2016
DOI: 10.3390/s16101652
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Highly Selective and Ultrasensitive Turn-on Luminescence Chemosensor for Mercury (II) Determination Based on the Rhodamine 6G Derivative FC1 and Au Nanoparticles

Abstract: A method for the detection and quantitation of Hg2+ in aqueous samples by fluorescence spectroscopy is presented. It consists of a turn-on sensor developed by coupling Gold nanoparticles (AuNPs) with the rhodamine 6G derivative FC1, in which the response is generated by a mercury-induced ring-opening reaction. The AuNPs were included in order to improve the sensitivity of the method towards the analyte, maintaining its high selectivity. The method was validated in terms of linearity, precision and accuracy, an… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
5
0

Year Published

2017
2017
2023
2023

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 10 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 43 publications
(59 reference statements)
0
5
0
Order By: Relevance
“…(1), we obtain the detection limit 20.6 nM for our sensor B. Of course, the limit of detection of bimetallic nanoparticles with our fluorescence sensor based on the organic dye is somewhat higher than those typical for the sensors associated with monometallic nanoparticles and organic dyes, for which the loading content is close to 0.2-10.0 nM [18][19][20][21]. On the other hand, the mercury concentration level corresponding to our detection limit for the sensor B is less than the harmless level set by the Environmental Protection Agency for the tap water (Fact Sheet EPA-823-F-01-011, USA) [23].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 67%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…(1), we obtain the detection limit 20.6 nM for our sensor B. Of course, the limit of detection of bimetallic nanoparticles with our fluorescence sensor based on the organic dye is somewhat higher than those typical for the sensors associated with monometallic nanoparticles and organic dyes, for which the loading content is close to 0.2-10.0 nM [18][19][20][21]. On the other hand, the mercury concentration level corresponding to our detection limit for the sensor B is less than the harmless level set by the Environmental Protection Agency for the tap water (Fact Sheet EPA-823-F-01-011, USA) [23].…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 67%
“…Although our experimental data are not so amazing as those reported in Refs. [18][19][20][21], the detection limits in this study are lowered down to nM levels. In other words, we offer a ponderable alternative to the present-day techniques for instantaneous determination of Hg(II) contents, which is very simple and needs neither cumbersome sample preparation nor complicated instrumentation.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…This value was significantly lower than the maximum allowable mercury concentration (10.0 nM) by USEPA in drinking water [17]. The proposed method [30,[37][38][39][40][41]43], electrochemical sensor [42], spectrophotometric [44,48], colorimetry [45,49], chemiluminescence [46], single-crystal X-ray diffraction [47], electrochemiluminescence biosensor [50], X-ray fluorescence (XRF) [51], differential pulse voltammetry [36,52], ICP-OES [21], electrochemical [50] and X-ray photoelectron spectroscopy (XPS) [53], in terms of LOD and LOQ (Table 4).…”
Section: Respectivelymentioning
confidence: 69%
“…Recently, several molecular probe-based sensors using organic chromophores, quantum dots (QDs), small fluorescent organic molecules, proteins, antibodies and conjugated polymers coupled with several spectrometric and electrochemical techniques are reported for mercury(II) determination [36][37][38][39][40][41][42][43][44][45][46][47][48][49][50][51][52][53]. Some of these methods suffere from solubility issues, low stability, lower sensitivity and selectivity, complicated synthesis procedures and environmentally unfriendliness to monitor mercury(II) in biological and environmental samples.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Mercury is a heavy metal that frequently contaminates the environment. Natural environmental mercury is mainly the result of volcanic activity; however, human activities also contribute to the increasing levels of mercury through metal mining, forest fires, solid-waste incineration, and the combustion of fossil fuels (coal, oil, and gas) [1][2]. The divalent mercury ion (Hg 2+ ) is the most common form of mercury and is stable when dissolved in water [3]; this mercury species binds easily to amino acids in the body.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%