Sensing Application — A Conductive Metal−Organic Framework Based on Triptycene Ligand: An Effective Electrochemical Sensor for Glucose and H2O2 Detection in Food and Human Serum

9 measurement groups · 43 results

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

Amperometric glucose calibration

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

0.1 M NaOH; optimal pH 13; best applied potential +0.65 V; successive glucose additions.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: three-electrode working electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target electrode
Measurement source: 6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3e-g; Fig. S4; Fig. S6

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Best applied potential for glucose sensingMarked as a best value within this paper	+0.65 V	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3e
Glucose calibration R2	R2 = 0.9965	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3g
Linear glucose concentration rangeMarked as a best value within this paper	0.001-1.95 mM	—	—	Text Range	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3g
Glucose calibration slope	j (mA cm^-2) = 47.20 c + 11.64	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3g
Glucose detection limitMarked as a best value within this paper	0.16 uM (S/N = 3)	—	S/N = 3	Text Exact Reported	2,6 · Abstract; Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3g
Optimal pH for glucose sensingMarked as a best value within this paper	pH 13	—	—	Text Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. S4
Glucose steady-state response timeMarked as a best value within this paper	within 2 s	—	within	Text Approximate	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. S6
Glucose anti-interference response	Fru, Urea, UA, AA, DA and Lac have no influence on glucose determination	—	—	Text Qualitative	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3h
Glucose sensitivityMarked as a best value within this paper	47200 mA uM^-1 cm^-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	2,6 · Abstract; Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3g

Cyclic voltammetry for glucose response

Voltammetry

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

0.1 M NaOH electrolyte; scan rate 50 mV s^-1; before and after 1 mM glucose; compared with bare CF.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: three-electrode working electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target versus bare CF pristine control
Measurement source: 3,5 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3a

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Bare CF glucose CV response	no redox peaks are observed at bare CF	—	—	Text Qualitative	3 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3a

Glucose assay in serum and orange juice

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

Serum from West China Hospital without pretreatment; orange juice supernatant after pre-centrifugation; standard addition; serum in 0.1 M NaOH with 20 uL 10 mM standard glucose additions.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: three-electrode working electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target electrode
Measurement source: 6-8 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 4; Table I; Table II

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Orange juice recovery range	99.2%-104.6%	—	RSDs less than 1.3%	Text Range	8 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Table II
Orange juice sample 1 glucose found	5.56 uM; UV-vis 5.58 +/- 0.03; RSD 0.48%	—	RSD 0.48%; UV-vis 5.58 +/- 0.03	Table Exact Reported	7 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Table II
Orange juice sample 2 glucose recovery	10 uM added; 15.71 uM found; recovery 101.5%; RSD 0.90%	—	RSD 0.90%	Table Exact Reported	7 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Table II
Orange juice sample 3 glucose recovery	15 uM added; 21.26 uM found; recovery 104.6%; RSD 1.26%	—	RSD 1.26%	Table Exact Reported	7 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Table II
Orange juice sample 4 glucose recovery	20 uM added; 25.40 uM found; recovery 99.2%; RSD 1.14%	—	RSD 1.14%	Table Exact Reported	7 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Table II
Serum 1 glucose by Cu-HHTT/CF sensor	5.88 mM; glucometer 5.9 mM; RSD 2.24%	—	RSD 2.24%, n=3	Table Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Table I
Serum 2 glucose by Cu-HHTT/CF sensor	5.54 mM; glucometer 5.6 mM; RSD 2.35%	—	RSD 2.35%, n=3	Table Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Table I
Serum 3 glucose by Cu-HHTT/CF sensor	8.86 mM; glucometer 8.7 mM; RSD 3.39%	—	RSD 3.39%, n=3	Table Exact Reported	6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Table I

Glucose CV scan-rate study

Voltammetry

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

1 mM glucose; scan rate varied from 20 to 200 mV s^-1.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: three-electrode working electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target electrode
Measurement source: 3-5 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3b-c; Fig. S3

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Glucose oxidation charge transfer coefficient	alpha = 0.5	—	—	Text Exact Reported	4 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. S3
Glucose diffusion coefficient	D = 0.021 cm^2 s^-1	—	—	Calculated From Reported Exact Reported	4,6 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3c
Glucose oxidation electron-transfer number	n = 0.98 (approximately 1)	—	approximately 1	Text Approximate	4 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. S3
Glucose scan-rate linear fit R2	R2 = 0.9998	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	5 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3c
Glucose scan-rate range	20-200 mV s^-1	—	—	Text Range	3 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3b
Glucose peak-current versus square-root scan-rate slope	y = 5.26x - 4.42	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	5 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 3c

