| Literature DB >> 22302165 |
Piyush S Sharma1, Agnieszka Pietrzyk-Le, Francis D'Souza, Wlodzimierz Kutner.
Abstract
This critical review describes a class of polymers prepared by electrochemical polymerization that employs the concept of molecular imprinting for chemical sensing. The principal focus is on both conducting and nonconducting polymers prepared by electropolymerization of electroactive functional monomers, such as pristine and derivatized pyrrole, aminophenylboronic acid, thiophene, porphyrin, aniline, phenylenediamine, phenol, and thiophenol. A critical evaluation of the literature on electrosynthesized molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) applied as recognition elements of chemical sensors is presented. The aim of this review is to highlight recent achievements in analytical applications of these MIPs, including present strategies of determination of different analytes as well as identification and solutions for problems encountered.Entities:
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2012 PMID: 22302165 PMCID: PMC3303047 DOI: 10.1007/s00216-011-5696-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Anal Bioanal Chem ISSN: 1618-2642 Impact factor: 4.142
Fig. 1Structural formulas of the most common polymers prepared by electropolymerization. a Electronically conducting polymers: polyacetylene 1, polyphenylene 2, polyphenylenevinylene 3, polypyrrole 4, poly(aminophenylboronic acid) 5, polythiophene 6, polyaniline 7, and polyethylenedioxythiophene 8. b Electronically nonconducting polymers: polyphenylenediamine 9, polyphenol 10, polyaminophenol 11, and polythiophenol 12
Fig. 2Cumulative number of articles published during the last decade in the field of chemical sensors using the concept of molecular imprinting: 1 all publications on molecularly imprinted polymer based chemical sensors and 2 publications on chemical sensors using molecularly imprinted polymers prepared by electropolymerization. (Data taken from SciFinder)
Fig. 3Basic mechanism of thiophene electropolymerization. SCE saturated calomel electrode. (Adapted from [68])
Fig. 4General procedure for molecular imprinting with an electroactive functional monomer and typical signal transduction methods employed in detection
Analytical parameters of molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) chemosensors using pyrrole as the functional monomer
| Template/analyte | Transduction/electrode | Electropolymerization conditions |
| Solution for analyte determination | Linear dynamic concentration range | LOD | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Adenosine/inosine/ATP | Voltammetry/GCE | Potentiostatic +0.9 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M (TBA)ClO4/ACN | 0.5 M PBS (pH 7.0) | - | - | [ |
| 0.1 M (TBA)ClO4/methanol (80%) | |||||||
| DS | PM/Pt | Galvanostatic at current density 1 mA cm-2 | 0.1 M Tris buffer (pH 9.0) | 0.1 M Tris buffer (pH 9.0) | 10 nM to 100 μM | - | [ |
| Caffeine | PM/Au | Galvanostatic at current density 4 mA cm-2 | 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) | 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) | 0.1–10 mg mL-1 | 4.7 μg mL-1 | [ |
| Caffeine | Chronoamperometry/Pt | Potential pulses between 0.95 V (1 s) and 0.35 V (10 s) vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.0) | 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.0) | Up to 90 mM | - | [ |
| Caffeine | Voltammetry/Au | Potential pulses between 0.3 V (1 s) and 0.7 V (10 s) vs. SCE | 0.05 M KCl | 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) | 10–40 μM | - | [ |
| Paracetamol | Voltammetry/PGE | Potentiodynamic −0.6 to +0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M LiClO4 | 0.1 M KCl, PBS (pH 7.0) | 5 μM to 0.5 mM | 0.79 μM | [ |
