4.7 Article

A colorimetric probe based on 4-mercaptophenol and thioglycolic acid-functionalized gold nanoparticles for determination of phytic acid and Fe(III) ions

期刊

MICROCHIMICA ACTA
卷 187, 期 10, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER WIEN
DOI: 10.1007/s00604-020-04478-2

关键词

Phytic acid (PA); Colorimetric probe; Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs); Fe(III) ions; Antioxidant; Spectrophotometric determination

向作者/读者索取更多资源

As a first of its kind, we developed a highly sensitive colorimetric nanoprobe for phytic acid (PA) and Fe(III) ion detection based on 4-mercaptophenol (4MP) and thioglycolic acid (TGA)-functionalized gold nanoparticles {AuNPs@(4MP-TGA)}. AuNPs were easily derivatized by 4MP and TGA through -SH binding to gold. Fe(III) ions possibly are bound first to the phenolate groups of 4MP-AuNPs, and further coordinated several nanoparticles via the carboxylate groups of TGA-AuNPs to cause aggregation, resulting in a red-to-purple color change and a bathochromic shift in the SPR absorption band of the nanoprobe. With the addition of PA to the AuNPs@(4MP-TGA)-Fe(III) system, the aggregated particles were released due to strong complex formation between Fe(III) and PA, resulting in a restoration of the color (purple-to-red) and of the SPR band to the original 520 nm wavelength maximum. Thus, the 650-nm absorption is attenuated and the 520-nm band is enhanced upon PA-Fe(III) chelation. This means that the absorption ratio A(650)/A(520) is an indication of Fe(III) whereas the reverse ratio A(520)/A(650) of the PA content of complex samples. The limits of detection (LOD) of the AuNPs@(4MP-TGA) were 1.0 mu M for Fe(III) ions and 0.15 mu M for PA. Phytic acid extracted from bean grains was determined with the proposed probe, yielding good recoveries. In addition, common metal ions, anions, and several biomolecules did not show an adverse effect on the nanoprobe performance for ferric ions and phytate. The developed method was statistically validated against a LC-MS/MS literature method.

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