4.8 Article

A shriveled rectangular carbon tube with the concave surface for high-performance enzymatic glucose/O2 biofuel cells

期刊

BIOSENSORS & BIOELECTRONICS
卷 132, 期 -, 页码 76-83

出版社

ELSEVIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2019.02.044

关键词

Rectangular carbon tube; Polypyrrole; Carbonization; Enzymatic biofuel cell; Constant-current discharge

资金

  1. Tianjin Institute of Industrial Biotechnology, Chinese Academy of Sciences [ZDRW-ZS-2016-3S]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21706273, 21878324]
  3. CAS Pioneer Hundred Talent Program [2016-081]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a novel carbon tube was prepared by carbonizing a rectangular polypyrrole (RPPy) tube at a high temperature for the construction of enzymatic biofuel cells with high performance. SEM and TEM images clearly showed that the initial PPy presented a rectangular tube shape, while the carbonized PPy became a shriveled rectangular tube with a concave surface, which might be beneficial for enzyme immobilization and electrochemical applications. The glucose oxidase (GOx)- or laccase (Lac)-modified electrodes based on carbonized RPPy exhibited excellent bioelectrochemical performance. In addition, a biofuel cell (GOx, glucose/O-2, Lac) was assembled, and the open-circuit voltage reached 1.16 V. The maximum power density was measured to 0.350 mW cm(-2), which correlated to the gravimetric power density of 0.265 mW mg(-1) (per mg of GOx) at 0.85 V. The constant-current discharge method was used to further evaluate the continuous discharge capacity. The discharge time reached 49.9 h at a discharge current of 0.2 mA before the voltage was lower than 0.8 V. Furthermore, three of the fabricated biofuel cells in series were able to continually light up a white light-emitting diode (LED) whose turn-on voltage was ca. 2.4 V for more than 48 h. This study suggests that carbonized conducting polymers may become a useful electrode material for the development of enzymatic biofuel cells.

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

4.8
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