| 1.25–4.5 mM | |||||||
| Sulfamethoxazole | Voltammetry/PGE | Potentiodynamic −0.6 to +0.1.4 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M (TBA)ClO4/ACN | BR buffer (pH 2.5)/50% ACN | 0.025–0.75 mM | 0.36 μM | [ |
| 0.75–2.0 mM | |||||||
| Ascorbic acid | Voltammetry/PGE | Potentiodynamic −0.6 to +0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M LiClO4 | 0.1 M KCl, 0.05 M PBS (pH 8.5) | 0.25–7.0 mM | 74 μM | [ |
|
| PM/Au | Galvanostatic at current density 10 μA cm-2 | Aqueous (pH = 6.0) | 0.05 KCl/HCl (pH–1.6) | - | - | [ |
| 1 M NaOH (pH 11) | |||||||
| 0.01 M NaPSS (pH = 6.0) | |||||||
| Phenylalanine | Impedimetry, CD/Pt | Galvanostatic at current density 0.3 mA cm-2 | 0.04 M CSA/water | - | 5–200 mg L-1 | - | [ |
| DCPA | Voltammetry/GCE | Potentiodynamic −1.3 to +1.0 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.05 M PBS (pH 6.86), | 0.1 M KCl | 1–10 μM | 0.83 μM | [ |
| 0.1 M KCl | |||||||
| Tryptophan | Voltammetry/Pt | Potentiostatic at +0.8 V vs. SCE | 0.1 M NaCl (pH 6.5) | 0.1 M NaCl | - | - | [ |
| Zearalenone | SPR/Au | Potentiostatic at +0.9 V vs. SCE | 0.2 M (TBA)BF4 | 0.1% ethanol | 0.3–3,000 ng mL-1 | 0.3 ng g-1 | [ |
| TCAA | PM, CV/Au | Galvanostatic at current density 0.1 mA cm-2 | 0.25 M KCl | 0.2 mM phosphate buffer (pH 7.0) | 0.1–100 mg L-1 | - | [ |
| 0.1–1,000 mg L-1 | - | ||||||
| OTA | SPR/Au | Potentiostatic at +0.85 V vs. SCE | Ethanol/water (1:9, v:v) | Ethanol/water (1:9, v:v) | 0.05–0.5 mg L-1 | 0.01 mg L-1 | [ |
| gp51 | Chronoamperometry/Pt | Potential pulses between 0.95 V (1 s) and 0.35 V (10 s) vs. SCE | 100 mM KCl | 0.5 M KCl, 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH = 7.2) | Up to 15 mg mL-1 | - | [ |
LOD limit of detection, DS dodecyl sulfate, -Asp, l-aspartic acid, DCPA 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, TCAA trichloroacetic acid, OTA ochratoxin, GCE glassy carbon electrode, PM piezoelectric microgravimetry, PGE pencil-graphite electrode, CD circular dichroism, SPR surface plasmon resonance, SCE saturated calomel electrode, TBA tetrabutylammonium, ACN acetonitrile, Tris tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane, PBS phosphate-buffered saline, NaPSS sodium poly(styrene sulfonate), CSA camphorsulfonic acid, BR Britton–Robinson
Fig. 5Illustration of the mechanism of alteration of the effective thickness, d, of a molecularly imprinted polypyrrole (MIPPy) polymer film with electrical potential stimuli. a at equilibrium, the film is not swollen and ingress of caffeine molecules is precluded. b upon application of a positive potential, the polymer swells and opens up all the imprinted cavities for caffeine binding. c under potential pulsing conditions, the effective thickness is smaller in a partially swollen film compared with that of the film in b, which swells over the entire volume. d three-dimensional enlargement of the partially swollen film under a 1-s positive potential pulse (ΔE = 0.6, 0.5, or 0.4 V). The caffeine-imprinted cavities in the swollen outer part (marked by d) are opened up for caffeine binding; however, those embedded inside the nonswollen part near the Au electrode are not. PBS phosphate-buffered saline (Adapted from [94])
Analytical parameters of MIP chemosensors using phenylboronic acid derivatives as the functional monomers
| Template/analyte | Transduction/electrode | Electropolymerization conditions | Solution for MIP preparation | Solution of analyte determination | Linear dynamic concentration range | LOD |
| Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| Potentiometry/GCE | Potentiodynamic −0.1 to 1.0 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.5 M phosphate buffer, 40 mM NaF (pH 5.0-7.4) | 0.5 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4) | - | - | - | [ |
