in
response to a surface stress (Figure 4(a)), b) bending in
response to a mass loading (Figure 4(b)), c) bending as a
result of a temperature change (Figure 4(c)) [26]. The
advantage of nano-mechanical devices is that they are
highly mass sensitive. More the size decreases, more the
mass reduces and hence the addition of bound analyte
molecules results in an increased relative change to the
main mass.
optical properties and enhanced sensitivity to their nano
environment has been developed [28].
Cantilever
Nanobiosensor
Nanobiosensor
Cantilever
Cantilever
Nanobiosensor
(b)
(a)
(c)
3.2. Optical Nanobiosensors
Optical biosensors are based on the arrangement of op-
tics where beam of light is circulated in a closed path
(Figure 4) and the change is recorded in resonant fre-
quency when the analyte binds to the resonator. The
resonator can be basically divided into linear resonator
(light bounces between two end mirrors) and ring reso-
nators (light is circulated in two different directions as
end mirrors are absent). Unlike mechanical resonators
(above mentioned) optical ones are based on the oscillat-
ing light within a cavity. Most of the commercially avail-
able optical biosensors rely on the use of lasers to monitor
and quantify interactions of biomolecules that occur on
specially derived surfaces or biochips [27]. Surface plas-
mon resonance (SPR) is an optical-electrical phenome-
non involving the interaction of light with the electrons
of a metal. It is based on the transfer of the energy car-
ried by photons of light to a group of electrons (a plas-
mon) at the surface of a metal. Miniature optical sensors
that specifically identify low concentrations of environ-
mental and biological substances are in high demand. Re-
cently, a triangular silver nanoparticle with remarkable
Figure 3. (a) Cantilever experiencing surface stress; (b) Can-
tilever experiencing mass load; (c) Cantilever experiencing
temperature change.
Laser output
Pump beam
Pump beam
Optical Isolato r
Laser output
Laser crystal
Figure 4. Optical biosensors based on the arrangement of mirrors.
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture 319
3.3. Nanowire Biosensors
Nanowire biosensor is a hybrid of two molecules that are
extremely sensitive to outside signals: single stranded
DNA, (serving as the ‘detector’) and a carbon nanotube,
(serving as the transmitter). The surface properties of
nanowires can be easily modified using chemical or bio-
logical molecular ligands, which make them analyte in-
dependent [29]. This transduces the chemical binding
event on their surface into a change in conductance of the
nanowire with extreme sensitivity, real time and quanti-
tative fashion. Boron-doped silicon nanowires (SiNWs)
have been used to create highly sensitive, real-time elec-
trically based sensors for biological and chemical species
[30].
3.4. Ion Channel Switch Biosensor Technologies
The Ion Channel Switch (ICS) is based on a synthetic
self-assembling membrane that acts as a biological switch
for detecting the signals i.e. the presence of specific
molecules by triggering an electrical current [31]. It de-
livers precise and quantitative test results in an immedi-
ate timeframe and reduces the time of emergency diag-
noses from hours down to minutes.
3.5. Electronic Nanobiosensors
Electronic nanobiosensors work by electronically detect-
ing the binding of a target DNA that actually forms a
bridge between two electrically separated wires on a mi-
crochip [32]. Each chip contains multiple sensors, which
can be independently addressed with capture probes for
different target DNA molecules from the same or differ-
ent organisms.
3.6. Viral nanobiosensors
Virus particles are essentially biological nanoparticles.
Herpes simplex virus (HSV) and adenovirus have been
used to trigger the assembly of magnetic nanobeads as a
nanosensor for clinically relevant viruses [33].
3.7. PEBBLE Nanobiosensors
Probes Encapsulated by Biologically Localized Embed-
ding (PEBBLE) nanobiosensors consist of sensor mole-
cules entrapped in a chemically inert matrix by a micro-
emulsion polymerization process that produces spherical
sensors in the size range of 20 to 200 nm. Various sensor
molecules can be entrapped including those that detect
optical change [34], change in pH or Ca2+ ions [35] or
can detect the fluorescence [36]. These nanosensors are
capable of monitoring real-time inter- and intra-cellular
imaging of ions and molecules, while at the same time
they are also insensitive to interference from proteins and
show great reversibility and stability to leaching and
photobleaching. In human plasma they demonstrate a
robust oxygen sensing capability, little affected by light
scattering and autofluorescence [37].
