| Literature DB >> 30781449 |
Nashwa S Abdalla1, Maha A Youssef2, H Algarni3, Nasser S Awwad4, Ayman H Kamel5.
Abstract
All-solid-state potentiometric sensors were prepared by using polyaniline (PANI) as the solid contact material. A film of PANI (thickness approximately being 0.25 µm) was deposited on a solid substrate (carbon screen printed platform). The PANI layer was subsequently coated with an ion-selective membrane (ISM) containing uniform-sized molecularly imprinted nanoparticles to produce a solid-contact ion-selective electrode (SC/ISE) for bispyribac herbicide (sensor I). In addition, aliquat 336 was also used as an ion exchanger in plasticized PVC membrane (sensor II). The proposed sensors revealed a remarkably improved sensitivity towards bispyribac ions with anionic slopes of -47.8 ± 1.1 (r² = 0.9995) and -44.4 ± 1.4 (r² = 0.9997) mV/decade over a linear range 1.0 × 10-2⁻8.6 × 10-6 M, 1.0 × 10-2⁻9.0 × 10-6 M and detection limits of 1.33 and 1.81 µg/mL for sensors I and II, respectively.Selectivity of both sensors is significantly high for different common pesticides and inorganic anions. The potential stability of the SC/ISEs was studied using chronopotentiometry. Electrochemical impedance spectrometry was used to understand the charge-transfer mechanisms of the different types of ion-selective electrodes studied. The impedance response of the electrodes was modelled by using equivalent electrical circuits. The sensors were used for a direct measurement of the bispyribac content in commercial herbicide formulations and soil samples collected from agricultural lands planted with rice and sprayed with bispyribac herbicide. The results agree fairly well with data obtained using HPLC method.Entities:
Keywords: bispyribac sodium; molecularly imprinted polymers; organic pollutant; screen-printed; solid-contact ISEs
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2019 PMID: 30781449 PMCID: PMC6412243 DOI: 10.3390/molecules24040712
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1FT-IR spectra for bispyribac (BIS), bispyribac/MIP, MIP/washed and NIP beads.
Figure 2SEM images of (a) MIP and (b) NIP nanobeads.
Figure 3(a) Binding isotherm (Q = mmol/g) is plotted as a function of byspyribac concentration, C = mmol/L); and (b) Scatchard plot (Q/C free = L/g is plotted as a function of Q = mmol/g). Q is the amount of byspyribac bond per g of polymer; t = 25 °C; V = 10.0 mL; binding time: 20 h.
Figure 4Potentiometric response curves obtained screen-printed ISEs integrated with MIP nanobeads curve (a) and aliquat curve (b).
Figure 5Water-layer tests for the bispyribac-ISE with and without PANI as the solid contact using MIP nano-beads (a) and aliquat (b) membrane based sensors.
Figure 6Chronopotentiometry (a) and Impedance plot (b) for bispyribac/MIP-ISEs with and without PANI as a solid contact material.
Potentiometric selectivity coefficients, log, of the proposed screen-printed ISEs.
| Interfering Ion | * Log | |
|---|---|---|
| Sensor I | Sensor II | |
| Diquate | −5.05 ± 0.2 | −5.04 ± 0.5 |
| Acetampirid | −4.73 ± 0.4 | −4.63 ± 0.2 |
| Dinotefuran | −5.17 ± 0.5 | −3.12 ± 0.3 |
| Imidachloprid | −5.32 ± 0.3 | −5.98 ± 0.8 |
| Cyromazine | −5.32 ± 0.7 | −5.35 ± 0.1 |
| Flucarbazone | −2.51 ± 0.1 | −0.24 ± 0.05 |
| Cl− | −5.05 ± 0.4 | −4.75 ± 0.5 |
| Br− | −5.15 ± 0.2 | −2.97 ± 0.4 |
| SO42− | −5.57 ± 0.3 | −5.08 ± 0.3 |
| CH3COO− | −3.96 ± 0.2 | −4.21 ± 0.1 |
| NO3− | −4.25 ± 0.6 | −3.06 ± 0.2 |
* Mean value obtained from three corresponding pairs of concentrations of bispyribac ion and the respective interfering anion in the Nernstian response range ± standard deviation.
Potentiomeric determination of bispyribac in commercial herbicide formulation using MIP/PANI membrane based sensor.
| Commercial Product | Label ( | a Found | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Potentiometry | RSD, % | HPLC [ | RSD, % | ||
| Nomenee-kz, Kafr El-Zayat Pesticides& Chemicals Company (Gharbia, Egypt) | 3 | 2.97 ± 0.02 | 99.0 | 2.99 ± 0.05 | 99.6 |
a Average of five measurements ± standard deviation.
Determination of bispyribac in some soil samples were collected after one day of spraying bispyribac herbicide to the land.
| Sample | Amount of Bispyribac (µg/g) | |
|---|---|---|
| Potentiometry | HPLC [ | |
| Sample 1 | 8.8 ± 0.9 | 9.2 ± 0.2 |
| Sample 2 | 10.4 ± 0.4 | 9.7 ± 0.1 |
| Sample 3 | 14.3 ± 0.7 | 13.1 ± 0.3 |
a Average of five measurements ± standard deviation.
Figure 7Schematic representation for MIPs synthesis and screen- printed electrode.