Bacterial biosensors (which usually contain plasmids with a reporter gene fused to a regulatory promoter) have been shown to be an alternative to traditional analytics for heavy-metal pollutant detection.

Several papers are claiming that they are "better" then traditional analytical techniques, such as inductively coupled plasma spectroscopy, EDAX analysis, and graphene based chem-sensor. However, after reviewing some literature, bacterial biosensors do not seem that much easier/more effective then these other techniques. Sometimes, there sensitivity is bad at lower concentration, and sample processing is still needed for some applications.

Does anybody know the pros and cons of using biosensors over these techniques? How do they compare in respect to cost, durability, accuracy, applicability of the field?

Thanks.

More Adam Radek Martinez's questions See All
Similar questions and discussions