3.8. Nanoshell Biosensors
Positioning gold nanoshells are used in a rapid immuno-
assay for detecting analytes within complex biological
media without any sample preparation [38]. Aggregation
of antibody/nanoshell conjugates with extinction spectra
in the near infrared is monitored spectroscopically in the
presence of analyte. Nanoshells can enhance chemical
sensing by as much as 10 billion times [32].
4. Role of Nanobiosensor in Agriculture
Presently, nanomaterial-based biosensors exhibit fasci-
nating prospects over traditional biosensors. Nanobio-
sensors have marked advantages such as enhanced detec-
tion sensitivity/ specificity and possess great potential for
its applications in different fields including environ-
mental and bioprocess control, quality control of food,
agriculture, bio defence, and, particularly, medical ap-
plications. But here we are concerned with the role of
nano biosensor in agriculture and agro-products. Some of
the potential applications of nanobiosensors are listed
below:
4.1. As Diagnostic Tool for Soil Quality and
Disease Assessment
Nano sensors may be used to diagnose soil disease (caused
by infecting soil micro-organisms, such as viruses, bacte-
ria, and fungi) via the quantitative measurement of dif-
ferential oxygen consumption in the respiration (relative
activity) of “good microbes” and “bad microbes” in the
soil. The measurement proceeds through the following
steps: two sensors impregnated with “good microbes”
and “bad microbes” respectively, are immersed in a sus-
pension of soil sample in buffer solution and the oxygen
consumption data by two microbes were detected. By
comparing two data, we can easily decide which microbe
favors the soil. Apart from that, we can also predict
whether or not soil disease is ready to break out in the
tested soil beforehand. So, it is to be emphasized that the
biosensor offers an innovative technique of diagnosing
soil condition based on semi-quantitative approach [39].
4.2. As an Agent to Promote Sustainable
Agriculture
A nanofertilizer refers to a product that delivers nutrients
to crops encapsulated within a nanoparticle. There are
three ways of encapsulation: a) The nutrient can be en-
capsulated inside nanomaterials such as nanotubes or
nanoporous materials; b) coated with a thin protective
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture
320
polymer film; c) delivered as particles or emulsions of
nanoscale dimensions. Nanofertilizers could be used to
reduce nitrogen loss due to leaching, emissions, and
long-term assimilation by soil microorganisms [40]. Re-
cently carbon nanotubes were shown to penetrate tomato
seeds [41], and zinc oxide nanoparticles were shown to
enter the root tissue of ryegrass [42]. This suggests that
new nutrient delivery systems that exploit the nanoscale
porous domains on plant surfaces can be developed. But,
the nanofertilizers should show sustained release of nu-
trients on-demand while preventing them from prema-
turely converting into chemical/gaseous forms that can
not be absorbed by plants. To achieve this, biosensor
could be attached to this nanofertilizer that allows selec-
tive nitrogen release linked to time, environmental and
soil nutrient condition. Slow-controlled-release of fertile-
izers may also improve soil by decreasing toxic effects
associated with fertilizer over application.
Zeolites are naturally occurring crystalline aluminum
silicates that can a) enable better plant growth; b) im-
prove the efficiency and value of fertilizer; c) improve
water infiltration and retention; d) improves yield; e)
retain nutrients for use by plants; f) improve long term
soil quality and g) reduce loss of nutrients in soil. Zeo-
lite holds nutrients in the root zone for plants to use when
required. This leads to more efficient use of N and K
fertilisers—either less fertiliser for the same yield or the
same amount of fertiliser lasting longer and producing
higher yields. An added benefit of zeolite application is
that unlike other soil amendments (gypsum and lime) it
does not break down over time but remains in the soil to
help improve nutrient and water retention permanently.
With subsequent applications, the zeolite will further
improve the soil's ability to retain nutrients and produce
improved yields. Zeolites linked to a nanobiosensor can
modernize agriculture in the sense that the biosensor can
sense the deficiency in either plant or soil and control the
release of water/nutrients retained in the zeolite.
Pesticides inside nanoparticles are being developed
that can be timed-release or have release linked to an
environmental trigger [43]. Also, combined with a smart
delivery system, herbicide could be applied only when
necessary, resulting in greater production of crops and
less injury to agricultural workers.
