Is digital scanner suitable as cheaper alternative of a spectrophotometer?
Ivan Landry Yumdjo YOUMBISSI1*
, Marie NOVÁKOVÁ1
, Michal Šídlo1
,
Přemysl LUBAL1
, Roman JAKUBÍČEK2
1
Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science, Masaryk University, Kamenice 5, 625 00 Brno, Czech Republic
2 Department of Biomedical Engineering, Faculty of Electrical Engineering and Communication, Brno
University of Technology, Technická 12, 616 00 Brno, Czech Republic
* 493489@mail.muni.cz
Arrays and microarrays have become increasingly popular as tools for biological research using
different capture agents in arrays in order to detect DNA/RNA, proteins, carbohydrates, etc.
[1]. This concept was also enlarged to identification and sensing of other chemical entities, e.g.,
ions, vapours, small organic molecules, etc. [1,2]. Technological advances such device
miniaturization in combination with CCD technology (e.g., digital scanner/camera or cell
phone) have enabled to measure the experimental datasets by easier way using available
hardware and software tools than in lab on spectrophotometer [1].
In this contribution, it is demonstrated how the digital scanner could be employed for fast and
routine analysis of some analytes in biological samples. The parameters for procedure of
scanning by digital scanner have been optimized in order to treat the experimental data by newly
developed software ScanQuant2. The determination of Cu(II) and ammonium ions with
commercial analytical strip papers as well as 96-well plates using digital scanner shows that it
can be employed as suitable alternative for classical spectrophotometer. In addition, the
methodology developed for analysis of ammonium ions was also utilized for enzymatic
determination of urea.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENT
The work has been supported by Masaryk University (MUNI/A/1192/2020), Ministry of
Education of the Czech Republic (LTC20044, ME09065) and EU (COST CA18202 NECTAR
Action).
REFERENCES
[1] Anzenbacher P. Jr., Lubal P., Buček P., Palacios M.A., Kozelkova M.E.: Chem. Soc. Rev., 39 (2010), 3954-
3979.
[2] Šídlo M., Lubal P., Anzenbacher P. Jr.: Chemosensors, 9 (2021), 39.