4.7 Article

Simultaneous and Ratiometric Electrochemical Determination of Uric Acid and Hypoxanthine Based on In Situ Carbonized Polydopamine Graphene Paper

期刊

ACS APPLIED NANO MATERIALS
卷 6, 期 11, 页码 9268-9275

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsanm.3c00891

关键词

ratiometric; simultaneity; electrochemistry; uric acid; xanthine

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A ratiometric electrochemical detection platform was constructed to simultaneously determine the levels of uric acid (UA) and xanthine (XA). The cPDA-Gp electrode was prepared by in situ modification of polydopamine (PDA) on graphene paper (Gp) and subsequent carbonization. Methylene blue (MB) was used as an internal reference and coupled with cPDA-Gp. The sensing platform showed promising results for the detection of UA and XA in real samples.
Highlevels of uric acid (UA) and xanthine (XA) in the human bodycan lead to various illnesses, highlighting the crucial need to detectUA and XA levels in the body. In this work, a ratiometric electrochemicaldetection platform was constructed for the simultaneous determinationof UA and XA. Polydopamine (PDA) was initially modified in situ ongraphene paper (Gp) and carbonized to fabricate the cPDA-Gp electrode.Methylene blue (MB) is coupled to cPDA-Gp as an internal referenceand is designated as MB/cPDA-Gp. The electrochemical behavior of UAand XA on MB/cPDA-Gp was studied by cyclic voltammetry and differentialpulse voltammetry. There were distinct anodic peaks on the electrodethat corresponded to the oxidation of UA and XA in the concentrationranges of 0.6-350 and 2-160 mu M, with detectionlimits of 0.2 and 0.67 mu M, respectively (S/N = 3). For simultaneousdetection of changes in UA and XA concentrations, the response rangewas 1-300 mu M, with detection limits of 0.34 and 0.67 mu M (S/N = 3), respectively. The sensing platform has been successfullyutilized to detect UA and XA in real samples with satisfactory results,indicating that it can be a reliable sensor for detecting these analytes.

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