4.7 Article

Nickel-Ferrite Oxide Decorated on Reduced Graphene Oxide, an Efficient and Selective Electrochemical Sensor for Detection of Furazolidone

期刊

IEEE SENSORS JOURNAL
卷 19, 期 14, 页码 5396-5403

出版社

IEEE-INST ELECTRICAL ELECTRONICS ENGINEERS INC
DOI: 10.1109/JSEN.2019.2908994

关键词

NiFe2O4; reduced graphene oxide; furazolidone; differential pulse voltammetry

资金

  1. Research Council
  2. Centre of Excellent of Sensors and Green Chemistry of Isfahan University of Technology (IUT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Here, in this paper, magnetic nickel-ferrite oxide nanoparticles decorated reduced graphene oxide (NiFe2O4/rGO) was successfully prepared to employ as an efficient electrocatalyst for the electrochemical detection of furazolidone, an antibiotic and antibacterial drug. The NiFe2O4/rGO was characterized by different analytical methods, including FT-IR spectroscopy, X-ray diffraction spectroscopy, energy-dispersive X-ray spectroscopy, and electrochemical methods. In addition, the morphology of NiFe2O4/rGO was monitored using microscopic images of TEM and FE-SEM. NiFe(2)O4(/)rGO was used to modify a glassy carbon electrode (GCE). The differential pulse voltam-metric studies represented that the NiFe2O4/rGO-GCE was more sensitive compared to rGO-GCE and unmodified GCE towards furazolidone detection. This electrochemical sensor was linearly related to furazolidone concentration in two linear ranges of 0.1-10.0 mu mol L-1 and 10.0-150.0 mu mol L-1. However, the performance of this furazolidone sensor was quantitatively limited by the detection limit of 0.05 mu mol L-1. To evaluate its selectivity, some common ions and other relevant species can interfere in the result of furazolidone sensor was investigated. This study, in addition to real sample analysis, represented that the suggested electrochemical sensor was practically selective and sensitive towards furazoldone. The determined value by the suggested sensor was in the related confidence interval accepted for the definite one.

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