| Literature DB >> 26473862 |
Cheng-Chih Hsu1, Yuan-Rong Lo2, Yu-Chian Lin3, Yi-Cen Shi4, Pang-Lung Li5.
Abstract
In this study we developed a low cost sensor for measuring the concentration of hydrogen peroxide (H₂O₂) in liquids utilizing a spectrometric method. The sensor was tested using various concentrations of a peroxidase enzyme immobilized on a glass substrate. H₂O₂ can be catalyzed by peroxidase and converted into water and oxygen. The reagent 4-amino-phenazone takes up oxygen together with phenol to form a colored product that has absorption peaks at 510 nm and 450 nm. The transmission intensity is strongly related to the hydrogen peroxide concentration, so can be used for quantitative analysis. The measurement range for hydrogen peroxide is from 5 × 10(-)⁵% to 1 × 10(-3)% (0.5 ppm to 10 ppm) and the results show high linearity. This device can achieve a sensitivity and resolution of 41,400 (photon count/%) and 3.49 × 10(-5)% (0.35 ppm), respectively. The response time of the sensor is less than 3 min and the sensor can be reused for 10 applications with similar performance.Entities:
Keywords: hydrogen peroxide; optical sensor; spectrometry
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2015 PMID: 26473862 PMCID: PMC4634519 DOI: 10.3390/s151025716
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sensors (Basel) ISSN: 1424-8220 Impact factor: 3.576
Comparisons of the proposed methods.
| Ref. | Method | Enzyme | Sensor Property |
|---|---|---|---|
| [ | Interferometry | None | D-type fiber/right angle prism |
| [ | Amperometric | Horseradish peroxidase (HRP) | SBA-15 entrapped HRP deposited on polyaniline |
| [ | Spectrometric | None | No rigid fabricated sensor, solutions of pyridine-2 6-dicarboxylic acid, H2O2, and vanadate |
| [ | Spectrometric | Peroxidase from zucchini | No rigid fabricated sensor, reaction with solutions of supernatant, guaiacol, H2O2, and peroxidase |
| [ | Spectrometric | Horseradish peroxidase (HRP) | HRP entrapped in silicate glass matrix with Sol-Gel method |
| [ | Fluorimetric | None | No rigid fabricated sensor, reaction with solutions of phosphine-based fluorescent reagent, H2O2, and sodium tungstate dihydrate |
| [ | Fluorimetric | Superoxide dismutase (SOD) | No rigid fabricated sensor, reaction with solutions of SOD, H2O2, and Nash reagent |
| [ | Chemiluminescence | None | No rigid fabricated sensor, reaction with solutions of octylphenyl polyglycol ether (OP), acidic KMnO4, and H2O2 |
| This work | Spectrometric | Horseradish peroxidase (HRP) | HRP immobilized on glass substrate |
Figure 1Measurement system and H2O2 sensor: (a) system arrangement; (b) photograph of the H2O2 sensor; and (c) transmittance-time response curve.
Figure 2Absorbance behavior of the proposed sensor with various POD concentrations: (a) 0.001 mg/mL; (b) 0.0005 mg/mL; and (c) 0.0003 mg/mL.
Figure 3Transmittance-time response behavior of various H2O2 concentrations (a: 0.0001%; b: 0.00015%; c: 0.0002%; d: 0.00025; e: 0.0003%; f: 0.00035; g: 0.0004; h: 0.00045%) measured by the sensor with various POD concentrations ((a) 0.001 mg/mL; (b) 0.0005 mg/mL; and (c) 0.0003 mg/mL) at monitored wavelengths of 510 nm.
Figure 4Transmittance-time response behavior of various H2O2 concentrations (a: 0.0001%; b: 0.00015%; c: 0.0002%; d: 0.00025; e: 0.0003%) measured by the sensor with various POD concentrations ((a) 0.001 mg/mL; (b) 0.0005 mg/mL; and (c) 0.0003 mg/mL) at monitored wavelengths of 450 nm.
Figure 5Calibration curve of the proposed sensor with various POD concentrations ((a) 0.001 mg/mL; (b) 0.0005 mg/mL; and (c) 0.0003 mg/mL) at a monitored wavelength of 510 nm.
Figure 6Calibration curve of proposed sensor with various POD concentrations ((a) 0.001 mg/mL; (b) 0.0005 mg/mL; and (c) 0.0003 mg/mL) at a monitored wavelength of 450 nm.
Figure 7Stability evaluation of the photon counter.
Sensitivity and resolution of the proposed sensor.
| Monitoring Wavelength (nm) | POD Concentration (mg/mL) | Sensitivity (Photon Count/%) | Δ | Resolution | |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Theoretical (10−8%) | Real (10−5%) | ||||
| 510 | 0.001 | 41,400 | 8.11 | 3.49 | |
| 0.0005 | 40,900 | 430 | 9.72 | 4.18 | |
| 0.0003 | 39,800 | 11.74 | 5.05 | ||
| 450 | 0.001 | 7600 | 10.37 | 4.46 | |
| 0.0005 | 2500 | 430 | 12.37 | 5.32 | |
| 0.0003 | 1700 | 16.23 | 6.98 | ||
Figure 8Qualitative analysis of the proposed sensor. The H2O2 concentration varied from 5 × 10−5% to 5 × 10−3% with the POD concentration controlled at 0.001 mg/mL.
Figure 9Reliability of the proposed sensor: (a) transmittance-time response curves with various POD concentrations; and (b) transmittance-time response curves for various application numbers measured by the proposed sensor with POD concentration of 0.001 mg/mL.
Performance of different H2O2 concentration measurement methods.
| Ref. | Detection Limit | Resolution | Linear Range | Response Time | Reusability |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| [ | 10% | 0.06% | 10%–90% | X | X |
| [ | 0.02 mM | 417.5 μA/mM | 0.04–12 mM | ~5 s | X |
| [ | 5.8 nmol | X | 0.05–50 ppm | X | X |
| [ | 2.1 × 10−6 mol/L | X | 16–660 μmol/L | X | X |
| [ | 5 × 10−5 M | X | Nonlinear | 1 h | X |
| [ | 1.25 ng/μL | X | 1.25–50 ng/μL | <2 min | X |
| [ | 5 μM | X | Nonlinear | X | X |
| [ | 0.006 μmol/L | X | 10−8–6 × 10−5 mol/L | X | X |
| This work | 3.5 × 10−5% | 5 × 10−5% | 10−4–10−3% | <5 min | 10 times |