| Nucleotide, monosaccharides | PM/Au | Potentiodynamic 0.1 to −1.4 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.2 M ZnCl2 | - | Up to 17 mM (nucleotide) | - | - | [ |
| EIS/Au | Potentiodynamic 0.1 to −1.4 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.2 M ZnCl2 | 0.05 M HEPES buffer (pH 7.4) | - | - | - | ||
| Glucose | Potentiometry/ISFET | Chemical oxidation | 0.01 M PBS, 0.14 M NaCl (pH 7.0) | Phosphate buffer solution | 1 μM to 0.8 mM | 0.8 μM | - | |
| AMP | 30 μM to 5 mM | 15 μM | - | |||||
| GMP | 40 μM to 5 mM | 15 μM | - | |||||
| CMP | 2 μM to 0.5 mM | 0.8 μM | - | |||||
| UMP | Up to 5 mM | 10 μM | - | |||||
| Lysozyme, Cytochrome | CV/Pt | Potentiodynamic −0.2 to 0.7 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.5 M PBS, 120 mM NaF (pH 5.5) | 0.5 M PBS (pH 5.5) | Up to 37.5 mg L-1 | - | - | [ |
| Up to 60 mg L-1 | - | - | ||||||
| T-2 toxin | SPR/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 1.1 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.05 M NaNO3 | Phosphate buffer (pH 7.5) | 2.1–33.6 fM | 0.1 fM | 7.8 × 1013 | [ |
| Neomycin | SPR/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.35 to 0.85 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M HEPES buffer (pH9.2) | 0.1 M HEPES buffer (pH 9.2) | Up to 1 μM | 2.0 pM | - | [ |
| Kanamycin | 1.0 pM | |||||||
| Streptomycin | 0.2 pM |
AMP adenosine monophosphate, GMP guanosine monophosphate, CMP cytosine monophosphate, UMP uridine monophosphate, EIS electrochemical impedance spectroscopy, ISFET ion-selective field-effect transistor, HEPES 4-(2-hydroxyethyl)-1-piperazineethanesulfonic acid
Fig. 6Mechanism of imprinting of molecular cavities featuring sites for recognition of antibiotics, for example, neomycin (NE), through electropolymerization of a 4-thioaniline 13 cross-linked Au nanoparticle composite with 4-mercaptophenylboronic acid 14 as a functional monomer on an Au electrode surface. Mercaptoethanesulfonic acid 15 prevented coagulation of Au nanoparticles. (Adapted from [114])
Analytical parameters of MIP chemosensors using thiophene derivatives as the functional monomers
| Template/analyte | Transduction/electrode | Electropolymerization conditions | Solution for MIP preparation | Solution for analyte determination | Linear dynamic concentration range | LOD |
| Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Histamine | PM/Pt | Potentiodynamic 0 to +1.5 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M (TBA)ClO4/ACN | 0.5 M HEPES (pH 7.5) | 10–100 mM | 5 nM | 57 | [ |
| Dopamine | PM/Pt | Potentiodynamic 0 to +1.5 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M (TBA)ClO4/ACN | 0.2 M PBS (pH 7.0) | 0.1–1 mM | 10 nM | 4.46 × 107 | [ |
| Adenine | PM/Pt | Potentiodynamic 0 to +1.5 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M (TBA)ClO4/ACN (pH = 6.0) | ACN/water (1:1, v:v) | 0.5–7 mM | 5 nM | 1.8 × 105 | [ |
| Melamine | PM/Pt | Potentiodynamic 0 to +1.5 V vs. Ag/AgCl | Ionic liquid/ACN (1:1,v:v) (pH 3.0) | 0.1 M HCl | 5 nM to 1 mM | 5 nM | 1.813 × 104 | [ |
| Morphine | Chronoamperometry/ITO | Potentiostatic +1.2 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M LiClO4/ACN | 0.1 M KCl (pH 5.3) | Up to 1 mM | 0.2 mM | - | [ |
| Morphine | Chronoamperometry/Pt | Potentiodynamic | 0.1 M LiClO4/ACN | 0.1 M KCl | 0.01–0.2 mM | 0.3 μM | - | [ |
| Atrazine | Voltammetry/Pt | Potentiostatic +1.45 V vs. Pt (10 s) | 0.1 M TBATFMS/CH2Cl2 | 0.1 M TBATFMS/CH2Cl2 | Up to 15 mM | 0.1 μM | - | [ |
| Avidin | Fluorescence/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.2 to +1.1 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.025 M NaPSS | 0.05 M PBS | 100 ng mL-1 to 1 mg mL-1 | - | 2.5 × 106 | [ |
