2013
DOI: 10.1039/c2nr33264g
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Archetypal sandwich-structured CuO for high performance non-enzymatic sensing of glucose

Abstract: In the quest to enhance the selectivity and sensitivity of novel structured metal oxides for electrochemical non-enzymatic sensing of glucose, we report here a green synthesis of unique sandwich-structured CuO on a large scale under microwave mediated homogeneous precipitation conditions. The physicochemical studies carried out by XRD and BET methods show that the monoclinic CuO formed via thermal decomposition of Cu(2)(OH)(2)CO(3) possesses monomodal channel-type pores with largely improved surface area (~43 … Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1
1

Citation Types

6
97
0
1

Year Published

2015
2015
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 174 publications
(104 citation statements)
references
References 85 publications
6
97
0
1
Order By: Relevance
“…As shown in Figure 6 (a), the CuO hierarchical nanostructures-based sensor is almost insensitive to common organics such as dopamine, uric acid, ascorbic acid, sucrose, maltose, and lactose. In contrast, some of the previously reported CuO-based sensors such as flower-like CuO hierarchical films on copper foils [28], archetypal sandwich-structured CuO [29], CuO nanoplates on Cu foils [32], and flexible 3D porous CuO nanowire arrays on Cu foils [37] could not well resist interference from the aforementioned organics, although they exhibited moderate sensitivity to glucose electro-oxidation. The good anti-interference performance of our CuO-based sensor might be attributed to the relatively low working potential of 0.4 V. In addition, the prepared CuO-based sensor also shows good anti-interference capacity to some inorganic salts such as NaCl, Na 2 SO 4 , KNO 3 , NaHCO 3 , and sodium citrate as shown in Figure 7 (b).…”
Section: à2mentioning
confidence: 70%
See 2 more Smart Citations
“…As shown in Figure 6 (a), the CuO hierarchical nanostructures-based sensor is almost insensitive to common organics such as dopamine, uric acid, ascorbic acid, sucrose, maltose, and lactose. In contrast, some of the previously reported CuO-based sensors such as flower-like CuO hierarchical films on copper foils [28], archetypal sandwich-structured CuO [29], CuO nanoplates on Cu foils [32], and flexible 3D porous CuO nanowire arrays on Cu foils [37] could not well resist interference from the aforementioned organics, although they exhibited moderate sensitivity to glucose electro-oxidation. The good anti-interference performance of our CuO-based sensor might be attributed to the relatively low working potential of 0.4 V. In addition, the prepared CuO-based sensor also shows good anti-interference capacity to some inorganic salts such as NaCl, Na 2 SO 4 , KNO 3 , NaHCO 3 , and sodium citrate as shown in Figure 7 (b).…”
Section: à2mentioning
confidence: 70%
“…As can be seen, the CuO electrode almost exhibits no catalytic activity toward electro-oxidation of glucose when the applied potential is below 0.1 V. The anodic current at the CuO electrode increases with the increase of the applied potential in the range of 0.20 .4 V, and decreases with further increase of the applied potential because that high potential could promote fast oxidation of glucose, which would lead to accumulation of intermediates and reaction products on the electrode surface and block of the catalytic active sites, and thus further oxidation of glucose being hindered [15]. This fact indicates the CuO electrode exhibits the highest electrocatalytic activity toward glucose oxidation at an applied potential of 0.4 V, which is lower than the detection potentials needed by most of other CuO-based enzymeless glucose sensors [22,24,28,29,33].…”
Section: Nonenzymatic Glucose Sensing Performancementioning
confidence: 97%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…It can be seen that the sensitivity of the as-prepared sensor are comparable or even better than most reported glucose sensors. In addition, the optimal applied potential of 0.35 V was more negative than those of 0.48 [38], 0.50 [35,39,45], and 0.60 [32,34,[42][43][44] in former reports of CuO film electrode. It was known that the interfering species (UA, AA) are easy to oxidation at more positive potential, resulting in severe interference to the oxidation of glucose.…”
Section: Electrochemical Measurementsmentioning
confidence: 79%
“…Without glucose in alkaline electrolyte, a reduction peak around 600 mV vs. SCE was found which corresponds to the Cu 2+ /Cu 3+ redox reaction. 29 Aer addition of 5 mM glucose, evident enhancement of anodic peak corresponding to the irreversible oxidation of glucose was observed. Although the underlying mechanism during glucose oxidation is currently unknown, it has been generally considered that the Cu 3+ species which might be an electron-transfer medium catalyzed glucose oxidation and produced gluconolactone and further hydrolyzed to glucose acid.…”
Section: Characterizationmentioning
confidence: 97%