A portable smart-phone device for rapid and sensitive detection of E.

coli

O157:H7 in Yoghurt and Egg

Mohamed Maarouf Ali Zeinhoma, b*,1, Yijia Wanga, c, 1, Yang Song a, 1, Mei-Jun Zhud,

Yuehe Lina and Dan Dua, e*

a School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA

b Food Hygiene Department, Faculty of Veterinary Medicine, Beni-Suef University, Beni-Suef 62512, Egypt.

c College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Hubei University, Wuhan 430062, PR China

d School of Food Science, Washington State University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA.

e Key Laboratory of Pesticide and Chemical Biology, Ministry of Education, College of Chemistry, Central China Normal

University, Wuhan 430079, P.R. China

*Corresponding author at School of Mechanical and Materials Engineering, Washington State

University, Pullman, WA 99164, USA. Fax: 5093354662.

E-mail address: dan.du@mail.ccnu.edu.cn (Y. Lin), m.zeinhom@vet.bsu.edu.eg (Mohamed

Zeinhom)
Figure. S1. TEM characterization of antibody labeled magnetic beads.

Figure. S2. The assemble setup of the developed 3D printed smartphone

based fluorescence imager.

Figure S3. Microplate reader output towards different concentration of

FITC-BSA with excitation at 405 nm.

Figure S4. (A) Specificity of the proposed method output based on

smartphone device after incubated with 104 CFU/mL E. coli O157:H7, 104

CFU/mL Salmonella Enteritidis, 104 CFU/mL Staphylococcus aureus, 104

CFU/mL Listeria innocua in PBS. (B) Stability of five parallel experiment

for two different concentration of E. coli O157:H7 detection by our

smartphone based device. (red line: 1× 104 CFU/ mL, blue line: 1× 102

CFU/ mL）

Figure S5. Linear calibration curve for E. coli O157:H7 detection from

101 CFU/mL to 106 CFU/mL using the smartphone device in (A) egg and

in (B) yoghurt. Log C refers to the logarithm of E. coli O157:H7

concentration. Each experiment was repeated three times to obtain the

average data value.

Table S1. Comparison of the performance of different detection methods for E. coli

O157:H7.

Bacterium Technique LOD* (CFU mL- Reference

1)

E. coli O157:H7 Flow Cytometry 103 Yamaguchi et al.,

2003
E. coli O157:H7 Electrochemical 103 Li et al., 2014
impedance
spectroscopy
E. coli O157:H7 Gold nanoparticles 68 Shen et al., 2014
enhanced ELISA
E. coli O157:H7 Chemiluminescence 103 Zhang et al., 2014
immunoassay
E. coli O157:H7 Photoluminescent 10 Morales-Narvaez
lateflow et al., 2015
immunoassay
E. coli O157:H7 Gold nanoparticle- 10 Wang and Alocilja,
labeled biosensor 2015
E. coli O157:H7 Pt–Au bimetal 102 Jiang et al., 2016
nanoparticles based
immunoassay
E. coli O157:H7 Three-in-one 10 Ye et al., 2016
nanoflower-based
ELISA
E. coli O157:H7 This Method 1 This work

*
LOD= Limit of detection
References:

Jiang, T., Song, Y., Wei, T., Li, H., Du, D., Z, M., Lin, Y., 2016. Biosens.

Bioelectron. 77, 687–694.

Li, Y., Afrasiabi, R., Fathi, F., Wang, N., Xiang, C., Love, R., She, Z.,

Kraatz, H. B., 2014. Biosens. Bioelectron. 58, 193−199.

Morales-Narvaez, E., Naghdi, T., Zor, E., Merkoci, A., 2015. Anal. Chem.

87, 8573–8577.

Shen, Z., Hou, N., Jin, M., Qiu, Z., Wang, J., Zhang, B., Wang, X., Wang,

J., Zhou, D., Li, J., 2014. Gut Pathog. 20, 6–14.

Wang, Y., Alocilja, E.C., 2015. J. Biol. Eng. 9, 16.

Ye, R., Zhu, C., Song, Y., Lu, Q., Ge, X., Yang, X., Zhu, M., Du, D., Li,

H., Lin, Y., 2016. Small 12, 3094–3100.

Yamaguchi, N., Sasada, M., Yamanaka, M., Nasu, M., 2003. Cytometry

A. 54(1):27–35.

Zhang, Y., Tan, C., Fei, R. H., Liu, X. X., Zhou, Y., Chen, J., Chen, H. C.,

Zhou, R., Hu, Y. G., 2014. Anal. Chem. 86, 1115−1122.