4.3. As a Device to Detect Contaminants and
Other Molecules
Several nanobiosensors are designed to detect contami-
nants, pests, nutrient content, and plant stress due to
drought, temperature, or pressure. They may also poten-
tially helpful for farmers to enhance competence by ap-
plying inputs only when necessary. Organophosphorus
pesticides such as dichlorvos and paraoxon, at very low
levels could be monitored by liposome-based biosensors
[44]. Zhang et al. [45] developed a method for the detec-
tion of Escherichia coli (E. coli) using bismuth nanofilm
modified GCE based on the principle of flow injection
analysis (FIA). Seo et al. [46] constructed a biochip sen-
sor system, consisting of two Ti contact pads and a 150
nm wide Ti nanowell device on LiNbO3 substrate. When
the bacteria were resistant to the phages (uninfected bac-
teria), small voltage fluctuations were observed in the
nanowell displaying a power spectral density (PSD). The
biosensors developed using PSII (photosystem II),
known to bind several groups of herbicides, isolated from
photosynthetic organisms may have potential to monitor
polluting chemicals, leading to the set-up of a low cost,
easy-to-use apparatus, able to reveal specific herbicides,
and eventually, a wide range of organic compounds pre-
sent in industrial and urban effluents, sewage sludge,
landfill leak-water, ground water, and irrigation water
[47].
4.4. As Tool for Effective Detection of DNA and
Protein
There are several nanosensors like ssDNA-CNTs probes/
optical biosensors to detect specific kinds of DNA oli-
gonucleotides [48], MWNTs/ZnO/CHIT composite film
modified GCE for immobilization ssDNA probes to ef-
fectively discriminate different DNA sequences [49,50],
a nanobiosensor with bionanocomposite layer of MWNT
in chitosan deposited on a SPCE for the detection of deep
DNA damage [51], a nanobiosensor with GNPs func-
tionalized with alkanethiol-capped LNA/DNA chimeras
in a tail-to-tail hybridization mode for single-stranded
DNA [52], Nano-SiO2/p-aminothiophenol (PATP) film
for the detection of the PAT gene sequences by a label-
free EIS method [53]. Maki et al. [54] reported the first
nanowire field effect transistor based biosensor which
achieves simple and ultra-sensitive electronic DNA me-
thylation detection and avoids complicated bisulfite treat-
ment and PCR amplification.
Similarly, using protein-ligand (antigen) interaction
properties, protein-nanoparticles based biosensors can
realize the ultra-sensitive detection of special protein
molecules. The use of these DNA and protein detecting
biosensors might play a vital role in detection of plant
pathogens; certain abnormalities in plants linked to min-
eral deficiency, biomarkers, and discriminate one plant
species from another etc.
4.5. As a Tool for Analysis in Food Products
Biosensor-based analysis is becoming increasingly im-
portant in the food industry where it has several applica-
tions;
Vitamins analysis: The SPR biosensor monitors in-
teractions of a specific binding protein with the vita-
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture 321
min immobilized on a CM5 sensor chip.
Antibiotics detection: recently the presence of pro-
hibited antibiotics was detected in honey. Biosensors
analyze the presence of antibiotics reliably, effect-
tively and in a short time.
Detection of food spoilage: Amperometric biosensor
using immobilized enzyme diamine oxidase (DAO)
has been developed for the rapid monitoring of the
histamine levels in tiger prawn (Penaeus monodon),
similarly a potentiometric biosensor could analyse
isocitrate using a 2
3
CO -selective electrode and en-
zyme immobilization in flow injection analysis (FIA)
Detection of microbial contamination: Immunobio-
sensors based on the surface immobilization of mono-
clone antibodies onto indium tin oxide (ITO) elec-
trodes could detect Escherichia coli O157:H7.
5. Market Assessment, Risks, Regulation and
Acceptance
Biological systems are used to nano-scale materials like
proteins, carbohydrates, fats etc., but the use on engi-
neered nanomaterials in agriculture and edibles has
raised concerns regarding the latent risks coupled with
the widespread use of engineered nanomaterials for en-
vironment or human health or both. The major apprehen-
sions being the insufficient knowledge about the factors
like toxicity, bioaccumulation, and exposure risk associ-
ated with the use of nanobiosensors. Also, the present
scenario is due to minimal funding for risk assessments
in a research projects. Conducting reproducible and reli-
able biocompatibility studies with nanostructures is dif-
ficult by the tentative behavior of particulate matter in
biological settings and the complicatedness in making in
situ measurements of properties such as size, shape and
surface chemistry. Due to the complexities the risk as-
sessments should include an early valuation of projected
sensors in order to recognize and address nano-bio inter-
actions that may impact the development and commer-
cialization of Center technologies. Expertise should be
accessible during the testing of more mature prototypes
to ensure safety and effectiveness of the sensor technol-
ogy. The nano particles and the nanoscale materials used
in the construction of nano biosensors has to be properly
characterised and tested in biological environments and
the probable toxicity has to be examined [55]. The possi-
ble hazard of nanoparticles to biological organisms has
significantly drawn interest from academics, industry,
governmental ethical committees and non-governmental
organizations worldwide.
