4.7 Article

Additive-based stability assessment of biologically designed CuO and GSH-CuO nanospheres and their applicability as Nano-biosensors

期刊

COLLOIDS AND SURFACES B-BIOINTERFACES
卷 178, 期 -, 页码 66-73

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.colsurfb.2019.02.048

关键词

Cuo nanoparticle; Biosensor; Peroxidase mimics; Nanozymes; Glutathione

资金

  1. Government of Pakistan

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Uncapped and Glutathione capped Cupric oxide nanospheres were synthesized by the interaction of Berberis lycium (B1) root extract with corresponding salt solution. CuO nanospheres were best optimized by mixing 2% extract solution with 1 mM CuSO4 center dot 5H(2)O (pH 11, 90 degrees C) Reduced glutathione (0.25 mM) in solution form was added in respective emulsion after 24 h. Synthesis of nanospheres was ensured by distinct surface plasmonic resonance peaks shown by CuO (370-420 nm). Addition of glutathione resulted in sharp blue shift and lowered absorbance values in UV spectra suggesting the decrease in nanoparticles' size and concentration. Average particle sizes as deduced with XRD were found to be 18.52 and 16.57 nm for CuO and GSH-CuO nanospheres respectively. Additive based stability assessment of synthesized nanospheres revealed CuO and GSH-CuO nanospheres to be highly stable in the presence of Catechin hydrate among various tested chemical compounds while ascorbic acid appeared as a strong destabilizing agent. TMB was oxidized by H2O2 in the presence of synthesized enzymes likewise horseradish peroxidase; though exhibited moderate results. Glutathione stabilized cupric oxide nanospheres exhibited the potential to be modulated further into efficient nanozymes as these showed better affinity towards chromogenic substrate TMB (K-m value 0.32 mM) and better catalytic efficiency (0.075 mM(-1) s(-1)) compared to uncapped CuO nanomimetics (1.6 mM, 0.033 mM(-1) s(-1) All of the tested additives served as inhibitors to the peroxidase mimicking potential of CuO and GSH-CuO nanozymes.

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