4.0 Article

Voltammetric determination of dopamine in the presence of uric acid using a 2-hydroxy-1-(1-hydroxynaphthyl-2-azo)-naphthalin-4-sulfonic acid modified glassy carbon electrode

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE SERBIAN CHEMICAL SOCIETY
卷 75, 期 12, 页码 1685-1699

出版社

SERBIAN CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.2298/JSC100311134E

关键词

2-hydroxy-1-(1-hydroxynaphthy1-2-azo)-naphthalin-4-sulfonic acid; simultaneous determination; dopamine and uric acid; voltammetry

资金

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

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A polymerized film of 2-hydroxy-1-(1-hydroxynaphthyl-2-azo)-naphthalin-4-sulfonic acid (HHNANSA) was prepared at the surface of a glassy carbon electrode by electropolymerization. The modified electrode was used for the simultaneous determination of dopamine (DA) and uric acid (UA). The electrochemical behaviors of the compounds at the surface of the modified electrode were studied using cyclic voltammetry, chronoamperometry, and square wave voltammetry (SWV). The experimental results indicated that the modified electrode exhibited an efficient electrocatalytic activity towards the oxidation of DA and UA, with a peak separation of about 140, mV at pH 5.0. Using chronoamperometry, the catalytic reaction rate constant was measured and found to equal to 1.23x10(4) mol(-1) L s(-1). At pH 5.0, the catalytic peak currents linearly depended on the DA and/or UA concentrations in the range of 1.0-300 mu mol L-1 DA (two linear segments with different slopes) and 6.7-20 mu mol L-1 UA, using SWV. The detection limits for DA and UA were 0.25 and 1.17 mu mol L-1, respectively. The RSD % for 40.0 and 140.0 mu mol L-1 DA were 1.9 and 2.2%, respectively, whereas for 10.0 and 20.0 mu mol L-1 UA, they were 1.8 and 1.2 %, respectively. The modified electrode showed good sensitivity, selectivity, and stability. It was successfully applied for the determination of DA and UA in real samples, such as drugs and urine.

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

4.0
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