Electrochemistry Application — Ruthenium(II) complex-grafted conductive metal-organic frameworks with conductivity- and confinement-enhanced electrochemiluminescence for ultrasensitive biosensing application

5 measurement groups · 20 results

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

Stepwise CV, EIS and ECL characterisation of biosensor fabrication

Impedance spectroscopy Voltammetry

Fc-S1/HT/aptamer/AuNPs/Ru@Ni3(HITP)2/GCE biosensor · Electrode

CV and EIS in 5 mM [Fe(CN)6]3-/4-; ECL in PBS pH 7.0 with 10 uL TPrA for bare GCE, Ru@Ni3(HITP)2/GCE, AuNPs/Ru@Ni3(HITP)2/GCE, aptamer/HT/Fc-S1-modified electrodes, and TB/Exo I-treated biosensor.

Geometry: Stepwise modified GCE electrode
Context: Biosensor fabrication sequence built on Ru@Ni3(HITP)2/GCE.
Measurement source: SI text · S-18 · Fig. S13

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
CV redox peak current trend during fabrication	Peak current increased after Ru@Ni3(HITP)2 and AuNPs modification, decreased after aptamer/HT/Fc-S1, and increased after TB/Exo I incubation.	—	—	Qualitative Qualitative	SI text · S-18 · Fig. S13A
ECL response trend during fabrication	Bare GCE almost no ECL; Ru@Ni3(HITP)2 enhanced ECL; AuNPs slightly enhanced; aptamer/HT/Fc-S1 reduced ECL; TB/Exo I recovered ECL.	—	—	Qualitative Qualitative	SI text · S-18 · Fig. S13C
EIS Ret trend during fabrication	Ret increased after Ru@Ni3(HITP)2, decreased after AuNPs, increased after aptamer/HT/Fc-S1, and decreased after TB/Exo I.	—	—	Qualitative Qualitative	SI text · S-18 · Fig. S13B

ECL-potential profiles and cyclic voltammetry

Voltammetry

Ni3(HITP)2/GCE · Electrode

Ni3(HITP)2/GCE and bare GCE in PBS (0.1 M, pH 7.0) containing Ru(bpydc)3 (1 uM) and TPrA (5 mM); CV in TPrA solution (5 mM).

Geometry: Ni3(HITP)2/GCE versus bare GCE
Context: Pristine conductive MOF carrier as confinement-control electrode.
Measurement source: p004-p005 · 3.3 · Fig. 3C-D

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
ECL enhancement of Ni3(HITP)2/GCE vs bare GCE	about 4.14-fold	—	—	Text Approximate	p004-p005 · 3.3 · Fig. 3C
TPrA oxidation peak current increase after Ni3(HITP)2 modification	nearly 1.3-fold	—	—	Text Approximate	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3D
Bare GCE TPrA anodic peak potential	0.87 V	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3D

ECL-time profiles

Ru@Ni3(HITP)2/GCE · Electrode

Ru@Ni3(HITP)2/GCE, Ru@Cu3(HITP)2/GCE and Ru@Co3(HITP)2/GCE including the same amount of Ru(bpydc)3 (5.6 nmol), measured under identical conditions.

Geometry: Modified GCE
Context: Ru-grafted MOF electrode comparison.
Measurement source: p004-p005 · 3.3 · Fig. 3B; Table S2

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
ECL efficiency enhancement ratio vs Ru@Co3(HITP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	6.86 times	—	—	Text Rounded Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3B; Table S2
ECL efficiency enhancement ratio vs Ru@Cu3(HITP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	4.68 times	—	—	Text Rounded Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3B; Table S2
ECL efficiency of Ru@Co3(HITP)2	3.93%	—	—	SI Table Exact Reported	S14 · S-15 · Table S2
ECL efficiency of Ru@Cu3(HITP)2	5.76%	—	—	SI Table Exact Reported	S14 · S-15 · Table S2
ECL efficiency of Ru@Ni3(HITP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	26.97%	—	—	SI Table Exact Reported	S14 · S-15 · Table S2
ECL intensity enhancement ratio vs Ru@Co3(HITP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	18.8 times	—	—	Text Rounded Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3B; Table S2
ECL intensity enhancement ratio vs Ru@Cu3(HITP)2Marked as a best value within this paper	6.76 times	—	—	Text Rounded Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3B; Table S2

Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), Nyquist plots

Impedance spectroscopy

Ni3(HITP)2/GCE · Electrode

0.1 M PBS containing 5.0 mM [Fe(CN)6]3-/4- and 0.1 M KCl; excitation 5 mV; formal potential 220 mV; frequency 1.0e-1 to 1.0e5 Hz.

Geometry: Modified GCE, Pt counter, Ag/AgCl reference
Context: Pristine M3(HITP)2/GCE comparison.
Measurement source: SI text · S-14 · Fig. S10

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Electron-transfer resistance Ret	282.2 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	SI text · S-14 · Fig. S10
Electron-transfer resistance Ret	180.9 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	SI text · S-14 · Fig. S10
Electron-transfer resistance RetMarked as a best value within this paper	63.38 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	SI text · S-14 · Fig. S10

Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS), Nyquist plots

Impedance spectroscopy

Ru@Ni3(HITP)2/GCE · Electrode

Nyquist plots of HATP/GCE, Ru@Ni3(HITP)2/GCE, Ru@Cu3(HITP)2/GCE and Ru@Co3(HITP)2/GCE, fit with equivalent circuit.

Geometry: Modified GCE
Context: Ru-grafted MOF ECL electrodes.
Measurement source: p004-p005 · 3.3 · Fig. 3A

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Electron-transfer resistance Ret	564.4 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3A
Electron-transfer resistance Ret	423.9 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3A
Electron-transfer resistance Ret	346.1 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3A
Electron-transfer resistance RetMarked as a best value within this paper	136.8 ohm	—	—	Text Exact Reported	p004 · 3.3 · Fig. 3A