引用本文:
宋光捷, 武调弟, 刘福鑫, 张彬雁, 刘秀辉. 壳聚糖/氮掺杂还原氧化石墨烯修饰电极对黄嘌呤的检测及尿酸抑制的研究[J]. 化学学报,
2020, 78(1): 82-88.
doi:
10.6023/A19080313 Citation:
Song Guangjie, Wu Tiaodi, Liu Fuxin, Zhang Binyan, Liu Xiuhui. Electrochemical Detection of Xanthine and Study for the Inhibition of Uric Acid Based on Chitosan/Nitrogen Doped Reduced Graphene Oxide Modified Electrode[J]. Acta Chimica Sinica,
2020, 78(1): 82-88.
doi:
10.6023/A19080313
Electrochemical Detection of Xanthine and Study for the Inhibition of Uric Acid Based on Chitosan/Nitrogen Doped Reduced Graphene Oxide Modified Electrode
College of Chemistry and Chemical Engineering, Northwest Normal University, Key Laboratory of Bioelectrochemistry & Environmental Analysis of Gansu Province, Lanzhou 730070
Received Date:
26 August 2019 Available Online:
15 January 2020
Fund Project:
Project supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (No. 21565021)
Abstract:
Nitrogen doped reduced graphene oxide (N-RGO) was successfully prepared by carbon thermal reduction method, which annealed graphene oxide (GO) and cyanamide at 900℃. The 0.2% acetic acid solution with chitosan (CS) was used as the dispersant of N-RGO to improve the dispersivity, electronic mass transfer rate, and biocompatibility of N-RGO. The morphology, structure and electrochemical properties of N-RGO and CS/N-RGO were investigated by scanning electron microscopy (SEM), fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR), and cyclic voltammetry (CV). FT-IR spectrum indicated graphene oxide (GO) was reduced and N-RGO was successfully prepared. The electrochemical experiments demonstrated that CS/N-RGO possesses large electrochemical effective area, strong adsorptive ability and fast electronic mass transfer rate. Then a novel electrochemical sensor for detection of xanthine was fabricated based on CS/N-RGO modified glassy carbon electrode (CS/N-RGO/GCE). It exhibited good electrochemical response toward the oxidation of xanthine with a linear range covering 2.99×10-8~1.07×10-4 mol/L, and the corresponding detection limit (LOD) of 9.96×10-9 mol/L (S/N=3). In addition, the electrochemical behaviors of xanthine on CS/N-RGO/GCE were explored using cyclic voltammetry (CV), which included the pH effect on the oxidation of xanthine and the effect of scan rate on the peak current and peak potential of xanthine. Usually, uric acid in the body is generated by xanthine under the catalysis of xanthine oxidase (XOR), and high concentration of uric acid can cause gout. The inhibition for the formation of uric acid is the most direct method for the treatment of gout. Hence, the inhibition for the formation of uric acid by febuxostat and allopurinol was researched by electrochemical method, manifesting febuxostat and allopurinol can inhibit the activity of xanthine oxidase, which did not make xanthine generating uric acid. Thus, this work is very meaningful in the field of the diagnosis and treatment of gout.
Figure 1.
SEM images of (A) N-RGO and (B) CS/N-RGO; (C) FTIR spectra of (a) GO and (b) N-RGO; (D) CVs of different electrodes in the solution of 5.0 mmol/L [Fe(CN)6]3-/4- and 0.1 mol/L KCl: (a) bare GCE, (b) N-RGO/GCE and (c) CS/N-RGO/GCE, at 50 mV•s-1
Figure 2.
(A) CV of different electrodes with 1.0 mmol/L xanthine in the solution of 0.2 mol/L PBS (pH 7.0): (a) bare GCE, (b) N-RGO/GCE and (c) CS/N-RGO/GCE, at 100 mV•s-1. (B) CVs of CS/N-RGO/GCE in the solution of 0.2 mol/L PBS at different pH (4~8) containing 1.0 mmol/L xanthine, at 100 mV•s-1; insert is the linear relationship of Epa vs. pH. (C) CVs of CS/N-RGO/GCE in the solution of 0.2 mol/L (pH 7.0) PBS containing 1.0 mmol/L xanthine with different scan rates (25~250 mV•s-1); insert is the linear relationship of Ipa vs. ν
Figure 3.
(A) LSVs of CS/N-RGO/GCE with successive addition xanthine to the solution of 0.2 mol/L PBS (pH 7.0), at 100 mV•s-1; (B) The calibration curve of low concentration (from 2.99×10-8 to 7.11×10-6 mol/L) for Ipa vs. [xanthine]. (C) The calibration curve of high concentration (from 7.11×10-6 to 1.07×10-4 mol/L) for Ipa vs. [xanthine]
Wang, Z. H.; Yu, J. B.; Gui, R. J.; Jin, H.; Xia, Y. Z. Biosens. Bioelectron.2016, 79, 136.
[15]
Li, S. M.; Yang, S. Y.; Wang, Y. S.; Lien, C. H.; Tien, H. W.; Hsiao, S. T.; Liao, W. H.; Tsai, H. P.; Chang, C. L.; Ma, C. C.; Hu, C. C. Carbon2013, 59, 418.
[16]
Guo, H. L.; Su, P.; Kang, X. F.; Ning, S. K. J. Mater. Chem. A2013, 1, 2248.
