4.4 Article

Efficient Electrochemical Determination of Catechol with Hydroquinone at Poly (L-Serine) Layered Carbon Paste Electrode

期刊

CHEMISTRYSELECT
卷 6, 期 26, 页码 6764-6772

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/slct.202101809

关键词

Catechol; Coffee powder sample; Hydroquinone; poly(L-serine); Voltammetry

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, a poly(L-serine) modified carbon paste electrode (PLSMCPE) was fabricated through electropolymerization for the electrochemical analysis of catechol (CC). The PLSMCPE showed nine-fold enhancement in peak current and good linear correlation between the concentration of CC and the oxidation peak current, with a LOD of 0.259 mu M and LOQ of 0.869 mu M. Additionally, the modified electrode was successful in analyzing the presence of CC in coffee powder samples.
The current endeavour presents the poly(L-serine) modified carbon paste electrode (PLSMCPE) fabricated through an electropolymerization methodology for the electrochemical analysis of catechol (CC). Field emission scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM) images of unmodified and PLSMCPE were examined to study the surface structure and the formation of polymer layer on the electrode surface. The PLSMCPE was functionalized for the voltammetric detection and quantification of CC in 0.2 M phosphate buffer solution (PBS) with a pH of 6.5. In contrast to unmodified electrode the PLSMCPE presented to have nine-fold enhancement in peak current and shift in anodic peak potential towards negative domain. The CV method showed good linear correlation between the concentration of CC and the oxidation peak current in the range from 2-50 mu M, and the corresponding limit of detection (LOD) and limit of quantification (LOQ) were achieved to be 0.259 mu M and 0.869 mu M, respectively. Furthermore, this sensor is used to determine the analytical response in the co-existence of CC and hydroquinone (HQ). The modified electrode is effectively functionalised for the analysis of CC in coffee powder sample.

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

4.4
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