4.7 Editorial Material

Urgent Need for Ethical Policies to Prevent the Proliferation of AI-Generated Texts in Scientific Papers

期刊

FOOD AND BIOPROCESS TECHNOLOGY
卷 -, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11947-023-03046-9

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) technology has been revitalized and advanced by utilizing metal-organic frameworks (MOFs) as substrates. In this study, Fe3O4@UiO-66(Zr)@Ag nanoparticles (FUAs) were developed as a new SERS substrate for trace detection of organophosphorus pesticides (OPs) in food. The FUAs exhibited excellent SERS detection sensitivity, uniformity, reproducibility, and stability, with a high Raman enhancement factor and low limit of detection for 4-NBT. The FUAs also achieved trace detection of OP compounds in apple juice, meeting the requirements of food control standards.
Surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy (SERS) technology has been revitalized and advanced with the introduction of metal-organic frameworks (MOFs), yet the valuable properties of MOFs for SERS substrates have not been fully explored. In this work, a new SERS substrate, Fe3O4@ UiO-66(Zr)@Ag nanoparticles (FUAs), was developed and applied for trace detection of organophosphorus pesticides (OPs) in food. The FUAs exhibited excellent SERS detection sensitivity, uniformity, reproducibility, and stability, with a high Raman enhancement factor (5.62 x 106), low limit of detection (LOD, 2.11 x 10-11 M) and RSD (12.41%) for 4-NBT, and maintained 81% SERS activity within 60 days. The FUAs utilized the strong affinity of UiO-66(Zr) for OP compounds to achieve trace detection of phoxim, triazophos, and methyl parathion in apple juice. The LODs of these OP compounds were 0.041, 0.021, and 0.0031 mg/L, respectively, with good linearities ranging from 0.02 or 0.1-50 mg/L, meeting the requirements of the food control standards. These results demonstrate the potential and prospects of the FUAs SERS substrate for trace detection of OP compounds in food.

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