4.8 Article

Potentiometric Sensors with Ion-Exchange Donnan Exclusion Membranes

期刊

ANALYTICAL CHEMISTRY
卷 85, 期 13, 页码 6208-6212

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/ac400470n

关键词

-

资金

  1. Swiss National Science Foundation
  2. Australian Research Council [DP0987851]
  3. Australian Research Council [DP0987851] Funding Source: Australian Research Council

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Potentiometric sensors that exhibit a non-Hofineister selectivity sequence are normally designed by selective chemical recognition elements in the membrane. In other situations, when used as detectors in separation science, for example, membranes that respond equally to most ions are preferred. With so-called liquid membranes, a low selectivity is difficult to accomplish since these membranes are intrinsically responsive to lipophilic species. Instead, the high solubility of sample lipids in an ionophore-free sensing matrix results in a deterioration of the response. We explore here potentiometric sensors on the basis of ion-exchange membranes commonly used in fuel cell applications and electrodialysis, which have so far not found their way into the field of ion selective electrodes These membranes act as Donnan exclusion membranes as the ions are not stripped of their hydration shell as they interact with the membrane. Because of this, lipophilic ions are no longer preferred over hydrophilic ones, making them promising candidates for the detection of abundant ions in the presence of lipophilic ones or as detectors in separation science. Two types of cation exchanger membranes and one anion exchange membrane were characterized, and potentiometric measuring ranges were found to be Nernstian over a wide range down to about 10 mu M concentrations. Depending on the specific membrane, lipophllic ions gave equal response to hydrophilic ones or were even somewhat discriminated. The medium and long-term stability and reproducibility of the electrode signals were found to be promising when evaluated in synthetic and whole blood samples.

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

4.8
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