4.7 Article

A hemin-based molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) grafted onto a glassy carbon electrode as a selective sensor for 4-aminophenol amperometric

期刊

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS B-CHEMICAL
卷 152, 期 2, 页码 220-225

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2010.12.010

关键词

4-Aminophenol; Amperometric sensor; Hemin; Molecularly imprinted polymer

资金

  1. Fundacao de Amparo a Pesquisa do Estado de Sao Paulo (FAPESP)
  2. Conselho Nacional de Desenvolvimento Cientifico e Tecnologico (CNPq)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Molecular imprinting technology is becoming a versatile tool for the preparation of tailor-made molecular recognition elements. This work investigates the performance of a hemin-modified molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) used as an amperometric sensor for the detection of 4-aminophenol (4-APh). MIP particles were prepared by the precipitation polymerization method with hemin introduced as the catalytic center to mimic the active site of peroxidase. 4-APh was used as the template molecule, methacrylic acid (MAA) as the functional monomer, trimethylolpropane trimethacrylate (TRIM) as the cross-linker and 2,2'-azobisisobutyronitrile (AIBN) as the initiator. The synthesized polymer particles were characterized in terms of particle size, porosity and morphology. The amperometric sensor used for 4-APh detection was prepared by modifying a glassy carbon electrode surface with the hemin-based MIP. Under optimized operational conditions, a linear response was obtained in the range of 10.0-90.0 mu mol L-1. with a sensitivity of 5.5 nA L mu mol(-1) and a detection limit of 3.0 mu mol L-1. The sensor showed good repeatability (RSD=2.7% for n=7). It exhibited to be very selective for 4-APh even in the presence of structurally similar compounds (2-aminophenol, catechol, guaiachol, 2-cresol and chloroguaiachol). Recoveries in the range 93-111% were obtained using the sensor for the determinations of 4-APh in tap and river water samples. (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