| Literature DB >> 28035076 |
Xin Du1, Yuan Chen2, Wenhao Dong2, Bingkai Han2, Min Liu1, Qiang Chen2, Jun Zhou1,2.
Abstract
Hydrogen peroxide (Entities:
Keywords: electrochemical sensor; graphene oxide; hydrogen peroxide; platinum nanoparticle; polyaniline
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2017 PMID: 28035076 PMCID: PMC5355075 DOI: 10.18632/oncotarget.14308
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Oncotarget ISSN: 1949-2553
Scheme 1The fabrication process of the rGO-PANI-PtNP/GCE
Figure 1Characterization of the morphology and structure of the composites
(A–C) TEM and (D) SEM images of PANI (A), rGO-PANI (B and D) and rGO-PANI-PtNPs (C).
Figure 2EDX analysis and FTIR spectra of the composites
(A) EDX analysis of the rGO-PANI-PtNP composite. (B) FTIR spectra of GO, PANI, and GO-PANI.
Figure 3CV profiles of various electrodes recorded in 0.1 M KCl containing 10 mM [Fe(CN)6]3+ at a scan rate of 50 mV/s
Figure 4Kinetics of rGO-PANI-PtNP/GCE
(A) Cyclic voltammograms of the sensor in 10 mM K3[Fe(CN)6] at scan rates ranging from 20 ~ 90 mV/s. (B) Linear fits of the oxidized peak current (Ipa) and reduced peak current (Ipc) versus the square root of the scan rate (v1/2).
Figure 5Electrocatalytic activity of rGO-PANI-PtNP/GCE towards H2O2
Cyclic voltammograms of the sensor in PB (pH 7.0) containing various concentrations of H2O2.
Figure 6Optimization of experimental conditions for the fabrication of rGO-PANI-PtNP/GCE
Effects of (A) reduction cycle numbers, (B) and (C) deposition time, and (D) applied potential on the fabrication of the sensor are shown.
Comparison of selected electrochemical sensors for H2O2 detection
| Electrodes | Applied potential (mV) | Sensitivity (μA mM−1 cm-2) | LOD (μM) | Liner range (mM) | Refs |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pt/Cu/C/GCE | +300 | 69.4 | 12.2 | up to 4 | [ |
| Silver nanowire | -200 | 0.0266 | 29.2 | 0.1-3.1 | [ |
| CQDsa/octahedral Cu2O | -200 | 130 | 2.8 | 0.005-5.3 | [ |
| Pt-SnO2@C | +500 | 241 | 0.1 | 0.001-0.17 | [ |
| Ag-Au-rGO | -400 | - | 1 | 0.1-5 | [ |
| PdNPs/PEDOTb/GCE | -400 | 215 | 2.84 | 0.0025-1 | [ |
| Pt-polypyrrole/GCE | -100 | 80.41 | 1.2 | 1-8 | [ |
| graphene/PBc/GCE | -50 | 196.6 | 1.9 | 0.02-2 | [ |
| rGO-PANI-PtNP/GCE | 0 | 257.04 | 1.1 | 0.02-8 | this study |
a carbon quantum dots; b poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene); c prussian blue.
Figure 7Electrochemical detection of H2O2 by rGO-PANI-PtNP/GCE
(A) Amperometric response of the sensor to successive additions of H2O2 in 0.1 M PB (pH 7.0) at 0 mV. Insert: Amplification of the current/time curve at lower concentrations of H2O2. (B) Calibration curve for H2O2 sensing. Error bars represent the mean ± standard deviation (n = 5).
Quantification of H2O2 in FBS containing different concentrations of H2O2
| Actual H2O2 (mM) | Measured H2O2 (mM) | RSD (%, n = 6) | Recovery (%) |
|---|---|---|---|
| 0.1 | 0.103 | 3.2 | 103 |
| 0.4 | 0.39 | 3.8 | 97.5 |
| 1 | 0.98 | 4.1 | 98 |
| 3 | 3.09 | 4.2 | 103 |
| 5 | 5.12 | 4.5 | 102.4 |
Figure 8Amperometric responses of rGO-PANI-PtNP/GCE to 1 mM H2O2, 0.5 mM UA, 0.15 mM AP, 0.15 mM AA, and 1 mM H2O2 in PB at an applied potential of 0 mV