| Literature DB >> 35479338 |
Mohammad Musarraf Hussain1,2,3, Abdullah M Asiri1,2, Jamal Uddin4, Mohammed M Rahman1,2.
Abstract
Herein, an easy wet-chemical process was used in basic medium with low temperature to prepare low-dimensional copper oxide nanoparticles (CuO NPs). A variety of optical and structural techniques such as UV-visible, FT-IR, XRD, FESEM, XEDS, and XPS were used to characterize the synthesized CuO NPs in detail. Two sensitive and selective sensor probes for γ-amino-butyric acid (GABA) and testosterone (TST) were achieved after modification; a thin layer of NPs on a flat glassy carbon electrode (GCE). Sensor analytical parameters such as sensitivity (SNT), linear dynamic range (LDR), limit of detection (LOD), limit of quantification (LOQ), robustness, and interference effects, were evaluated for the proposed sensor (GCE/CuO NPs) for GABA and TST, based on a dependable current-voltage technique. Calibration curves were found to be linear (R 2 = 0.9963 and 0.9095) over a broad concentration range of GABA and TST (100.0 pM to 100.0 mM and 10.0 pM to 10.0 mM, respectively). Sensor parameters - SNT (316.46 and 2848.10 pA μM-1 cm-2), LDR (100.0 nM to 10.0 mM and 10.0 pM to 1.0 mM), LOD (≈11.70 and 96.67 pM), and LOQ (39.0 and 322.2 pM) - for GABA and TST were calculated from the calibration plot successively. Preparation of CuO NPs using the wet-chemical technique is a good approach for perspective expansion of NPs-based sensors for the enzyme-free detection of biomolecules. Our sensor probe (GCE/CuO NPs) is applied for the cautious recognition of GABA and TST in real biological samples -human, mouse, and rabbit serum - and achieved good and acceptable results. This journal is © The Royal Society of Chemistry.Entities:
Year: 2021 PMID: 35479338 PMCID: PMC9033999 DOI: 10.1039/d1ra02709c
Source DB: PubMed Journal: RSC Adv ISSN: 2046-2069 Impact factor: 4.036
Scheme 1Preparation of CuO NPs by wet-chemical process.
Fig. 1(a) UV-visible, (b) band gap energy plot, (c) FT-IR spectrum, and (d) XRD pattern of CuO NPs.
Fig. 2Analyses of CuO NPs, (a) FESEM, (b and c) low to high magnified TEM images, (d and e) elemental analysis (inset: elemental compositions of O and Cu), and (f and g) elemental mapping of O and Cu.
Fig. 3Binding energy examination of CuO NPs (a) full spectrum, (b) Cu2+, and (c) O 1s.
Scheme 2Proposed mechanism regarding detection of GABA and testosterone using CuO NPs.
Fig. 4(a) pH optimization, (b) bare and coated electrode, (c) selectivity study, and (d) bar diagram presentation of control experiment at +1.2 V with error limit 10.0%.
Fig. 5Concentration variation study and calibration diagram with error limit 10.0%: (a and b) GABA and (c and d) testosterone.
Fig. 6LDR plot and response time: (a and c) GABA and (b and d) testosterone.
