4.7 Article

Trace determination of molybdenum by anodic adsorptive stripping voltammetry using a multi-walled carbon nanotubes modified carbon paste electrode

期刊

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS B-CHEMICAL
卷 148, 期 1, 页码 214-220

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2010.04.029

关键词

Molybdenum; Alizarin violet; Anodic adsorptive stripping voltammetry; Multi-walled carbon nanotubes; Modified electrode

资金

  1. Project of Science and Technology Department of Hunan Province [2009FJ3158]
  2. Project of Education Department of Hunan Province [09C173, 09K099]
  3. Key Discipline in Hunan Province

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A method for the voltammetric determination of trace molybdenum using a multi-walled carbon nanotubes modified carbon paste electrode (MWCNT/CPE) was described. The new procedure is based on the adsorptive accumulation of the Mo(VI)-alizarin violet (AV) complex onto the surface of the modified electrode, followed by the electrochemical oxidation of adsorbed species. The modified electrode showed high electrocatalytic activity toward the oxidation of the free ligand and the complex and the peak current was enhanced significantly. The optimal experimental conditions include the use of 0.12 mol L-1 potassium biphthalate (KHP) buffer (pH 3.6), 4.0 x 10(-6) mol L-1 AV (C-Mo(VI) <= 1.0 x 10(-7) mol L-1)/4.0 x 10(-5) mol L-1 AV (C-Mo(VI) > 1.0 x 10(-7) mol L-1), an accumulation potential of -0.30V (versus SCE), an accumulation time of 120 s, a scan rate of 100 my s(-1) and a second-order derivative linear scan mode. The oxidation peak for the complex appears at 0.59V. The peak current increases linearly with Mo(VI) concentration in the range of 4.0 x 10(-10) mol L-1 to 1.0 x 10(-7) mol L-1 and 2.0 x 10(-7) mol L-1 to 8.0 x 10(-6) mol L-1 and the detection limit (S/N = 3) is 1.0 x 10(-10) mol L-1 (accumulation time 120s). The proposed method was applied to the determination of Mo(VI) in natural water samples with satisfactory results. (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

4.7
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