Besides, the commercialization of nanobiosensors is
also linked to several risk factors [1] as: a) initial appli-
cations “could act as substitutes for agricultural com-
modities” [1] which might be “disastrous” on the econ-
omy of developing countries [1,56]; b) Secondly, vari-
able import regulations in different nations could obstruct
the nano-product expansion [1,57]; c) Lastly, the use of
nanotechnology could pose “negative economic effects
on the poor by increasing productivity in developed
countries” [1], which could lead to decrease commodity
price in developing countries [1].
Apart from all the associated risks marketing of any
product depends on the public acceptance of the same.
Thus, risk perceptions are vital for the future accessibility
of nano products worldwide [1]. Till date, consumers
lean to be more unwilling to nanofood applications than
other nanotechnology uses [1,58] apparent “benefits and
health risks affect acceptance” [1], “meaning consumers
do not perceive all products with the same risk levels”
[1,59] Risk communication strategies should articulate
“attention to the messenger and the target of the mes-
sage” [1,60]. Some “external factors” [1] could also put
an impact in “shaping future acceptance in the key mar-
kets” [1] that will largely influence the future of nano-
technologies globally [1]. Non-governmental organiza-
tions which support a “ban on nanotechnology use in
food and agriculture” may prove significant [1], ap-
proaching toward condensed commercialization interna-
tionally [1,61]. This might result in “technology divide”
[1,62].
The probable solution to current problem is the proper
labeling on nano-products in certain developed countries
which might lead to technology consumption and regula-
tions in developing countries. The Science and Technol-
ogy Committee of the UK House of Lords has recom-
mended including a compulsory “pre-commercialization
assessment using the methods supported by a research
investment effort in risk assessment and detection meth-
ods” [1,63]. “The European Food Safety Agency supports
the use of conventional risk assessment while addressing
the limited knowledge on exposure to nanofood applica-
tions” [1,64]. While creating regulations countries should
keep in mind the existing institutional capacity [1].
“Similarities between biotech regulatory systems and
nanotech regulatory systems” [1] should be taken as an
advantage [1] (Niosi and Reid, “Biotechnology and
Nanotechnology). Keeping in mind the learnt lessons
“from the challenges observed in biosafety issues of bio-
tech regulatory system” [1], the “need of public educa-
tion, transparency and predictability” [1] has increased
[1,65]. “The lack of risk assessment capacity” [1] and
permeable borders should also support countries to form
local groups [1].
6. Future Perspectives
Clearly, there is an opportunity for nanotechnology to
have a profound impact on energy, the economy and the
environment, by improving the screening processes. New
prospects for integrating nanotechnologies into nanobio-
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture
322
sensors should be explored, cognizant of any potential
risk to the environment or to human health. With targeted
efforts by governments and academics in developing
such enabled agro-products, we believe that nanotech-
nology will be transformative in the field of agriculture
by focused research and development toward the goals
for reaching sustainable agriculture.
REFERENCES
[1] G. Gruère, C. Narrod and L. Abbott, “Agriculture, Food,
and Water Nanotechnologies for the Poor: Opportunities
and Constraints,” IFPRI Policy Brief, Vol. 19, 2011.
[2] A. P. Turner, “Biosensors-Sense and Sensitivity,” Science,
Vol. 290, No. 5495, 2000, pp. 1315-1317.
doi:10.1126/science.290.5495.1315
[3] S. J. Updike and G. P. Hicks, “The Enzyme Electrode,”
Nature, Vol. 214, 1967, pp. 986-988.
doi:10.1038/214986a0
[4] J. M. Nelson and E. G. Griffin, “Adsorption of Invertase,”
Journal of the American Chemical Society, Vol. 38, No. 5,
1916, pp. 1109-1115. doi:10.1021/ja02262a018
[5] W. S. Hughes, “The Potential Difference between Glass
and Electrolytes in Contact with the Glass,” Journal of
the American Chemical Society, Vol. 44, No. 12, 1922, pp.
