Search

Electrochemical DNA biosensors show great potential for the sensitive and sequence-specific detection of disease pathogens. To date, although there are a large number of published articles showing various sensing strategies of an electrochemical biosensor, only a few of those studies actually reach the commercialization phase, because addressing one technical issue would usually be at the expense of another. Moreover, there are various adoptable formats in electrochemical biosensors. Current approaches may or may not use enzymes, immobilize DNA probes, label the sensing substrates with an electroactive reporter molecule, or any combination of these. Although much has been paid to individual advantages and disadvantages, there are a very limited number Review articles studying and analyzing the synergistic aspects of various detection strategies when combined with each other. It is the aim of this Review to highlight the hotspots for innovation when these strategies are used in tandem, in order to create more streamlined improvements in making a versatile biosensor platform that can be administered at point of care.

Electrochemical DNA biosensors show great potential for the sensitive and sequence-specific detection of disease pathogens. To date, although there are a large number of published articles showing various sensing strategies of an electrochemical biosensor, only a few of those studies actually reach the commercialization phase, because addressing one technical issue would usually be at the expense of another. Moreover, there are various adoptable formats in electrochemical biosensors. Current approaches may or may not use enzymes, immobilize DNA probes, label the sensing substrates with an electroactive reporter molecule, or any combination of these. Although much has been paid to individual advantages and disadvantages, there are a very limited number Review articles studying and analyzing the synergistic aspects of various detection strategies when combined with each other. It is the aim of this Review to highlight the hotspots for innovation when these strategies are used in tandem, in order to create more streamlined improvements in making a versatile biosensor platform that can be administered at point of care.

Electrochemical DNA biosensors show great potential for the sensitive and sequence-specific detection of disease pathogens. To date, although there are a large number of published articles showing various sensing strategies of an electrochemical biosensor, only a few of those studies actually reach the commercialization phase, because addressing one technical issue would usually be at the expense of another. Moreover, there are various adoptable formats in electrochemical biosensors. Current approaches may or may not use enzymes, immobilize DNA probes, label the sensing substrates with an electroactive reporter molecule, or any combination of these. Although much has been paid to individual advantages and disadvantages, there are a very limited number Review articles studying and analyzing the synergistic aspects of various detection strategies when combined with each other. It is the aim of this Review to highlight the hotspots for innovation when these strategies are used in tandem, in order to create more streamlined improvements in making a versatile biosensor platform that can be administered at point of care.

A control point for keeping redox homeostasis in Saccharomyces cerevisiae during fermentative growth is the dynamic regulation of transcription for the glycerol-3-phosphate dehydrogenase 2 (GPD2) gene. In this study, the possibility to steer the activity of the GPD2 promoter was investigated by placing it in strains with different ability to reoxidise NADH, and applying different environmental conditions. Flow cytometric analysis of reporter strains expressing green fluorescent protein (GFP) under the control of the GPD2 promoter was used to determine the promoter activity at the single-cell level. When placed in a gpd1Δgpd2Δ strain background, the GPD2 promoter displayed a 2-fold higher activity as compared to the strong constitutive glyceraldehyde-3-phosphate dehydrogenase (TDH3). In contrast, the GPD2 promoter was found to be inactive when cells were cultivated in continuous mode at a growth rate of 0.3 h-1 and in conditions with excess oxygen (i.e. with an aeration of 2.5 vvm, and a stirring of 800 rpm). In addition, a clear window of operation where the gpd1Δgpd2Δ strain can be grown with the same efficiency as wild type yeast was identified. In conclusion, the flow cytometry mapping revealed conditions where the GPD2 promoter was either completely inactive or hyperactive, which has implications for its implementation in future biotechnological applications such as for process control of heterologous gene expression.