4.7 Article

A facile electrochemical chiral sensor for tryptophan enantiomers based on multiwalled carbon nanotube/hydroxypropyl-β-cyclodextrin functionalized carboxymethyl cellulose

期刊

MICROCHEMICAL JOURNAL
卷 175, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.microc.2021.107133

关键词

Chiral recognition; Trp enantiomers; Electrochemical sensor; HP-beta-CD-grafted CMC; Multiwalled carbon nanotubes

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [51803021]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Heilongjiang Province [LH2020E007]
  3. Fundamental Research Funds forthe Central Universities [2572021BU05]
  4. China Postdoctoral Science Foundation [2018M641790]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The development of a sensitive electrochemical sensor for chiral recognition of tryptophan enantiomers was described. The sensor showed good recognition performance under optimal experimental conditions and successfully analyzed the content of D-Trp in a racemic mixture.
The development of facile and convenient sensors for the chiral recognition of enantiomers is of great signifi-cance for medical and life science. Herein, a sensitive electrochemical sensor for the chiral recognition of tryptophan (Trp) enantiomers was developed based on the assembly of cellulose grafted with hydroxypropyl-beta-cyclodextrins (CMC-CD), multi-walled carbon nanotubes (MWCNTs) and copper ions on the surface of a GCE. The morphologies and electrochemical behaviors of the prepared electrode (GCE/MWCNTs/CMC-CD-Cu) were characterized by differential pulse voltammetry (DPV), FT-IR, XPS, cyclic voltammetry (CV) and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS). The oxidation peak current ratio (I-L/I-D) of DPV could be reached at 2.2 under the optimal experimental conditions. Compared with D-Trp, the higher electrochemical signal of L-Trp was ascribed to the stronger affinity for L-type tryptophan. Additionally, the as-prepared chiral sensor was successfully utilized to analyze the amount of D-Trp in the racemic mixture.

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