2860-2867. doi:10.1021/ja01433a021
[6] L. C. Clark, “Monitor and Control of Blood and Tissue
Oxygen Tensions,” Transactions of the American Society
for Artificial Internal Organs, Vol. 2, 1956, pp. 41-48.
[7] L.C. Clark Jr. and C. Lyons, “Electrode System for Con-
tinuous Monitoring in Cardiovascular Surgery,” Annals of
the New York of Academy of Science, Vol. 148, No. 1962,
pp. 133-153. doi:10.1111/j.1749-6632.1968.tb20346.x
[8] G. G. Guilbault and J. G. Montalvo, “A Urea-Specific
Enzyme Electrode,” Journal of the American Chemical
Society, Vol. 91, No. 8, 1969, pp. 2164-2165.
doi:10.1021/ja01036a083
[9] P. Bergveld, “Development of an Ion-Sensitive Solid-
State Device for Neurophysiological Measurements,”
IEEE Transactions on Biomedical Engineering, Vol.
BM17, No. 1, 1970, pp. 70-71.
doi:10.1109/TBME.1970.4502688
[10] K. Mosbach and B. Danielsson, “An Enzyme Thermis-
tor,” Biochimica et Biophysica Acta (BBA)—Enzymology,
Vol. 364, No. 1, 1974, pp. 140-145.
[11] D. W. Lubbers and N. Opitz, “The pCO2/pO2 Optrode: A
New pCO2, pO2 Device for the Measurement of pCO2 or
pO2 in Gases or Fluids,” Z. Naturforsch. C: Biosci., Vol.
30c, 1975, pp. 532-533.
[12] A. H. Clemens, P. H. Chang and R. W. Myers, “Devel-
opment of an Automatic System of Insulin Infusion Con-
trolled by Blood Sugar, Its System for the Determination
of Glucose and Control Algorithms,” Proc. Journes Ann.
de Diabtologie de l’Htel-Dieu, 1976, pp. 269-278.
[13] K. Cammann, “Biosensors Based on Ion-Selective Elec-
trodes,” Fresenius Zeitschrift für Analytische Chemie,
Vol. 287, No. 1, 1977, pp. 1-9. doi:10.1007/BF00539519
[14] M. Shichiri, R. Kawamori, R.Yamaski, Y. Hakai and H.
Abe, “Wearable Artificial Endocrine Pancreas with Nee-
dle-Type Glucose Sensor,” Lancet, Vol. 2, No. 8308,
1982, pp. 1129-1131.
doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(82)92788-X
[15] A. E. G. Cass, D. G. Francis, H. A. O. Hill, W. J. Aston, I.
J. Higgins, E. V. Plotkin, L. D. L. Scott and A. P. F.
Turner, “Ferrocene-Mediated Enzyme Electrode for Am-
perometric Determination of Glucose,” Analytical Chem-
istry, Vol. 56, No. 4, 1984, pp. 667-671.
doi:10.1021/ac00268a018
[16] C. Kurzawa, A. Hengstenberg and W. Schuhmann, “Im-
mobilization Method for the Preparation of Biosensors
Based on pH Shift-Induced Deposition of Biomolecule-
Containing Polymer Films,” Analytical Chemistry, Vol.
74, No. 2, 2002, pp. 355-361. doi:10.1021/ac010830a
[17] N. Mano, F. Mao and A. Heller, “Characteristics of a
Miniature Compartment-Less Glucose-O2 Biofuel Cell
and Its Operation in a Living Plant,” Journal of the
American Chemical Society, Vol. 125, No. 21, 2003, pp.
6588-6594. doi:10.1021/ja0346328
[18] R. L. Weinstein, J. R. Bugler, S. L. Schwartz, T. A. Pey-
ser, R. L. Brazg and G. V. McGarraugh, “Accuracy of the
5-Day Freestyle Navigator Continuous Glucose Monitor-
ing System-Comparison with Frequent Laboratory Ref-
erence Measurements,” Diabetes Care, Vol. 30, No. 5,
2007, pp. 1125-1130. doi:10.2337/dc06-1602
[19] C. You, M. Bhagawati, A. Brecht and J. Piehler, “Affinity
Capturing for Targeting Proteins into Micro and
NANOSTRUCTURES,” Analytical and Bioanalytical
Chemistry, Vol. 393, No. 6-7, 2009, pp. 1563-1570.
