4.3 Article

Voltammetric measurement of trace amount of glutathione using multiwall carbon nanotubes as a sensor and chlorpromazine as a mediator

期刊

JOURNAL OF SOLID STATE ELECTROCHEMISTRY
卷 14, 期 8, 页码 1415-1423

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s10008-009-0978-z

关键词

Chlorpromazine; Electrocatalysis; Glutathione determination; Voltammetric methods

资金

  1. Isfahan University of Technology Research Council
  2. Center of Excellence in Sensor and Green Chemistry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this work, we propose chlorpromazine as a new mediator for the rapid, sensitive, and highly selective voltammetric determination of glutathione (GSH) using multiwall carbon nanotubes paste electrode (MWCNTPE). The experimental results showed that the carbon nanotubes paste electrode has a highly electrocatalytic activity for the oxidation of GSH in the presence of chlorpromazine as a mediator. Cyclic voltammetry, double potential step chronoamperometry, and differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) are used to investigate the suitability of chlorpromazine at the surface of MWCNTPE as a mediator for the electrocatalytic oxidation of GSH in aqueous solutions. It is shown that chlorpromazine can catalyze the oxidation of GSH in an aqueous buffer solution to produce a sharp oxidation peak current at about +0.70 versus Ag/AgCl as a reference electrode. Kinetic parameters such as electron transfer coefficient and catalytic reaction rate constant, k/h, are also determined. Using DPV and under the optimum conditions at pH 4.0, the electrocatalytic oxidation peak current of GSH shows a linear dependence on GSH concentration in the GSH concentration range of 0.3 to 18.3 A mu M. The detection limit (3 sigma) is determined to be 0.16 A mu M. The relative standard deviation for 1.5 and 5.0 A mu M GSH are found to be 3.7% and 2.5%, respectively. The proposed method may, thus, also be used as a novel, selective, simple, and precise method for the voltammetric determination of GSH in such real samples as hemolyzed erythrocyte.

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