Measurement evidence
A mixed-organic ligands Ru(bpy)32+@Zn mMOFs-NH2 nanoreactors integrated co-reaction accelerator and morphologic regulator for the electrochemiluminescence detection of ATP · Xie Y., Wang X., Yan Z. et al. · Talanta · 2025 · 127196
Reported values remain attached to the sample, method, conditions, extraction quality and source location that produced them.
Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP/ATP/AP/AuNPs/GCE · Electrode
50 mM K2S2O8; 100 nM ATP; three parallel measurements
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optimal AP concentrationMarked as a best value within this paper | 2.0 uM | — | — | Text Exact Reported | 6 · 3.4 · Fig. S2 |
Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP/ATP/AP/AuNPs/GCE · Electrode
ATP concentrations 5, 10, 20, 50, 100, 500, 1000 nM; 50 mM K2S2O8
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Calibration R2 | R2 = 0.993 | — | — | Text Exact Reported | 7 · 3.5 · Fig. 5B |
| ATP linear calibration range | 5 nM to 1000 nM | — | — | Text Exact Reported | 7 · 3.5 · Fig. 5B |
| Calibration slope | I = 3984.2 lgC + 2645.3 | — | — | Text Exact Reported | 7 · 3.5 · Fig. 5B |
| ATP detection limitMarked as a best value within this paper | 1.18 nM | 1.18 nM | — | Text Exact Reported | 7 · 3.5 · Fig. 5B |
Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP/ATP/AP/AuNPs/GCE · Electrode
50 mM K2S2O8; 100 nM ATP; three parallel measurements
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Optimal ATP incubation timeMarked as a best value within this paper | 90 min | — | — | Text Exact Reported | 7 · 3.4 · Fig. S3 |
| Optimal Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP incubation timeMarked as a best value within this paper | 90 min | — | — | Text Exact Reported | 7 · 3.4 · Fig. S4 |
Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP/ATP/AP/AuNPs/GCE · Electrode
Serum samples from tumour patients; ELISA used as independent validation
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Patient serum sample 1 ATP by ECL | ECL 365.9 +/- 5.6 nM; ELISA 374.9 +/- 11.3 nM; relative error -2.4% | — | +/- 5.6 nM | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 2 |
| Patient serum sample 2 ATP by ECL | ECL 377.3 +/- 5.8 nM; ELISA 373.3 +/- 18.8 nM; relative error 1.1% | — | +/- 5.8 nM | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 2 |
| Patient serum sample 3 ATP by ECL | ECL 363.1 +/- 8.4 nM; ELISA 368.2 +/- 1.3 nM; relative error -1.4% | — | +/- 8.4 nM | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 2 |
| ECL vs ELISA relative error range | -2.4 % to 1.1 % | — | — | Text Range | 7 · 3.6 · Table 2 |
Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP/ATP/AP/AuNPs/GCE · Electrode
1000 nM Glu, 1000 nM L-Cys, 1000 nM GSH, 100 nM ATP and mixture
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| ATP selectivity ECL responseMarked as a best value within this paper | approximately 10.5k a.u. for 100 nM ATP from Fig. 5C | — | visual estimate from bar chart | Visual Estimate Approximate | 6 · 3.5 · Fig. 5C |
| Interferent selectivity ECL response | Glu, GSH and L-Cys bars approximately 2.8k-3.3k a.u.; mixture approximately 9.8k a.u. | — | visual estimates from bar chart | Visual Estimate Approximate | 6 · 3.5 · Fig. 5C |
Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP/ATP/AP/AuNPs/GCE · Electrode
Non-pathologic human serum diluted 100-fold with PBS and spiked with ATP