Glucose sensor stability and reproducibility

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

1 mM glucose at room temperature measured every 5 d for 30 d; six identical Cu-HHTT/CF electrodes tested in 0.1 M NaOH.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target electrode
Measurement source: 8 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 5

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Six-electrode glucose reproducibility RSD	RSD of the anode peak current is 5.22%	—	six identical electrodes	Text Exact Reported	8 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 5b
Glucose sensor retained current after 30 days	92.5% of original current after 30 d	—	—	Text Exact Reported	8 · Electrochemical determination of glucose · Fig. 5a

Amperometric H2O2 calibration

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

PBS electrolyte, pH 7; best applied potential -0.25 V; successive H2O2 additions.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: three-electrode working electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target electrode
Measurement source: 8-9 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6e-g; Fig. S7-S8

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Best applied potential for H2O2 reductionMarked as a best value within this paper	-0.25 V	—	—	Text Exact Reported	8 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6e
H2O2 calibration R2	R2 = 0.9990	—	—	Text Exact Reported	8 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6g
Linear H2O2 concentration rangeMarked as a best value within this paper	0.008-6.45 mM	—	—	Text Range	8 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6g
H2O2 calibration slope	j (mA cm^-2) = -5.17 c - 1.51	—	—	Text Exact Reported	8 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6g
H2O2 detection limitMarked as a best value within this paper	0.54 uM	—	S/N = 3 stated in abstract	Text Exact Reported	2,8 · Abstract; Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6g
H2O2 low-concentration inset range	8-50 uM in caption	—	—	Caption Range	9 · Figure 6 caption · Fig. 6f
Optimal pH for H2O2 sensingMarked as a best value within this paper	pH 7	—	—	Text Exact Reported	8 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. S7
H2O2 sensitivityMarked as a best value within this paper	5170 mA uM^-1 cm^-2	—	—	Text Exact Reported	2,8 · Abstract; Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6g

Cyclic voltammetry for H2O2 response

Voltammetry

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

0.1 M PBS, pH 7.0; potential range -0.7 to +0.4 V; before and after 1 mM H2O2; compared with bare CF.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: three-electrode working electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target versus bare CF pristine control
Measurement source: 8-9 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6a

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
Bare CF H2O2 CV response	bare CF has only a small reduction peak and almost no response to H2O2	—	—	Text Qualitative	8 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6a

H2O2 CV scan-rate study

Voltammetry

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

1 mM H2O2; scan rate varied from 20 to 200 mV s^-1.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: three-electrode working electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target electrode
Measurement source: 8-9 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6b-c

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
H2O2 scan-rate linear fit R2	R2 = 0.9981	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	9 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6c
H2O2 scan-rate range	20-200 mV s^-1	—	—	Caption Range	9 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6b caption
H2O2 peak-current versus square-root scan-rate slope	y = -6.62x - 12.45	—	—	Figure Axis Rounded Reported	9 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6c

H2O2 selectivity and milk standard-addition assay

Cu-HHTT/CF working electrode · Electrode

Interference test with 1 mM H2O2 and 5 mM interferents; milk samples measured by standard addition without pretreatment.

Temperature: room temperature
Geometry: three-electrode working electrode
Context: Cu-HHTT/CF target electrode
Measurement source: 9-10 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6h; Fig. S9; Table III

Property	Reported value	Normalised value	Uncertainty	Origin and quality	Source
H2O2 anti-interference response	other interfering substances cause ignorable current-density changes	—	—	Text Qualitative	8-10 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Fig. 6h
Milk 1 H2O2 found	10 uM added; 8.97 uM found; recovery 89.7%; RSD 2.94%	—	RSD 2.94%, n=3	Table Exact Reported	10 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Table III
Milk 2 H2O2 found	10 uM added; 9.36 uM found; recovery 93.6%; RSD 1.16%	—	RSD 1.16%, n=3	Table Exact Reported	10 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Table III
Milk 3 H2O2 found	10 uM added; 11.08 uM found; recovery 110.8%; RSD 1.62%	—	RSD 1.62%, n=3	Table Exact Reported	10 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Table III
Milk H2O2 assay RSD maximum	RSD is less than 2.94%	—	less than	Text Exact Reported	10 · Electrochemical determination of H2O2 · Table III