| Literature DB >> 28787832 |
Jiri Kudr1,2, Lukas Richtera3,4, Lukas Nejdl5,6, Kledi Xhaxhiu7,8, Petr Vitek9, Branislav Rutkay-Nedecky10,11, David Hynek12,13, Pavel Kopel14,15, Vojtech Adam16,17, Rene Kizek18.
Abstract
Increasing urbanization and industrialization lead to the release of metals into the biosphere, which has become a serious issue for public health. In this paper, the direct electrochemical reduction of zinc ions is studied using electrochemically reduced graphene oxide (ERGO) modified glassy carbon electrode (GCE). The graphene oxide (GO) was fabricated using modified Hummers method and was electrochemically reduced on the surface of GCE by performing cyclic voltammograms from 0 to -1.5 V. The modification was optimized and properties of electrodes were determined using electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and cyclic voltammetry (CV). The determination of Zn(II) was performed using differential pulse voltammetry technique, platinum wire as a counter electrode, and Ag/AgCl/3 M KCl reference electrode. Compared to the bare GCE the modified GCE/ERGO shows three times better electrocatalytic activity towards zinc ions, with an increase of reduction current along with a negative shift of reduction potential. Using GCE/ERGO detection limit 5 ng·mL-1 was obtained.Entities:
Keywords: carbon; cyclic voltammetry; electrochemical impedance spectroscopy; electrochemistry; graphene oxide; heavy metal detection; reduced graphene oxide
Year: 2016 PMID: 28787832 PMCID: PMC5456574 DOI: 10.3390/ma9010031
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Materials (Basel) ISSN: 1996-1944 Impact factor: 3.623
Figure 1(A) Micrograph of GO used to modify GCE obtained by SEM; (B) GO size distribution including zetapotential; (C) Raman spectra of GCE, GCE modified with GO and GCE modified with ERGO; (D) AFM image of GO and (E) the height profiles along lines displayed in AFM image.
Figure 2(A) The CV (0 − (−1.5) V) of GCE/GO in acetate buffer; (B) Dependence of Zn(II) reduction signal obtained using GCE/ERGO on deposition time of GO (0.5 mg·mL−1) on the electrode (deposition time selected as optimal is marked with star); (C) CV of 2 mM [Fe(CN)6]3−/[Fe(CN)6]4− in 0.1 M KCl (50 mV∙s−1) recorded on bare GCE (blue line), GCE/GO (red line) and GCE/ERGO (green line) and corresponding peak current levels; (D) The dependence of [Fe(CN)6]3−/[Fe(CN)6]4− anodic (Ia) and cathodic (Ic) peak heights on the square root of scan rate; (E) Nyquist plot, detail of nyquist plot high frequency region and equivalent circuit used for data evaluation in insets; (F) Bode modulus plot of bare GCE (blue line), GCE/GO (red line) and GCE/ERGO (green line); and (G) corresponding Bode phase diagram (same colours as previous figure).
Figure 3Dependence of Zn(II) reduction signal on deposition potential (A) and deposition time (B) of Zn(II) (35 µmol·L−1) on GCE/ERGO (parameters marked with star was selected as an optimal); (C) Dependence of electrochemical signal on Zn(II) concentration (1.0–62.5 µmol·L−1) and comparison of DPV reduction signals of Zn(II) (4 µmol·L−1) (D) obtained using GCE/ERGO (red line) and bare GCE (blue line); (E) DPV voltammograms ((−1.40) − (−0.70) V) and comparison of Zn(II) and Cd(II) peak heights (F) of Zn(II) solution (1 µmol·L−1) with different concentrations of Cd(II) (0–64 µmol·L−1). Comparison of 10 µmol·L−1 Zn(II) electrochemical signal in acetate buffer with added 50 µmol·L−1 K(I), Ca(II) and Mg(II) in inset.
Analytical parameters of electrochemical detection of Zn(II).
| Substance | Working Electrode | Regression Equation | Linear Dynamic Range (µmol·L−1) | R2 a | LOD b (µmol·L−1) | LOQ c (µmol·L−1) | RSD (%) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Zn(II) | GCE/ERGO | 62.5 – 1.0 | 0.9999 | 0.1 | 0.4 | 4.8 | |
| Zn(II) | GCE | 500.0 – 2.0 | 0.9992 | 0.5 | 2.0 | 5.2 |
a Regression coefficient; b LOD (S/N = 3); c LOQ (S/N = 10).