| Naproxen, paracetamol, theophylline | SPR/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to +0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M (TBA)PF6 | 0.1 M PBS | 10–50 μM (theophylline) | - | - | [ |
| Theophylline | SPR, PM/Pt | Potentiodynamic 0 to +0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M (TBA)PF6/ACN | PBS | 10–50 μM | 3.36 μM | - | [ |
| Folic acid | PM/Pt | Potentiodynamic 0 to +1.1 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M (TBA)PF6/ACN | ACN/water (1:9, v:v) | Up to 100 μM | 15.4 μM | 2.6 × 104 | [ |
ITO indium tin oxide, TBATFMS tetrabutylammonium trifluoromethane sulfonate
Fig. 7Structural formulas of derivatives of thiophene (16–19, 24–27) and carbazole (20–23) used as functional (16–26) and cross-linking (27) monomers for molecular imprinting
Fig. 8Structural formulas of the porphyrin functional monomers nickel protoporphyrin IX dimethyl ester 28, cobalt(III) tetrakis(2-aminophenyl)porphyrin hydroxide 29, and iron(III) tetrakis(4-aminophenyl)porphyrin chloride 30
Analytical parameters of MIP chemosensors using porphyrins as the functional monomers
| Template/analyte | Transduction/electrode | Electropolymerization conditions | Solution for MIP preparation | Solution of analyte determination | Linear dynamic concentration range | LOD | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nitrobenzene | CV/GCE | Potentiodynamic 0.5 to 1.5 V vs. Ag/AgCl | Dichloromethane | 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.0) | Up to 1 M | 0.01 M | [ |
| DCPB | Chronoamperometry/Pt | Potentiodynamic −0.1 to 1.0 V vs. Pt | 0. 1 M (TBA)PF6/ACN | 0. 1 M TBAPF6/ACN | 200 μM to 2 mM | - | [ |
| Dopamine | SWV/Pt | Potentiodynamic −0.2 to 1.0 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M Na2SO4/H2SO4 (pH 1.0) | 0.1 M acetate buffer | 1–100 μM | 0.4 μM | [ |
DCPB 2,4-dichlorophenoxybutyric acid, SWV square wave voltammetry
Analytical parameters of MIP chemosensors using other functional monomers
| Functional monomer | Template/analyte | Transduction/electrode | Electropolymerization conditions | Solution for MIP preparation | Solution of analyte determination | Linear dynamic concentration range | LOD | Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Methylene green | Theophylline | CV/GCE | Potentiodynamic −0.3 to 1.3 V vs. SCE | 100 mM NaNO3, | - | 3–75 μM | - | [ |
| 10 mM NaB4O7 | ||||||||
| Aminobenzoic acid | Melamine | DPV/GCE | Potentiodynamic −0.8 to 1.0 V vs. SCE | 0.2 M Na2SO4 | 0.2 M Na2SO4 | 4–450 μM | 0.36 μM | [ |
| MBI | Pyrene | SWV/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.6 to 1.3 V vs. Ag/AgCl | Ethanol/water (7:3,v:v) (pH 10) | 100 mM NaClO4, 50% ethanol (pH 7.4) | Up to 0.35 μM | - | [ |
| MBI | Cholesterol | Capacitance/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.6 to 1.3 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M NaClO4 (pH9.5) | 10 mM PBS (pH 7.4) | 5–30 μM | 0.42 μM | [ |
| MBI | Cholesterol | DPV/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.6 to 1.3 V vs. SCE | Ethanol (pH 9.5) | Ethanol/water (1:1, v:v) | Up to 20 μM | 0.7 μM | [ |
| MBI | Fenvalerate | Capacitance/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 1.9 V vs. SCE | Ethanol (pH 7.5) | 5 mM PBS, 140 mM NaCI (pH = 7.5) | Up to 5 μg mL-1 | 0.36 μg mL-1 | [ |
MBI 2-mercaptobenzimidazol, DPV differential pulse voltammetry
Analytical parameters of MIP chemosensors using 1,2-phenylendiamine as the functional monomer
| Template/analyte | Transduction/electrode | Electropolymerization conditions | Solution for MIP preparation | Solution for analyte determination | Linear dynamic concentration range | LOD |
| Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Glucose | PM/Pt | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | Acetate buffer (pH 5.2) | Acetate buffer (pH 5.2) | Up to 20 mM | - | 2.1 × 102 | [ |
