Electrochemical Detection of Endosulfan Using an AONP-PANI-SWCNT Modified Glassy Carbon Electrode

Abstract

This report narrates the successful application of a fabricated novel sensor for the trace detection of endosulfan (EDS). The sensor was made by modifying a glassy-carbon electrode (GCE) with polyaniline (PANI), chemically synthesized antimony oxide nanoparticles (AONPs), acid-functionalized, single-walled carbon nanotubes (fSWCNTs), and finally, the AONP-PANI-SWCNT nanocomposite. The electrochemical properties of the modified electrodes regarding endosulfan detection were investigated via cyclic voltammetry (CV) and square-wave voltammetry. The current response of the electrodes to EDS followed the trend GCE-AONP-PANI-SWCNT (−510 µA) > GCE-PANI (−59 µA) > GCE-AONPs (−11.4 µA) > GCE (−5.52 µA) > GCE-fSWCNTs (−0.168 µA). The obtained results indicated that the current response obtained at the AONP-PANI-SWCNT/GCE was higher with relatively low overpotential compared to those from the other electrodes investigated. This demonstrated the superiority of the AONP-PANI-SWCNT-modified GCE. The AONP-PANI-SWCNT/GCE demonstrated good electrocatalytic activities for the electrochemical reduction of EDS. The results obtained in this study are comparable with those in other reports. The sensitivity, limit of detection (LoD), and limit of quantification (LoQ) of AONP-PANI-SWCNT/GCE towards EDS was estimated to be 0.0623 µA/µM, 6.8 µM, and 20.6 µM, respectively. Selectivity, as well as the practical application of the fabricated sensor, were explored, and the results indicated that the EDS-reduction current was reduced by only 2.0% when interfering species were present, whilst average recoveries of EDS in real samples were above 97%.

Electrocatalysis of Endosulfan Based on Fe3O4: An Experimental and Computational Approach

“…The linear concentration range, detection limit, and sensitivity of EDS at GCE/f-MWCNT/Fe 3 O 4 were determined using DPV. Figure shows a decrease in oxidation peak currents with increasing EDS concentrations ranging from 0.1 to 20 μM with a sensitivity of 0.064 μA/μM, similar to those reported in the literature . The limit of detection (LoD) and quantification (LoQ) for EDS were 3.3 and 11 μM based on and , respectively, where s is the standard deviation of the intercept of the y -coordinates from the line of the best fit of the calibration plot (Figure b) and m is the slope of the same line.…”

“…In addition to birth defects, respiratory failure, biochemical instability, kidney, hepatic, and cardiac toxicities with symptoms of nausea, vomiting, tremors, and hypotension. EDS can also cause birth defects and respiratory failure. ,,, Moreover, the discharge of EDS into fresh and groundwater as spray drifts and runoffs and its presence in food pose concerns since it can pose risks to humans and other organisms if inhaled, absorbed, and ingested from diverse sources of food chains. , Monitoring endosulfan residues in water, soil, and food is crucial for maintaining public health and the health of ecosystems. Various analytical techniques have been used for EDS detection, including chromatography, − immunosensors, and electrochemical sensors. ,,,, Compared to chromatographic methods, immunosensors are uneconomical with poor sensitivity and specificity as a result of the cost and denaturation of enzymes and require expertise, large samples, and a long time to perform .…”

“…EDS can also cause birth defects and respiratory failure. 1,2,8,9 Moreover, the discharge of EDS into fresh and groundwater as spray drifts and runoffs and its presence in food pose concerns since it can pose risks to humans and other organisms if inhaled, absorbed, and ingested from diverse sources of food chains. 1,2 Monitoring endosulfan residues in water, soil, and food is crucial for maintaining public health and the health of ecosystems.…”

“…Various analytical techniques have been used for EDS detection, including chromatography, 10−14 immunosensors, 3 and electrochemical sensors. 1,2,8,15,16 Compared to chromatographic methods, immunosensors are uneconomical with poor sensitivity and specificity as a result of the cost and denaturation of enzymes and require expertise, large samples, and a long time to perform. 1 Electrochemical sensors, on the other hand, offer a method that is accessible, fast, easy to use, low cost, sensitive, and reproducible to overcome these limitations.…”

Electrochemical Detection of Ascorbic Acid in Oranges at MWCNT-AONP Nanocomposite Fabricated Electrode

“…Their electrode displayed a linear range and LOD of 52-270 nM for metaproterenol detection and 6.6 nM. Similarly, Masibi et al [53,54] used MWCNT-AONP-PANI@GCE to detect endosulfan, and lindane, respectively, from water samples via the SWV method.…”