Detection of GABA and testosterone using different modified electrochemical sensorsa
| BM | Sensors | pH | Sensitivity | LOD (pM) | LOQ (pM) | LDR | r.t. (s) | RP (%) | RA (%) | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| GABA | AgNPs | 3.8 | — | 57.7 mg L−1 | 79.2 mg L−1 | — | — | — | — |
|
| Fe3O4@SiO2@meso SiO2 microspheres | — | 0.94 nm/log | 3.51 × 10−13 M | — | — | — | — |
| ||
| GCE/CuO NPs | 5.7 | 316.46 pA μM−1 cm−2 | 11.70 | 39.0 | 100.0–10.0 (nM to mM) | 9.0 | 55.0 | 89.0 | This work | |
| TST | CuO–CeO2 NSs/GCE | — | 27.36 μA μM−1 cm−2 | 9.30 pM | — | 0.01–0.01 (nM to mM) | 25 | — | — |
|
| MIPs materials | — | — | 0.5 nM | — | 0.5–20.0 (nM to nM) | — | — | — |
| |
| GO materials | — | — | 0.4 fM | — | 1.0–1.0 (fM to μM) | — | — | — |
| |
| CTAB/GC | — | — | 1.18 nM | — | 10.0–70.0 nM | — | — | — |
| |
| GCE/CuO NPs | 2848.10 pA μM−1 cm−2 | 96.67 | 322.2 | 10.0–1.0 (pM to mM) | 9.0 | 61.0 | 98.0 | This work |
BM: biological molecules, l-LA: l-lactic acid, UA: uric acid, GSH: glutathione, LOD: limit of detection, LOQ: limit of quantification, LDR: linear dynamic range, r.t.: response time, RP: reproducibility, and RA: repeatability.
Fig. 7Reproducible and repeatability studies of the fabricated GCE/CuO NPs sensor: (a and b) GABA and (c and d) testosterone.
Fig. 8Bar diagram presentation of interference effects at +1.2 V with error limit 10.0%: (a) GABA and (b) testosterone.
Fig. 9Real sample analysis with error limits 10.0%: (a) GABA and (b) testosterone.
Real samples analysis using GCE/CuO NPs sensor by electrochemical methoda
| BM | ME | CA (μM, 25.0 μL) | OC (μA) | RSA (25.0 μL) | ROC (RSA, μA) | FC (μM) |
| SD ( | RSD% ( | |||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| R1 | R2 | R3 | A | |||||||||
| GABA | 1 | 1.0 | 1.55 | HS-1 | 0.67 | 0.75 | 0.63 | 0.68 | 0.44 | 44 | 0.06 | 8.94 |
| 2 | 1.0 | 0.68 | HS-2 | 0.39 | 0.36 | 0.36 | 0.37 | 0.54 | 54 | 0.02 | 4.68 | |
| 3 | 1.0 | 1.06 | HS-3 | 0.71 | 0.71 | 0.68 | 0.70 | 0.66 | 66 | 0.02 | 2.47 | |
| 4 | 1.0 | 0.82 | MS | 0.61 | 0.54 | 0.55 | 0.57 | 0.70 | 70 | 0.04 | 6.68 | |
| 5 | 1.0 | 0.45 | RaS | 0.36 | 0.42 | 0.34 | 0.37 | 0.82 | 82 | 0.04 | 11.15 | |
| TST | 1 | 1.0 | 1.14 | HS-1 | 0.90 | 0.81 | 0.81 | 0.84 | 0.74 | 74 | 0.05 | 6.19 |
| 2 | 1.0 | 0.64 | HS-2 | 0.44 | 0.44 | 0.46 | 0.45 | 0.70 | 70 | 0.01 | 2.59 | |
| 3 | 1.0 | 2.31 | HS-3 | 1.55 | 1.82 | 1.87 | 1.75 | 0.76 | 76 | 0.17 | 9.86 | |
| 4 | 1.0 | 0.76 | MS | 0.55 | 0.55 | 0.56 | 0.55 | 0.72 | 72 | 0.006 | 1.04 | |
| 5 | 1.0 | 2.27 | RaS | 3.42 | 2.99 | 2.97 | 3.13 | 1.38 | 138 | 0.25 | 8.13 | |
BM: biomolecules, ME: modified electrode, CA: concentration added, GABA: γ-amino-butyric acid, TST: testosterone, OC: observed current, RSA: real sample added, ROC: respective observed current, RSA: real sample added, R: reading, A: average, FC: found concentration, R: recovery, SD: standard deviation, RSD: relative standard deviation, HS: human serum, MS: mouse serum, and RaS: rabbit serum.