» Articles » PMID: 33585404

A Comparison of Commercially Available Screen-Printed Electrodes for Electrogenerated Chemiluminescence Applications

Overview
Journal Front Chem
Specialty Chemistry
Date 2021 Feb 15
PMID 33585404
Citations 2
Authors
Affiliations
Soon will be listed here.
Abstract

We examined a series of commercially available screen-printed electrodes (SPEs) for their suitability for electrochemical and electrogenerated chemiluminescence (ECL) detection systems. Using cyclic voltammetry with both a homogeneous solution-based and a heterogeneous bead-based ECL assay format, the most intense ECL signals were observed from unmodified carbon-based SPEs. Three commercially available varieties were tested, with Zensor outperforming DropSens and Kanichi in terms of sensitivity. The incorporation of nanomaterials in the electrode did not significantly enhance the ECL intensity under the conditions used in this evaluation (such as gold nanoparticles 19%, carbon nanotubes 45%, carbon nanofibers 21%, graphene 48%, and ordered mesoporous carbon 21% compared to the ECL intensity of unmodified Zensor carbon electrode). Platinum and gold SPEs exhibited poor relative ECL intensities (16% and 10%) when compared to carbonaceous materials, due to their high rates of surface oxide formation and inefficient oxidation of tri--propylamine (TPrA). However, the ECL signal at platinum electrodes can be increased ∼3-fold with the addition of a surfactant, which enhanced TPrA oxidation due to increasing the hydrophobicity of the electrode surface. Our results also demonstrate that each SPE should only be used once, as we observed a significant change in ECL intensity over repeated CV scans and SPEs cannot be mechanically polished to refresh the electrode surface.

Citing Articles

Towards a Point-of-Care (POC) Diagnostic Platform for the Multiplex Electrochemiluminescent (ECL) Sensing of Mild Traumatic Brain Injury (mTBI) Biomarkers.

Jovic M, Prim D, Saini E, Pfeifer M Biosensors (Basel). 2022; 12(3).

PMID: 35323442 PMC: 8946848. DOI: 10.3390/bios12030172.


Emission from the working and counter electrodes under co-reactant electrochemiluminescence conditions.

Adamson N, Theakstone A, Soulsby L, Doeven E, Kerr E, Hogan C Chem Sci. 2021; 12(28):9770-9777.

PMID: 34349950 PMC: 8293983. DOI: 10.1039/d1sc01236c.

References
1.
Guo Z, Sha Y, Hu Y, Wang S . In-electrode vs. on-electrode: ultrasensitive Faraday cage-type electrochemiluminescence immunoassay. Chem Commun (Camb). 2016; 52(25):4621-4. DOI: 10.1039/c6cc00787b. View

2.
Huang J, Liu Y, Hou H, You T . Simultaneous electrochemical determination of dopamine, uric acid and ascorbic acid using palladium nanoparticle-loaded carbon nanofibers modified electrode. Biosens Bioelectron. 2008; 24(4):632-7. DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2008.06.011. View

3.
Rusling J . Nanomaterials-based electrochemical immunosensors for proteins. Chem Rec. 2012; 12(1):164-76. PMC: 3373167. DOI: 10.1002/tcr.201100034. View

4.
Zhang H, Wang Z, Zhang Q, Wang F, Liu Y . TiC MXenes nanosheets catalyzed highly efficient electrogenerated chemiluminescence biosensor for the detection of exosomes. Biosens Bioelectron. 2018; 124-125:184-190. DOI: 10.1016/j.bios.2018.10.016. View

5.
Workman S, Richter M . The effects of nonionic surfactants on the tris(2,2'-bipyridyl)ruthenium(II)--tripropylamine electrochemiluminescence system. Anal Chem. 2000; 72(22):5556-61. DOI: 10.1021/ac000800s. View