Electrochemistry Application — Aptasensor based on gold nanostructure-decorated 2D Cu metal–organic framework nanosheets for highly sensitive and specific electrochemical lipopolysaccharide detection

6 measurement groups · 29 results

Reported values remain attached to the sample, method, conditions, extraction quality and source location that produced them.

CV scan-rate Randles-Sevcik analysis

Voltammetry

Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Electrode

CV at scan rates from 10 to 100 mV/s in ferri/ferrocyanide; active surface areas calculated using Randles-Sevcik equation.

Geometry: three-electrode cell
Context: Au/GCE and Au/MOF/GCE comparison
Measurement source: 6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S10; Equation S1

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Au/Cu-TCPP/GCE electroactive surface area	0.1257 cm2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S10
Au/Cu-THQ/GCE electroactive surface areaMarked as a best value within this paper	0.1551 cm2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S10
Au/GCE electroactive surface area	0.1008 cm2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S10
Bare GCE electroactive surface area	0.0871 cm2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S10

CV

Voltammetry

Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Electrode

CV in ferri/ferrocyanide electrolyte from -0.2 to 0.6 V at 0.1 V/s under optimal electrode fabrication conditions.

Geometry: three-electrode cell
Context: GCE, Au/GCE, Au/Cu-TCPP/GCE and Au/Cu-THQ/GCE comparison
Measurement source: 7 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure 3A,B

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
CV peak current increase for Au/Cu-TCPP/GCE versus bare GCE	48%	—	—	Text Rounded Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure 3B
CV peak current increase for Au/Cu-THQ/GCE versus bare GCEMarked as a best value within this paper	77%	—	—	Text Rounded Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure 3B
CV peak current increase for Au/GCE versus bare GCE	25%	—	—	Text Rounded Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure 3B
Au/Cu-THQ/GCE CV peak currentMarked as a best value within this paper	about 235 uA from bar chart	—	visual estimate from plotted mean bar	Figure Axis Approximate	7 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure 3B

DPV and EIS

Impedance spectroscopy Voltammetry

Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Electrode

DPV and EIS used to verify aptamer immobilisation and LPS response on Au/Cu-THQ/GCE.

Geometry: three-electrode cell
Context: final aptasensor compared with Au/Cu-THQ/GCE and LPS-treated state
Measurement source: 7 · Preparation and electrochemical characterization of Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Figure 3C,D

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Aptamer optimisation current difference at 0.25 uMMarked as a best value within this paper	about 68 uA	—	—	Figure Axis Approximate	16 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S11B
Aptamer optimisation current difference at 0.50 uM	about 22 uA	—	—	Figure Axis Approximate	16 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S11B
Optimal LPS aptamer concentrationMarked as a best value within this paper	0.25 uM	—	—	Text Exact Reported	7 · Preparation and electrochemical characterization of Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Figure S11
Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE DPV peak current with 0.1 pg/mL LPS	about 175 uA from Figure 3C	—	visual estimate	Figure Axis Approximate	7 · Preparation and electrochemical characterization of Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Figure 3C
Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE DPV peak current after aptamer	about 260 uA from Figure 3C	—	visual estimate	Figure Axis Approximate	7 · Preparation and electrochemical characterization of Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Figure 3C
Au/Cu-THQ/GCE DPV peak current before aptamer	about 440 uA from Figure 3C	—	visual estimate	Figure Axis Approximate	7 · Preparation and electrochemical characterization of Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Figure 3C
DPV peak current after 40 min LPS incubationMarked as a best value within this paper	about 171 uA	—	—	Figure Axis Approximate	17 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S12
Optimal LPS incubation timeMarked as a best value within this paper	40 min	—	—	Text Exact Reported	7 · Preparation and electrochemical characterization of Apt/Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Figure S12
Rct order after Au depositionMarked as a best value within this paper	Au/Cu-THQ/GCE < Au/Cu-TCPP/GCE < Au/GCE < GCE	—	—	Text Qualitative	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S3A,B

EIS

Impedance spectroscopy

Cu-THQ/GCE · Electrode

EIS in 5 mM K3[Fe(CN)6]/K4[Fe(CN)6] and KCl electrolyte; amplitude 5 mV, bias 0.224 V, frequency 0.1-10 kHz.

Geometry: three-electrode cell; modified GCE working electrode, SCE reference, Pt counter
Context: MOF-only GCE controls before Au deposition
Measurement source: 3 · Electrochemical measurements · Figure S3

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Cu-TCPP/GCE charge-transfer resistance	approximately 1330 ohm	—	—	Text Approximate	5 · Characterization of the synthesized 2D Cu-MOF nanosheets · Figure S3
Cu-THQ/GCE charge-transfer resistanceMarked as a best value within this paper	725 ohm	—	—	Text Rounded Reported	5 · Characterization of the synthesized 2D Cu-MOF nanosheets · Figure S3

CV optimisation of MOF loading and Au electrodeposition time

Voltammetry

Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Electrode

CV current peaks compared across Cu-THQ or Cu-TCPP nanosheet volumes (5, 8, 10, 15 uL) and HAuCl4 electrodeposition times (30-270 s).

Geometry: modified GCE electrodes in ferri/ferrocyanide electrolyte
Context: Au/MOF/GCE fabrication optimisation
Measurement source: 8-9 · Supplementary Materials · Figures S4-S5

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Optimised Au deposition time for Cu-TCPP/GCE	210 s	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S5
Optimised Cu-TCPP nanosheet volume	10 uL at 1 mg/mL	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S5
Optimised Au deposition time for Cu-THQ/GCEMarked as a best value within this paper	210 s	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S4
Optimised Cu-THQ nanosheet volumeMarked as a best value within this paper	8 uL at 1 mg/mL	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical characterization of Au/2D-MOF/GCE · Figure S4

CV scan-rate analysis

Voltammetry

Au/Cu-THQ/GCE · Electrode

CV plots for Au/GCE, Au/Cu-TCPP/GCE and Au/Cu-THQ/GCE in 5.0 mM K3Fe(CN)6/K4Fe(CN)6 plus 0.1 M KCl at 10-100 mV/s; linear fits of peak current versus scan rate are labelled in Figure S10.

Geometry: three-electrode cell with modified GCE working electrode
Context: Au/GCE and Au/MOF/GCE comparison
Measurement source: 14 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S10

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Au/Cu-TCPP/GCE scan-rate anodic fit slope	y = -1.55x - 56.3, R2 = 0.980	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	14 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S10D
Au/Cu-TCPP/GCE scan-rate cathodic fit slope	y = 1.50x + 56.2, R2 = 0.981	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	14 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S10D
Au/Cu-THQ/GCE scan-rate anodic fit slopeMarked as a best value within this paper	y = -2.023x - 53.174, R2 = 0.990	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	14 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S10F
Au/Cu-THQ/GCE scan-rate cathodic fit slopeMarked as a best value within this paper	y = 2.163x + 50.719, R2 = 0.992	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	14 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S10F
Au/GCE scan-rate anodic fit slope	y = -1.08x - 46.5, R2 = 0.995	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	14 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S10B
Au/GCE scan-rate cathodic fit slope	y = 1.13x + 57.8, R2 = 0.991	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	14 · Supplementary Materials · Figure S10B