doi:10.1007/s00216-008-2595-6
[20] M. N. Velasco, “Optical Biosensors for Probing at the
Cellular Level: A Review of Recent Progress and Future
Prospects,” Seminars in Cell & Developmental Biology,
Vol. 20, No. 1, 2009, pp. 27-33.
doi:10.1016/j.semcdb.2009.01.013
[21] X. Fan, I. M. White, S. I. Shopova, H. Zhu, J. D. Suter
and Y. Sun, “Sensitive Optical Biosensors for Unlabeled
Targets: A Review,” Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 620,
No. 1-2, 2008, pp. 8-26. doi:10.1016/j.aca.2008.05.022
[22] V. K. Khanna, “New-Generation Nano-Engineered Bio-
sensors, Enabling Nanotechnologies and Nanomaterials,”
Sensor Review, Vol. 28, No. 1, 2008, pp. 39-45.
doi:10.1108/02602280810850017
[23] A. Shana and K. R. Rogers, “Biosensors,” Measurement
Science and Technology, Vol. 5, No. 5, 1994, pp. 461-472.
doi:10.1088/0957-0233/5/5/001
[24] A. Cavalcanti, B. Shirinzadeh, M. Zhang and L. C. Kretly,
“Nanorobot Hardware Architecture for Medical Defense,”
Sensors, Vol. 8, No. 5, 2008, pp. 2932-2958.
doi:10.3390/s8052932
[25] M. M. Cheng, “Nanotechnologies for Biomolecular De-
tection and Medical Diagnostics,” Current Opinion in
Chemical Biology, Vol. 19, 2006, pp. 10-11.
[26] C. Ziegler, “Cantilever-Based Biosensors,” Analytical
and Bioanalytical Chemistry, Vol. 379, No. 7-8, 2004, pp.
946-959.
[27] T. Vo-Dinh, “Optical Nanosensors for Detecting Proteins
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture 323
and Biomarkers in Individual Living Cells,” Methods in
Molecular Biology, Vol. 300, 2005, pp. 383-402.
[28] A. J. Haes and R. P. Duyne, “Preliminary Studies and
Potential Applications of Localized Surface Plasmon
Resonance Spectroscopy in Medical Diagnostics,” Expert
Review of Molecular Diagnostics, Vol. 4, No. 4, 2004, pp.
527-537. doi:10.1586/14737159.4.4.527
[29] http://seminarprojects.com/Thread-nano-sensors-and-dete
ctors-their-applications-full-report#ixzz1nYqLlR14
[30] Y. Cui, Q. Wei, H. Park and C. M. Lieber, “Nanowire
Nanosensors for Highly Sensitive and Selective Detection
of Biological and Chemical Species,” Science, Vol. 293,
No. 12, 2001, pp. 89-92.
[31] B. A. Cornell, “Optical Biosensors: Present and Future,”
In: F. Lighler and C. R. Taitt, Eds., Membrane Based
Biosensors, Amsterdam Elsevier, Chapter 457, 2002, p.
12.
[32] K. K. Jain, “Nanotechnology in clinical Laboratory Di-
agnostics,” Clinica Chimica Acta, Vol. 358, No. 1-2,
2005, pp. 37-54. doi:10.1016/j.cccn.2005.03.014
[33] J. M. Perez, F. J. Simeone, Y. Saeki, L. Josephson and R.
Weissleder, “Viral-Induced Self-Assembly of Magnetic
Nanoparticles Allows the Detection of Viral Particles in
Biological Media,” Journal of the American Chemical
Society, Vol. 125, No. 34, 2003, pp. 10192-10193.
doi:10.1021/ja036409g
[34] H. A. Clark, “Optical Nanosensors for Chemical Analysis
Inside Single Living Cells, 1: Fabrication, Characteriza-
tion, and Methods for Intracellular Delivery of PEEBLE
Sensors,” Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 71, No. 21, 1999, pp.