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Serum recovery range | 90.1 % to 107 % | — | — | Text Range | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum recovery RSD range | 0.1 % to 4.1 % | — | — | Text Range | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 1 spiked 100 nM found ATP | spiked 100.0 nM; found 104.7 nM; RSD 4.1%; recovery 105% | — | RSD 4.1% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 1 spiked 20 nM found ATP | spiked 20.00 nM; found 19.50 nM; RSD 0.1%; recovery 97.5% | — | RSD 0.1% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 1 spiked 50 nM found ATP | spiked 50.00 nM; found 47.86 nM; RSD 4.1%; recovery 95.7% | — | RSD 4.1% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 2 spiked 100 nM found ATP | spiked 100.0 nM; found 106.9 nM; RSD 2.4%; recovery 107% | — | RSD 2.4% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 2 spiked 20 nM found ATP | spiked 20.00 nM; found 19.97 nM; RSD 1.6%; recovery 99.9% | — | RSD 1.6% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 2 spiked 50 nM found ATP | spiked 50.00 nM; found 45.09 nM; RSD 3.3%; recovery 90.2% | — | RSD 3.3% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 3 spiked 100 nM found ATP | spiked 100.0 nM; found 90.10 nM; RSD 3.9%; recovery 90.1% | — | RSD 3.9% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 3 spiked 20 nM found ATP | spiked 20.00 nM; found 20.30 nM; RSD 1.1%; recovery 102% | — | RSD 1.1% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
| Serum sample 3 spiked 50 nM found ATP | spiked 50.00 nM; found 45.30 nM; RSD 2.2%; recovery 90.6% | — | RSD 2.2% | Table Exact Reported | 7 · 3.6 · Table 1 |
Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP/ATP/AP/AuNPs/GCE · Electrode
10 consecutive scanning cycles with 100 nM ATP
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Stability cycles | 10 consecutive scanning cycles | — | — | Text Exact Reported | 7 · 3.5 · Fig. 5D |
| Stability RSDMarked as a best value within this paper | RSD of 3.6 % | — | — | Text Exact Reported | 7 · 3.5 · Fig. 5D |
Ru(bpy)3(2+)@Zn mMOFs-NH2-CP/ATP/AP/AuNPs/GCE · Electrode
Table S1 compares linear range and LOD of fluorescence, bioluminescence, aptamer-based, chemiluminescence and ECL methods; includes this work.
| Property | Reported value | Normalised value | Uncertainty | Origin and quality | Source |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Aptamer-based comparison LOD [4] | linear range 1.5e-8 to 4e-3 M; LOD 1.5e-8 M | 1.5e-8 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| Aptamer-based comparison LOD [5] | linear range 0 to 2e-6 M; LOD 2.5e-8 M | 2.5e-8 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| Bioluminescence comparison LOD [3] | linear range 1.5e-8 to 1e-6 M; LOD 8e-9 M | 8e-9 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| Chemiluminescence comparison LOD [6] | linear range 2e-6 to 2e-3 M; LOD 8.43e-8 M | 8.43e-8 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| Chemiluminescence comparison LOD [7] | linear range 5e-5 to 2.31e-4 M; LOD 1.85e-7 M | 1.85e-7 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| ECL comparison LOD [8] | linear range 8e-9 to 2e-6 M; LOD 7.6e-9 M | 7.6e-9 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| ECL comparison LOD [9] | linear range 1e-8 to 1e-4 M; LOD 1.9e-9 M | 1.9e-9 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| ECL comparison LOD [10]Marked as a best value within this paper | linear range 5e-9 to 2.5e-7 M; LOD 1.4e-9 M | 1.4e-9 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| Fluorescence comparison LOD [1] | linear range 2e-7 to 1e-5 M; LOD 3.5e-8 M | 3.5e-8 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| Fluorescence comparison LOD [2] | linear range 2e-7 to 5e-5 M; LOD 9.3e-8 M | 9.3e-8 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |
| This work LOD in SI comparison tableMarked as a best value within this paper | linear range 5e-9 to 1e-6 M; LOD 1.18e-9 M | 1.18e-9 M | — | SI Table Exact Reported | S10 · Table S1 · Table S1 |