4.7 Article

Titanate nanotube forest/CuxO nanocube hybrid for glucose electro-oxidation and determination

期刊

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS B-CHEMICAL
卷 190, 期 -, 页码 389-397

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2013.08.099

关键词

Titanate nanotubes forest; CuxO nanocube; Hybrid electrode; Glucose

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21075048]
  2. Scientific Research Foundation for Returned Overseas Chinese Scholars, State Education Ministry of China

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Titanate nanotubes forest (TNTF) possesses unique ion-exchange ability and presents a uniform pore size and better stability as compared to non-aligned nanotubes. These features increase the available surface area and allow greater penetration for catalyst loading, further simplify the optimization of the hybridization processes. Here, TNTF were in situ grown hydrothermally on titanium substrate, and the possibility of electrochemically hybridizing TNTF with CuxO nanocubes (CONC) to achieve TNTF/CONC hybrid nanostructure for electrocatalysis and analytic application was firstly demonstrated. The morphological and structural characteristics of TNTF and TNTF/CONC hybrid electrode were well-characterized by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), transmission electron microscopy (TEM) and X-ray diffractometry (XRD). Their electrochemistry and catalytic performance toward glucose oxidation were investigated in detail by cyclic voltammetry (CV) and chronoamperometry (I-t). A highly stable and sensitive catalytic current toward glucose oxidation was observed at + 0.45 V at TNTF/CONC hybrid electrode, and fast response (about 1 s), long-term stability and excellent resistance toward electrode fouling were also achieved. All these suggest that TNTF/CONC electrode is promising for glucose oxidation and determination. This study provides insight into design of other nano-architectures for catalysis, sensing and nanodevices fabrication by similar hybridization of TNTF. (C) 2013 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