Table 1.
Comparison with reported state-of-the-art glucose biosensors.
| Platform | Redox | Detection Method | Linear Range | Detection Limit | Comments |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Pyrolytic carbon [20] | Potassium ferro/ferricyanide | Amperometry | 0.001–1 | 0.4 µM | Redox species in solution |
| Gold [24] | GOx modified with ferrocencecarboxaldehyde | Cyclic voltammetry |
1.0–5.0 mM | 5.2–210 µM | Variable response due to high oxygen levels |
| Glassy carbon electrode [25] | Poly(glycidyl methacrylateco-vinylferrocene) redox copolymer | Amperometry | 0.5 to 6 mM | 3 µM | Requires FAD as a cofactor |
| Multiwalled carbon nanotubes [26] | Osmium redox polymer | Voltammetry /amperometry |
- | - | Moderate stability |
| ZnO Nanorods [27] | - | Cyclic voltammetry |
1–13.8 mM | 1 mM | Non-enzymatic sensing may have selectivity issues |
| prGOx/GA/BSA (This work) | NH2-Fc | Amperometry | 0.0–10 mM | 1 mM | Scalable and cost effective |