4.7 Article

A novel electrochemical sensor based on thermally reduced graphene oxide for the sensitive determination of dopamine

期刊

APPLIED SURFACE SCIENCE
卷 592, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.apsusc.2022.153257

关键词

Thermally reduced graphene oxide; Electrochemical sensor; Dopamine; Carbon suboxide; Structural analysis

资金

  1. European Social Fund [09.3.3-LMT-K-712-19-0050]
  2. Research Council of Lithuania(LMTLT)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In this study, two different reduced graphene oxide samples were synthesized using traditional and modified Hummers methods, and it was found that one of the samples showed higher sensitivity and lower limit of detection for dopamine determination.
In this paper, two different reduced graphene oxide samples rGO_H and rGO_M derived, respectively, from the graphene oxide (GO) obtained using traditional and modified Hummers methods were synthesized. Thermal reduction of GO was performed in the presence of malonic acid (MA) and P2O5 additives. The prepared rGO samples were investigated as active electrode materials for the electrochemical determination of dopamine (DA). The structural characterization using XPS demonstrated that the thermal treatment of GO with the mixture of MA and P2O5 leads to incorporation of phosphorus functional groups into the structure of graphene-based material, as evidenced by an increase in the phosphorus content in rGO_H (1.84%) and rGO_M (2.74%). Raman analysis confirms that a slightly larger number of defects are present in the rGO_M sample (I-D/I-G = 0.94) than in the rGO_H structure (I-D/I-G = 0.93). Electrochemical studies using CV and DPV showed that the rGO_M sample significantly improves the oxidation peak current of DA, demonstrating its higher sensitivity to the determination of dopamine than that on rGO_H. Also, it was determined that the proposed sensor based on rGO_M shows a low limit of detection value (0.11 mu M) and high sensitivity (28.64 mu A mu M-1 cm(-2)) toward DA detection.

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