4831-4836. doi:10.1021/ac990629o
[35] H. A. Clark, “Optical Nanosensors for Chemical Analysis
inside Single Living Cells, 2: Sensors for pH and Calcium
and the Intracellular Application of PEEBLE Sensors,”
Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 71, No. 21, 1999, pp. 4837-
4843. doi:10.1021/ac990630n
[36] J. P. Sumner, J. W. Aylott, E. Monson and R. Kopelman,
“A Fluorescent PEBBLE Nanosensor for Intracellular
Free Zinc,” Analyst, Vol. 127, 2002, pp. 11-16.
doi:10.1039/b108568a
[37] Y. Cao, Y.E. Lee Koo and R. Kopelman, “Poly(decyl
methacrylate)-Based Fluorescent PEBBLE Swarm Nano-
sensors for Measuring Dissolved Oxygen in Biosamples,”
Analyst, Vol. 129, No. 7, 2004, pp. 45-50.
[38] L. R. Hirsch, J. B. Jackson, A. Lee, N. J. Halas and J. L.
West, “A Whole Blood Immunoassay Using Gold Nano-
shells,” Analytical Chemistry, Vol.75, No. 23, 2003, pp.
77-81.
[39] http://www.aist.go.jp/aiste/latestresearch/2004/20040402
_1/20040402_1.html
[40] M. C. DeRosa, C. Monreal, M. Schnitzer, R. Walsh and
Y. Sultan, “Nanotechnology in Fertilizers,” Nature
Nanotechnology, Vol. 5, 2010, p. 91.
doi:10.1038/nnano.2010.2
[41] M. Khodakovskaya, E. Dervishi, M. Mahmood, Y. Xu, Z.
Li, F. Watanabe and A. S. Biris, “Carbon Nanotubes Are
Able to Penetrate Plant Seed Coat and Dramatically Af-
fect Seed Germination and Plant Growth,” ACS Nano,
Vol. 3, No. 10, 2009, pp. 3221-3227.
doi:10.1021/nn900887m
[42] D. H. Lin and B. S. Xing, “Root Uptake and Phytotoxic-
ity of ZnO Nanoparticles,” Environmental Science &
Technology, Vol. 42, No. 15, 2008, pp. 5580-5585.
doi:10.1021/es800422x
[43] C. Lauderwasser, “Small Sizes That Matter: Opportuni-
ties and Risks of Nanotechnologies,” Report in coopera-
tion with the OECD International Futures Programme.
http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/32/1/44108334.pdf
[44] V. Vamvakaki and N. A. Chaniotakis, “Pesticide Detec-
tion with a Liposome-Based Nano-Biosensor,” Biosen-
sors and Bioelectronics, Vol. 22, No. 12, 2007, pp. 2848-
2853. doi:10.1016/j.bios.2006.11.024
[45] W. Zhang, H. Tang, P. Geng, Q. Wang, L. Jin and Z. Wu,
“Amperometric Method for Rapid Detection of Es-
cherichia coli by Flow Injection Analysis Using a Bis-
muth Nano-Film Modified Glassy Carbon Electrode,”
Electrochemistry Communications, Vol. 9, 4, 2007, pp.
833-838. doi:10.1016/j.elecom.2006.11.019
[46] S. Seo, M. Dobozi-King, R. F Young, L. B. Kish and M.
Cheng, “Patterning a Nanowell Sensor Biochip for Spe-
cific and Rapid Detection of Bacteria,” Microelectronic
Engineering, Vol. 85, No. 7, 2008, pp. 1484-1489.
doi:10.1016/j.mee.2007.12.046
[47] M. T. Giardi and E. V. Piletska, “Biotechnological Ap-
plications of Photosynthetic Proteins: Biochips, Biosen-
sors and Biodevices,” Biotechnology Intelligence Unit
copublished by Land Biosciences and Springer, 2006.
[48] C. Cao, J. H. Kim, D. Yoon, E. S. Hwang, Y. J. Kim and
S. Baik, “Optical Detection of DNA Hybridization Using
Absorption Spectra of Single-Walled Carbon Nanotubes,”
Materials Chemistry and Physics, Vol. 112, No. 3, 2008,
pp. 738-741. doi:10.1016/j.matchemphys.2008.07.129
[49] W. Zhang, T. Yang, D. Huang, K. Jiao and G. Li, “Syn-
ergistic Effects of Nano-ZnO/Multi-Walled Carbon
Nanotubes/Chitosan Nanocomposite Membrane for the
Sensitive Detection of Sequence Specific of PAT Gene
and PCR Amplification of NOS Gene,” Journal of Mem-
brane Science, Vol. 325, 2008, pp. 245-251.
doi:10.1016/j.memsci.2008.07.038
[50] W. Zhang, T. Yang, D. M. Huang and K. Jiao, “Electro-
chemical Sensing of DNA Immobilizationand Hybridiza-
tion Based on Carbon Nanotubes/Nano Zinc Oxide/
Chitosan Composite Film,” Chinese Chemical Letters,
Vol. 19, 2008, pp. 589-591.
doi:10.1016/j.cclet.2008.03.012
[51] J. Galandova, G. Ziyatdinova and J. Labuda, “Disposable
Electrochemical Biosensor with Multiwalled Carbon
Nanotubes-Chitosan Composite Layer for the Detection
of Deep DNA Damage,” Analytical Science, Vol. 24, No.