| Glucose | Capacitance/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.01 M acetate buffer (pH 5.18) | 0.1 M NaCl, 10 mM Tris buffer (pH 7.14) | 0.1–20 mM | 0.05 mM | - | [ |
| Atropine | PM/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.1 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | 0.1 M H2 SO4 | 0.1 M H2 SO4 | 8.0 μM to 4.0 mM | 2.0 μM | - | [ |
| Phenylalanine | PM/Au | Potentiodynamic 0.1 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | 0.1 M acetate buffer (pH = 6.0) | 0.1 M acetate buffer (pH = 6.0) | 2–20 mM | 0.5 mM | 1.98 × 102 | [ |
| Sorbitol | PM/Au | Potentiodynamic 0.1 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | Acetate buffer (pH 5.2) | 0.05 M PBS (pH 6.8) | 1–15 mM | 1 mM | 11 | [ |
| Glutathione | Capacitance/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | 0.02 M PBS (pH 6.98) | 0.1 M KCl, 0.02 M PBS (pH6.98) | 0.025–0.30 mM | 1.25 μM | - | [ |
| DCPA | SWV/PGE | Potentiodynamic +1.0 to −1.0 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 4% DMSO | 1 M KCl | - | - | - | [ |
| DCPA | Chronoamperometry/Au | Potentiodynamic +1.0 to −1.0 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 2% DMSO | 1 M KCl | Up to 8 μg mL-1 | - | - | [ |
| Paracetamol | Voltammetry/carbon | Potentiodynamic −0.1 to +1.35 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M H2SO4 | 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) | 6.5 μM to 2.0 mM | 1.5 μM | - | [ |
| 2-Methyl-4,6-dinitrophenol | Voltammetry/carbon | Potentiodynamic −0.1 to +1.35 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.2 M H2SO4 methanol (1:1, v:v) | 0.04 M BR buffer (pH3) methanol (9:1, v:v) | 0.8 μM to 100 μM | 0.2 μM | - | [ |
| Metamitron | Voltammetry/carbon | Potentiodynamic −0.1 to +1.35 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M H2SO4 | 0.04 M BR buffer | 1–100 μM | 0.27 μM | - | [ |
| DHP | Voltammetry, Impedimetry/GCE | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | 1/15 M PBS (pH 6.98) | 1/15 M PBS (pH 6.98) | 50 nM to 50 μM | 10 nM | - | [ |
| Dimethoate | Voltammetry/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | Acetate buffer (pH 5.2) | 0.1 M PBS (pH = 7.0) | 1.0–1,000 ng mL-1 | 0.5 ng mL-1 | - | [ |
| 1.0–50 μg mL-1 | ||||||||
| Theophylline | Voltammetry/GCE | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | 0.1 M acetate buffer (pH5.2) | - | 0.4–15 μM | 0.1 μM | - | [ |
| 0.24–3.4 mM | ||||||||
| Triclosan | Chronoamperometry/GCE | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | Acetate buffer (pH 5.2) | Acetate buffer (pH 5.2) | 0.2–3.0 μM | 0.08 μM | - | [ |
| Dopamine | Voltammetry/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | 0.1 M acetate buffer (pH6.5) | 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) | 0.5–40 μM | 0.13 μM | - | [ |
| Oxytetracycline | Voltammetry/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M acetate buffer (pH5.2) | 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.2) | Up to 1 μM | 0.64 nM | - | [ |
| Oxytetracycline | Voltammetry/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M acetate buffer (pH5.2) | 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.2) | Up to 0.4 μM | 33 nM | 5.34 × 103 | [ |
| DMP | SAW/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | - | N2 gas | 0.19–19.6 mg mL-1 | 0.1 mg mL-1 | - | [ |
DCPA 2,4-dichlorophenoxyacetic acid, DHP O,O-dimethyl-α-hydroxyphenyl phosphonate, DMP dimethylmethylphosphonate, SAW surface acoustic wave, DMSO dimethyl sulfoxide
Fig. 9Procedure for preparation of the molecularly imprinted polymer chemosensor for surface plasmon resonance determination of oxytetracycline (OTC) using phenylenediamine (PD) as the functional monomer. (Adapted from [163])
