4.7 Article

Comparative study of graphene nanosheet- and multiwall carbon nanotube-based electrochemical sensor for the sensitive detection of cadmium

Journal

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
Volume 851, Issue -, Pages 43-48

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2014.08.021

Keywords

Nanographene; Multiwall carbon nanotubes; Rapid detection; Cadmium

Funding

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21307161]
  2. Special Scientific Research Funds for Central Non-profit Institutes, Chinese Academy of Fishery Sciences [2013C006]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

A novel nanocomposite was obtained through the controlled surface modification of graphene nanosheets (nanographene) with Nafion by ultrasonic oscillation. The composite was used as an ultrasensitive platform for the detection of cadmium ions (Cd2+) by differential pulse anodic stripping voltammetry (DPASV) analysis. The performance of the nanographene-based sensor was systematically compared with that of a multiwall carbon nanotube (MWCNT)-modified sensor. The results indicate that the nanographene-based sensor exhibits significant advantages over the MWCNT-based sensor in terms of repeatability, sensitivity and limit of detection (LOD). The nanographene-based sensor displayed superior analytical performance over a linear range of Cd2+ concentrations from 0.25 mu g L-1 to 5 mu g L-1, with a LOD of 3.5 ng L-1. This sensor was also used to systematically screen for 6 types of chemicals, including sodium salts, magnesium salts and zinc salts. It was observed that the sensor could successfully differentiate cadmium ions from interferents (magnesium salts, zinc salts, etc.). The nanographene-based sensor was also demonstrated to be a promising and reliable tool for the rapid detection of cadmium existing in tap water and for the rapid on-site analysis of critical pollution levels of cadmium. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available