4.8 Article

Nonenzymatic glucose sensor based on renewable electrospun Ni nanoparticle-loaded carbon nanofiber paste electrode

期刊

BIOSENSORS & BIOELECTRONICS
卷 24, 期 11, 页码 3329-3334

出版社

ELSEVIER ADVANCED TECHNOLOGY
DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2009.04.032

关键词

Glucose; Nonenzymatic sensor; Renewable electrode; Electrospinning; Ni nanoparticle-loaded carbon nanofiber

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [20605020, 20875085]
  2. Chinese Academy of Sciences [KJCX2-YW-H11]
  3. Distinguished Young Scholars of Jilin Province [20060112]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A novel nonenzymatic glucose sensor was developed based on the renewable Ni nanoparticle-loaded carbon nanofiber paste (NiCFP) electrode. The NiCF nanocomposite was prepared by combination of electrospinning technique with thermal treatment method. The scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and transmission electron microscopy (TEM) images showed that large amounts of spherical nanoparticles were well dispersed on the surface or embedded in the carbon nanofibers. And the nanoparticles were composed of Ni and NiO, as revealed by energy dispersive X-ray spectroscopy (EDX) and X-ray powder diffraction (XRD). In application to nonenzymatic glucose determination, the renewable NiCFP electrodes, which were constructed by simply mixing the electrospun nanocomposite with mineral oil, exhibited strong and fast amperometric response without being poisoned by chloride ions. Low detection limit of 1 mu M with wide linear range from 2 mu M to 2.5 mM (R = 0.9997) could be obtained. The current response of the proposed glucose sensor was highly sensitive and stable, attributing to the electrocatalytic performance of the firmly embedded Ni nanoparticles as well as the chemical inertness of the carbon-based electrode. The good analytical performance, low cost and straightforward preparation method made this novel electrode material promising for the development of effective glucose sensor. (C) 2009 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

4.8
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