6, 2008, pp. 711-716. doi:10.2116/analsci.24.711
[52] F. McKenzie, K. Faulds and D. Graham, “Sequence-
Specific DNA Detection Using High-Affinity LNA-
Functionalized Gold Nanoparticles,” Small, Vol. 3, 2007,
pp. 1866-1868. doi:10.1002/smll.200700225
[53] Y. Ma, K. Jiao, T. Yang and D. Sun, “Sensitive PAT
Gene Sequence Detection by Nano-SiO2/Paminothio-
phenol Self-Assembled Films DNA Electrochemical
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
Implications of Nanobiosensors in Agriculture
Copyright © 2012 SciRes. JBNB
324
Biosensor Based on Impedance Measurement,” Sensors
and Actuators B, Vol. 131, No. 2, 2008, pp. 565-571.
doi:10.1016/j.snb.2007.12.046
[54] W. C. Maki, N. N. Mishra, E. G. Cameron, B. Filanoski,
S. K. Rastogi and G. K. Maki, “Nanowiretransistor Based
Ultra-Sensitive DNA Methylation Detection,” Biosensor
and Bioelectronics, Vol. 23, No. 6, 2008, pp. 780-787.
doi:10.1016/j.bios.2007.08.017
[55] http://cnbs.centers.ufl.edu/research/sensors.asp
[56] ETC Group, “The Potential Impacts of Nano-Scale
Technologies,” Meridian Institute, Nanotechnology,
Commodities, and Development.
[57] G. Gruère and D. Sengupta, “GM-Free Private Standards
and Their Effects on Biosafety Decision-Making in De-
veloping Countries,” Food Policy, Vol. 34, No. 5, 2009,
pp. 399-406. doi:10.1016/j.foodpol.2009.04.002
[58] B. Lyndhurst, “An Evidence Review of Public Attitudes
to Emerging Food Technologies, Social Science Research
Unit,” Food Standards Agency, Vol. 89, 2010.
http://www.foodbase.org.uk/admintools/reportdocuments/
3701647_Emerging_Food_Technologies_Final_Report_
with_logo.pdf
[59] M. Siegrist, N. Stampfli and H. Kastenholz, “Acceptance
of Nanotechnology Foods: A Conjoint Study Examining
Consumers’ Willingness to Buy,” British Food Journal,
Vol. 111, No. 7, 2009, pp. 660-668.
doi:10.1108/00070700910972350
[60] D. Sylvester, K. Abbott and G. Marchant, “Not Again!
Public Perception, Regulation, and Nanotechnology,”
Regulation and Governance, Vol. 3, No. 2, 2009, pp.
165-185. doi:10.1111/j.1748-5991.2009.01049.x
[61] K. Lyons, “Nanotechnology: Transforming Food and the
Environment,” Food First Backgrounder, Vol. 16, No. 1,
2010, pp. 1-4.
[62] E. Court, S. Daar, E. Martin, T. Acharya and P. Singer,
“Will Prince Charles et al. Diminish the Opportunities of
Developing Countries in Nanotechnology?” 2004.
http://nanotechweb.org/cws/article/indepth/18909
[63] http://www.publications.parliament.uk/pa/ld200910/ldsel
ect/ldsctech/22/22i.pdf
[64] R. Harrington, “Nano Risk Assessment a Work in Pro-
gress,” 2010.
http://www.foodnavigator.com/Science-Nutrition/Nano-ri
sk-assessment-a-work-in-progress
[65] J. Falck-Zepeda, A. Cavialeri and P. Zambrano, “Deliv-
ering Genetically Engineered Crops to Poor Farmers:
Recommendations for Improved Biosafety Regulations in
Developing Countries,” IFPRI Brief 14, International
Food Policy Research Institute, Washington DC, 2009.
