| Literature DB >> 31460417 |
Adil Shafi1, Nafees Ahmad1, Saima Sultana1, Suhail Sabir1, Mohammad Zain Khan1.
Abstract
Visible light-driven Ag2S-graftedEntities:
Year: 2019 PMID: 31460417 PMCID: PMC6682037 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.9b01261
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Figure 1FTIR spectra of pure NiO, pure ZnO, NZ, and AZN nanocomposites with different weight ratios of Ag2S.
Figure 2XRD patterns of pure NiO, pure ZnO, pure Ag2S, NZ, and AZN nanocomposites with different weight ratios of Ag2S.
Average Particle Size of Pure and Composite Samples
| prepared samples | peak chosen (2θ) | average particle size (nm) |
|---|---|---|
| ZnO | 36.303 | 48.8 |
| NiO | 43.326 | 24.3 |
| Ag2S | 34.406 | 28.1 |
| NZ | 36.303 | 31.7 |
| AZN-6 | 36.303 | 30.5 |
| AZN-8 | 36.303 | 29.4 |
Figure 3(a) UV-DRS of NiO, ZnO, NZ, and AZN-8 nanocomposites. (b) Band gap curve of NZ and AZN-8 nanocomposites.
Figure 4(a,b) SEM image of the NZ sample at low and high magnification, (c,d) SEM image of the AZN-8 sample at low and high magnification, (e) EDS spectrum of NZ, and (f) EDS spectrum of the AZN-8 sample.
Figure 5EDS elemental mapping of the AZN-8 nanocomposite [(a) O, (b) S, (c) Ni, (d) Ag, (e) Zn].
Figure 6TEM images of NZ (a,b) and AZN-8 (c,d) nanocomposites.
Figure 7(a) Cyclic voltammograms of AZN-8 at different scan rates (10–80 mV s–1) and (b) capacitive current as a function of scan rate for NZ and AZN-8 nanocomposites.
Figure 8(a) UV–vis absorption spectra of aqueous RhB dye in the presence of the AZN-8 nanocomposite at different time intervals, (b) degradation of the RhB dye with time in the presence of NZ and AZN-8 nanocomposites with different Ag2S contents, (c) chemical kinetics of the photocatalytic decolorization of the dye over various samples, and (d) bar diagram showing comparative RhB degradation efficiency over different photocatalysts.
Apparent Rate Constant of Different Photocatalysts Obtained from Linear Fit Data
| Catalyst | |
|---|---|
| NZ | 0.0051 |
| AZN-2 | 0.0075 |
| AZN-4 | 0.0103 |
| AZN-6 | 0.0119 |
| AZN-8 | 0.0302 |
| AZN-10 | 0.0192 |
Figure 9Schematic diagram for the photocatalytic mechanism of AZN nanocomposites under visible light irradiation.
Figure 10PL spectra of different samples at an excitation wavelength of 320 nm.
Figure 11Effect of different scavengers on the degradation of RhB over the AZN-8 catalyst.
Figure 12Recycling experiments of the AZN-8 catalyst.
Comparison of Photocatalytic Performance with the Reported Photocatalyst
| material used | synthetic route | light used | dye degradation | % removal (%) | literature |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| NiO–ZnO heterojunction | hydrothermal method | UV–visible | rhodamine B | 83 | ( |
| NiO/CNF/ZnO composite | chemical vapor deposition method | UV–visible | rhodamine B | 78 | ( |
| NiO–ZnO core–shell heterostructure | electrochemical deposition | UV–visible | rhodamine B | 94 | ( |
| NiO–ZnO–Ag composite | precipitation method | UV–visible | methylene blue | 94 | ( |
Scheme 1Pictorial Representation of GCE (WE) and Possible Mechanism of Acetone Sensing over Pasted GCE
Figure 13Cyclic voltammograms of (a) bare GCE, (b) NZ/GCE, and (c) AZN-8/GCE in 0.1 M PBS buffer in the absence and presence of 0.2 M acetone at a scan rate of 30 mV s–1.
Figure 14(a) CVs of AZN-8/GCE with different acetone concentrations and (b) calibration curve depicting the relationship between the acetone concentration and oxidation peak current values.
Figure 15CVs of AZN-8/GCE in 0.2 M PBS buffer at scan rates of 5–100 mV s–1 (from inner to outer); the inset shows the plots of redox peak currents vs scan rate.
Comparison of Nanocomposite Sensor Performance with Various Reported Sensors
| sensing material/chemical sensor | LOD | sensitivity (μA mM–1 cm–2) | linearity ( | literature |
|---|---|---|---|---|
| ZnO nanoparticles | 1.18 μM | 0.14 | ( | |
| ZnO/CO3O4 nanorods | 14.7 μM | 3.58 | 0.9684 | ( |
| Ag2O microflowers | 0.11 μM | 1.60 | 0.9462 | ( |
| lead foil electrode | 50.0 ppm | 2.07 | 0.9780 | ( |