Analytical parameters of electrochemical MIP chemosensors using phenol as the functional monomer
| Template/analyte | Transduction/electrode | Electropolymerization conditions | Solution for MIP preparation | Solution for analyte determination | Linear dynamic concentration range | LOD |
| Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Phenylalanine | Capacitance/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | 0.05 M NaHPO4 (pH 7.5) | - | 0.5–8 mg mL-1 | - | - | [ |
| Ferritin | Voltammetry/carbon | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.9 V vs. Ag/AgCl | PBS (pH 7.4) | PBS (pH 7.4) | Up to 0.1 μg L-1 | 10 pg L-1 | 0.019 (pg/ L)-1 | [ |
|
| Chronoamperometry/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.35 V vs. SCE | 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 10.3) | 0.05 M HEPES buffer (pH 7.2) | Up to 2.0 mM | - | 170 | [ |
|
| Up to 1.0 mM | - | 870 | |||||
| MV2+ | Voltammetry/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.6 V vs. SCE | 0.05 M PBS (pH 7.4) | 0.05 M PBS (pH 7.4) | Up to 10 mM | - | 3.45 × 103 M-1 | [ |
| DCPA | PM/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.2 to +1.0 V vs. SCE | 0.1 M NaClO4, 0.4 M HClO4 | 0.05 M HClO4 | 40 μM to 2.0 mM | 10 μM | - | [ |
| NIC | Voltammetry/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.2 to +1.0 V vs. SCE | NaClO4 | - | 0.4–33 μM | 0.2 μM | - | [ |
| Tegafur | Capacitance/PM/Au | Potentiodynamic 0 to 0.8 V vs. SCE | 1/15 M PBS (pH 6.98) | 1/15 M PBS (pH 6.98) | Up to 1 mM | - | 6.25 × 104 M-1 | [ |
| Dopamine | Voltammetry/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.2 to +1.2 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.1 M NaClO4 (pH 5.5) | 0.2 M NaCl, 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.2) | 0.02 - 0.25 μM | 1.98 nM | - | [ |
| Theophylline | Capacitance/Au | Potentiodynamic 0.2 to +0.8 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.05 M borate buffer (pH 9.2) | 0.05 M borate buffer (pH 9.2) | Up to 15 μM | 1 μM | - | [ |
MV methyl viologen, NIC nicotine
Analytical parameters of MIP chemosensors using thiophenol as the functional monomer
| Template/analyte | Transduction/electrode | Electropolymerization conditions | Solution for MIP preparation | Solution of analyte determination | Linear dynamic concentration range | LOD |
| Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Nitrobenzene | Chronoamperometry/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.4 to 1.0 V vs. SCE | CH2Cl2 | PBS (pH 7.0) | 0.5–4.5 mM | - | - | [ |
| Metolcarb | Chronoamperometry/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.2 to 1.4 V vs. SCE | 5 mM (TBA)ClO4, 10 mM HCl | 0.2 M KNO3 | 50–350 nM | 13.4 nM | - | [ |
| TNT | LSV/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.35 to 0.5 V vs. SCE | 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4) | 0.1 M phosphate buffer (pH 7.4) | - | 46 pg mL-1 | 2.6 × 104 | [ |
| TNT | SPR/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.35 to 0.8 V vs. Ag | 0.1 M HEPES buffer (pH 7.2) | 0.1 M HEPES buffer (pH 7.2) | 20–100 fM | 10 fM | 6.4 × 1012 | [ |
| Picric acid, MV2+ | SPR/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.35 to 0.8 V vs. Ag | 0.1 M HEPES buffer (pH 7.2) | 0.1 M HEPES buffer (pH 7.2) | 50 fM to 2 pM | - | 3.9 × 1012 | [ |
| 1–100 nM | - | 9.0 × 107 | ||||||
| Chlorpyrifos | CV/GCE | Potentiodynamic −0.2 to 0.6 V vs. Ag/AgCl | 0.05 M PBS (pH 6.86), 0.1 M KCl | 0.05 M PBS (pH 6.86), 0.1 M KCl | 0.5–10 μM | 0.3 μM | - | [ |
| Tolazoline | CV/Au | Potentiodynamic −0.4 to 1.2 V vs. SCE | Acetate buffer (pH 5.2) | PBS (pH 6.8), 0.1 M NaCl | 0.05–5 μg mL-1 | 16 ng mL-1 | - | [ |
| 5.0–240 μg mL-1 |
TNT 2,4,6-trinitrotoluene, LSV linear sweep voltammetry