4.7 Review

MOFs composite materials for Pb2+ions detection in water: Recent trends & advances

Journal

MICROCHEMICAL JOURNAL
Volume 190, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2023.108585

Keywords

Lead(Pb2+); MOFs; Composites Membrane; Sensor; Detection limit

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This article investigates the efficiency of metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) in detecting heavy metal ions such as Pb2+, Hg2+, and Cd2+. By optimizing conditions, MOFs composite materials and membranes can achieve ultra-sensitive detection of Pb2+ ions (LOD in pmol/L), which is their main advantage. However, the low working potential of MOFs requires the development of MOFs membrane composite materials for highly efficient detection of toxic Pb2+ ions. Therefore, this review summarizes their advantages, limitations, and future directions.
The concern about increasing heavy metal ions such as Pb2+, Hg2+, and Cd2+ in the environment threatens society. Metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) are found highly efficient in detecting these ions. The necessity of MOFs composite material and membranes for sensitive detection of Pb2+ ions exhibits the lowest limit of detection (LOD) in pico mole per liter (pmol/L) under optimized conditions, which is the main advantage. However, this review studies the role of various functional sites in detecting analytes describing electrochemical and optical mechanisms. Therefore, the low working potential of MOFs demands the development of MOFs membrane composite material for highly efficient detection of toxic Pb2+ ions. Herein, some advantages and certain limitations have been studied. MOF materials are bounded by functional limitations which deduct their detection efficiencies, which is why MOF membrane composite materials have become a global topic of interest for researchers. This review summarizes detection potential, MOFs properties, challenges, and future directions.

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