2019
DOI: 10.1021/acs.analchem.9b01724
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Metal Replacement Causing Interference in Stripping Analysis of Multiple Heavy Metal Analytes: Kinetic Study on Cd(II) and Cu(II) Electroanalysis via Experiment and Simulation

Abstract: Although it has been recognized that the interference between heavy metal ions (HMIs) becomes a severe problem for the simultaneous electroanalysis of multiple HMIs, the factor leading to the interference is still difficult to identify, due to the limited understanding of the electroanalytic kinetics. In this work, a kinetic model is built for the electroanalysis of HMIs, and the electroanalytic results are simulated for Cd­(II), Cu­(II), and their mixture as examples for the interference investigation. The mu… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
2
1
1

Citation Types

0
17
0

Year Published

2019
2019
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
8

Relationship

1
7

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 54 publications
(17 citation statements)
references
References 23 publications
0
17
0
Order By: Relevance
“…A slight shift of the stripping peak potential is observed when the concentration of As(III) changes, which is attributed to the interaction between adjacent deposited arsenic atoms. 26 The sensitivity of Co SAC for As(III) was 11.44 μA ppb −1 and the theoretical limit of detection (LOD) was 0.02 ppb (3σ method). For comparison, Co NPs, N−C, and bare SPCE were adopted for the electroanalysis of As(III).…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…A slight shift of the stripping peak potential is observed when the concentration of As(III) changes, which is attributed to the interaction between adjacent deposited arsenic atoms. 26 The sensitivity of Co SAC for As(III) was 11.44 μA ppb −1 and the theoretical limit of detection (LOD) was 0.02 ppb (3σ method). For comparison, Co NPs, N−C, and bare SPCE were adopted for the electroanalysis of As(III).…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 98%
“…The current signals of As­(III) were present at approximately 0.05 V and the current peak increased with As­(III) concentration. A slight shift of the stripping peak potential is observed when the concentration of As­(III) changes, which is attributed to the interaction between adjacent deposited arsenic atoms . The sensitivity of Co SAC for As­(III) was 11.44 μA ppb –1 and the theoretical limit of detection (LOD) was 0.02 ppb (3σ method).…”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Managing these risks requires the construction of multifunctional adsorptive/sensing platforms for the simultaneous assessment of the exposure to and remediation of heavy metals . Various adsorbents have been reported for the efficient removal of heavy metals from water, , and their affinities further benefit the sensitive electroanalysis of heavy metals. , However, the adsorptive selectivity of these adsorbents for contaminant removal and quantified analysis , is yet to be realized. Layered materials have great potential to capture metal ions and show much structural superiority over their bulk counterparts, owing to their open accessible sites. The unique cation exchange capacities, based on the soft Lewis acid–base interactions, , offer an efficient way to separate heavy metals from the coexisting hard ions (such as H­(I), Na­(I), and Ca­(II)).…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…1 Various adsorbents have been reported for the efficient removal of heavy metals from water, 2,3 and their affinities further benefit the sensitive electroanalysis of heavy metals. 4,5 However, the adsorptive selectivity of these adsorbents for contaminant removal 6−9 and quantified analysis 5,10 is yet to be realized. Layered materials have great potential to capture metal ions and show much structural superiority over their bulk counterparts, owing to their open accessible sites.…”
Section: ■ Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…At present, some analytical methods based on portable detectors, e.g., anodic stripping voltammetry (ASV), and colorimetry, can be used to detect trace heavy metals in the field, but they are not inherently suitable for the detection of heavy metals in complex real water samples due to the interference of unknown coexisting metal ions . X-ray fluorescence (XRF) and laser-induced breakdown spectroscopy (LIBS) present elemental characteristics in direct sampling analysis.…”
mentioning
confidence: 99%