4.3 Article

Iron nanoparticles decorated multi-wall carbon nanotubes modified carbon paste electrode as an electrochemical sensor for the simultaneous determination of uric acid in the presence of ascorbic acid, dopamine and L-tyrosine

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.msec.2015.08.003

关键词

Iron nanoparticles decorated multi-wall carbon nanotubes; Uric acid; Ascorbic acid; Dopamine; L-Tyrosine; Differential pulse voltammetry

资金

  1. Board of Research in Nuclear Sciences (BRNS, BARC, Mumbai), Department of Atomic Energy, Government of India, under the Major Research Project (Basic Sciences Category) [37(2)/14/10/2014-brns]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Iron nanoparticles decorated multi-wall carbon nanotubes modified carbon paste electrode (Fe-MWCNTs/MCPE) was prepared by bulk-modification method. The electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) suggests least charge transfer resistance at the modified electrode. The electrochemical behavior of UA was studied in 0.1 M phosphate buffer solution (PBS) of pH 3.0 using cyclic voltammetry (CV) while differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) was used for quantification. The spectroelectrodiemial study of oxidation of UA at Fe-MWCNTs/MCPE showed a decrease in the absorbance of two peaks with time, which are ascribed to pi* to pi* and n to pi* transitions. Under optimum condition, the DPV response offered two linear dynamic ranges for UA in the concentration range 7.0 x 10(-8) M-1.0 x 10(-6) M and 2.0 x 10(-6) M-1.0 x 10(-5) M with detection limit (4.80 +/- 035) x 10(-8)M (S/N = 3). The practical analytical application of this sensor was successfully evaluated by determination of spiked UA in clinical samples, such as human blood serum and urine with good percentage recovery. The proposed electrochemical sensor offers a simple, reliable, rapid, reproducible and cost effective analysis of a quaternary mixture of biomolecules containing AA, DA, UA and Tyr which was free from mutual interferences. (C) 2015 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.3
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据