Fast and reliable analyses of sulphite in fruit juices using a supramolecular amperometric detector encompassing in flow gas diffusion unit

Highly Sensitive Amperometric Glucose Sensors Based on Nanostructured α‐Ni(OH)2 Electrodes

“…This indicates that even a small amount of this species is enough to ensure the consumption of all analyte molecules at the electrode surface. For example, this behavior is observed when tetraruthenated porphyrins [28][29][30][31][32][33] are employed as active electrode materials of amperometric sensors of reducing species such as sulfite and ascorbic acid among others. However, in the present case, the FIA current increased until 0.4 V ( Figure 6A) suggesting that all electrocatalytic sites are contributing to promote the oxidation of glucose at the electrode surface.…”

Carbon nanotubes for voltammetric determination of sulphite in some beverages

“…On each new working day, a new analytical curve was constructed. In order to ensure reliable results, it is essential to record the voltammetric scans immediately after sample addition, because components in the sample accelerate sulphite elimination from the electrochemical cell, as previously reported (Martins et al, 2011).…”

“…Usually, these beverages are concomitantly consumed and their sulphite concentrations are relatively high, ranging from 20 to 2000 ppm (Ruiz-Capillas & Jiménez-Colmenero, 2009). Regular consumption of commercial beverages can therefore be enough to exceed the sulphite ADI, especially for children (Martins et al, 2011).…”

“…The main attractive features of these techniques include simplicity, cheap instruments, high sensitivity, and compatibility with suspensions or coloured samples, which minimizes sample pretreatment requirements. Most of the electrochemical methods proposed for sulphite determination are based on its electrochemical oxidation (Corbo & Bertotti, 2002;Dadamos & Teixeira, 2009;Dilgin, Kızılkaya, Ertek, Eren, & Dilgin, 2012;Isaac et al, 2006;Martins et al, 2011;Shankaran, Iimura, & Kato, 2004;Siroueinejad, Abbaspour, & Shamsipur, 2009;Toniolo, Pizzariello, Susmel, Dossi, & Bontempelli, 2010;Zhou, Yang, & Sun, 2008). The limits of detection (LODs) achieved using these methods are in the range of 0.3-200 lmol L À1 .…”

“…The main interfering species present in beverage and food samples are glucose, sucrose, fructose, and ascorbate, and polyphenolic compounds present in red wine and red fruit juice samples (Isaac et al, 2006). The main approaches used to overcome these limitations are the separation of SO 2 from the sample using gas-diffusing membranes (silicone or polytetrafluoroethylene) before detection (Chinvongamorn, Pinwattana, Praphairaksit, Imato, & Chailapakul, 2008;Corbo & Bertotti, 2002;Lowinsohn, Alipázaga, Coichev, & Bertotti, 2004;Martins et al, 2011); the use of electrochemical biosensors (Dinçkaya, Sezginturk, Akyilmaz, & Eertas, 2007;Rawal, Chawla, & Pundir, 2012;Sartori, Vicentini, & Fatibello-Filho, 2011;Sezginturk & Dinçkaya, 2005;Zhao, Hibbert, & Gooding, 2006); and the use of electrodes chemically modified with metal nanoparticles (Molinero-Abad, AlonsoLomillo, Domínguez-Renedo, & Arcos-Martínez, 2013;, carbon nanotubes (Ensafi & Karimi-Maleh, 2010;Sartori & Fatibello-Filho, 2012;Sartori, Takeda, & Fatibello-Filho, 2011;Sartori, Vicentini, et al, 2011;Zhou et al 2008), porphyrins (Agboola & Nyokong, 2007;Lucero et al, 2012), metal hexacyanoferrates (García, Casero, Lorenzo, & Pariente, 2005;Majidi, Asadpour-Zeynali, Shahmoradi, & Shivaeefar, 2010;Siroueinejad et al, 2009), and other metal complexes (Salimi, Pourbeyram, & Amini, 2002).…”