[17]
Usachov, D.; Vilkov, O.; Gruneis, A.; Haberer, D.; Fedorov, A.; Adamchuk, V. K.; Preobrajenski, A. B.; Dudin, P.; Barinov, A.; Oehzelt, M.; Laubschat, C.; Vyalikh, D. V. Nano Lett.2011, 11, 5401.
[18]
Zhang, Y.; Zhu, J. Y.; Ren, H. B.; Bi, Y. T.; Zhang, L. Chin. J. Chem.2017, 35, 1069.
[19]
Kong, D. Q.; Bi, S.; Wang, Z. H.; Xia, J. F.; Zimney, E. J.; Zhang, F. F. Anal. Chem.2016, 88, 10667.
[20]
Kumar, M. N.; Muzzarelli, R. A.; Muzzarelli, C.; Sashiwa, H.; Domb, A. J. Chem. Rev.2004, 104, 6017.
[21]
Yang, X. M.; Tu, Y. F.; Li, L.; Shang, S. M.; Tao, X. M. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter.2010, 2, 1707.
[22]
Liu, Y. G.; Li, W. M.; Wei, C. B.; Lv, L. L. Chin. J. Chem.2012, 30, 1601.
[23]
Sharma, N.; Sharma, V.; Jain, Y.; Kumari, M.; Gupta, R.; Sharma, S. K.; Sachdev, K. Macromol. Symp.2017, 376, 1700006.
[24]
Guo, H. L.; Wang, X. F.; Qian, Q. Y.; Wang, F. B.; Xia, X. H. ACS Nano2009, 3, 2653.
[25]
Gao, H. C.; Xiao, F.; Ching, C. B.; Duan, H. W. ACS Appl. Mater. Inter.2011, 3, 3049.
[26]
Wu, P.; Qian, Y. D.; Du, P.; Zhang, H.; Cai, C. X. J. Mater. Chem.2012, 22, 6402.
[27]
Li, S. J.; He, J. Z.; Zhang, M. J.; Zhang, Q. R.; Lv, X. L. Electrochim. Acta2013, 102, 58.
[28]
Laviron, E. Electroanal. Chem. Inter. Electrochem.1974, 52, 355.
[29]
Li, Y. C.; Feng, S. Q.; Li, S. X.; Zhang, Y. Y.; Zhong, Y. M. Sens. Actuators, B2014, 190, 999.
[30]
Li, J. H.; Kuang, D. Z.; Feng, Y. L.; Zhang, F. X.; Xu, Z. F.; Liu, M. Q.; Wang, D. P. Biosens. Bioelectron.2013, 42, 198.
[31]
Wen, Y. P.; Chang, J.; Xu, L. J.; Liao, X. N.; Bai, L.; Lan, Y. D.; Li, M. F. J. Electroanal. Chem.2017, 805, 159.
[32]
Steel, A. B.; Herne, T. M.; Tarlov, M. J. Anal. Chem.1998, 70, 4670.
[33]
Dincer, H. E.; Dincer, A. P.; Levinson, D. J. Clev. Clin. J. Med.2002, 69, 594.
[34]
Mandell, B. F. Clev. Clin. J. Med.2002, 69, 583.
[35]
Maiuolo, J.; Oppedisano, F.; Gratteri, S.; Muscoli, C.; Mollace, V. Int. J. Cardiol.2016, 213, 8.
[36]
Wilson, L.; Saseen, J. J. Pharmacotherapy2016, 36, 906.
[37]
Okamoto, K.; Eger, B. T.; Nishino, T.; Kondo, S.; Pai, E. F.; Nishino, T. J. Biol. Chem.2003, 278, 48.
[38]
Takano, Y.; Hase, K.; Horiuchi, H. Life Sci.2005, 76, 35.
[39]
Schumacher, H. R. Expert Opin. Invest. Drugs2005, 14, 893.
Figure 1
SEM images of (A) N-RGO and (B) CS/N-RGO; (C) FTIR spectra of (a) GO and (b) N-RGO; (D) CVs of different electrodes in the solution of 5.0 mmol/L [Fe(CN)6]3-/4- and 0.1 mol/L KCl: (a) bare GCE, (b) N-RGO/GCE and (c) CS/N-RGO/GCE, at 50 mV•s-1
Figure 2
(A) CV of different electrodes with 1.0 mmol/L xanthine in the solution of 0.2 mol/L PBS (pH 7.0): (a) bare GCE, (b) N-RGO/GCE and (c) CS/N-RGO/GCE, at 100 mV•s-1. (B) CVs of CS/N-RGO/GCE in the solution of 0.2 mol/L PBS at different pH (4~8) containing 1.0 mmol/L xanthine, at 100 mV•s-1; insert is the linear relationship of Epa vs. pH. (C) CVs of CS/N-RGO/GCE in the solution of 0.2 mol/L (pH 7.0) PBS containing 1.0 mmol/L xanthine with different scan rates (25~250 mV•s-1); insert is the linear relationship of Ipa vs. ν
Figure 3
(A) LSVs of CS/N-RGO/GCE with successive addition xanthine to the solution of 0.2 mol/L PBS (pH 7.0), at 100 mV•s-1; (B) The calibration curve of low concentration (from 2.99×10-8 to 7.11×10-6 mol/L) for Ipa vs. [xanthine]. (C) The calibration curve of high concentration (from 7.11×10-6 to 1.07×10-4 mol/L) for Ipa vs. [xanthine]
下载:
下载:
