4.7 Article

Highly sensitive amperometric enzyme biosensor for detection of superoxide based on conducting polymer/CNT modified electrodes and superoxide dismutase

期刊

SENSORS AND ACTUATORS B-CHEMICAL
卷 236, 期 -, 页码 574-582

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE SA
DOI: 10.1016/j.snb.2016.06.032

关键词

Superoxide detection; Superoxide dismutase biosensor; Carbon nanotubes; Conducting polymer; Antioxidant activity

资金

  1. Fundacao para a Ciencia e a Tecnologia (FCT), Portugal [PTDC/QUI-QUI/116091/2009]
  2. POCH
  3. FCT [SFRH/BPD/72656/2010, PEst-C/EME/UI0285/2013]
  4. European Commission 7th Framework Programme Marie Curie Actions IRSES FP7-PEOPLE-IRSES SMARTCANCERSENS project [318053]
  5. POFC-QREN
  6. FSE
  7. European Community FEDER funds through the program COMPETE
  8. Fundação para a Ciência e a Tecnologia [SFRH/BPD/72656/2010] Funding Source: FCT

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel highly sensitive electrochemical biosensor for the direct determination of the reactive oxygen species superoxide,O-2(center dot-), using superoxide dismutase has been developed, by incorporating multiwalled carbon nanotubes (MWCNT) together with the conducting polymer poly(3,4-ethylenedioxythiophene) (PEDOT) in different configurations. After characterisation, the experimental conditions have been optimized and the analytical parameters of superoxide dismutase biosensors based on PEDOT/CNT or CNT/PEDOT modified glassy carbon electrodes, as well as those with one component only (MWCNT, PEDOT), have been determined. The biosensor with CNT on top of PEDOT presented the best analytical performance due to synergistic effects, with fast, and selective response to O-2(center dot-), a high sensitivity of similar to 1115 mu Acm(-2) mM(-1) and a low detection limit of 1 mu M, and was applied to the determination of the antioxidant capacity of beverages. The biosensor exhibited outstanding stability over a period of 2 months, with a slight increase in the initial sensitivity. (C) 2016 Elsevier B.V. All Rights reserved.

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