4.8 Article

Imprinted polymer-carbon consolidated composite fiber sensor for substrate-selective electrochemical sensing of folic acid

期刊

BIOSENSORS & BIOELECTRONICS
卷 25, 期 9, 页码 2140-2148

出版社

ELSEVIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2010.02.016

关键词

Molecularly imprinted polymer-carbon composite; Folic acid; Salt-bridge association; MIP-fiber sensor; Differential pulse; Cathodic stripping voltammetry

资金

  1. Council of Scientific and Industrial Research, New Delhi
  2. Department of Science and Technology [SR/S1/IC-18/2006]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) are often electrically insulating materials. Due to the presence of diffusion barrier(s) in between such MIP coating and electrode surface and the absence of a direct path for the conduction of electrons from the binding sites to the electrode, the development of electrochemical sensor is significantly restricted. The direct use of MIPs those possess intrinsic electron-transport properties, is highly limited. These problems are resolved by the design of an original, substrate-selective MIP-fiber sensor that combines conventional insulating MIP and conducting carbon powder in consolidated phase. A layer of conducting carbon particles, arranged orderly as 'carbon strip', is inducted in the polymer for direct electronic conduction. MIP-carbon composite (monolithic fiber) in this work is prepared via in situ free radical polymerization of a new monomer (2,4,6-trisacrylamido-1,3,5-triazine, TAT) and subsequent cross-linkage with ethylene glycol dimethacrylate, in the presence of carbon powder and template (folic acid), at 55 degrees C in a glass capillary. The detection of folic acid with the MIP-fiber sensor was found to be specific and quantitative (detection limit 0.20 ng mL(-1), RSD = 1.3%, S/N = 3), in aqueous, blood serum and pharmaceutical samples, without any problem of non-specific false-positive contribution and cross-reactivity. (C) 2010 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

4.8
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