Table 1.
A comparison of the proposed sensor with other detection methods.
| Method | Tool | Linear Range | LOD | Time | Real Sample | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| colorimetric | platinum nanoparticles | 0.01–4 nM | 0.0085 nM | 10 min | tap water | [18] |
| colorimetric | gold nanoparticles | 25–750 nM | 50 nM | 40 min | pond and river water | [33] |
| colorimetric | Cu2-xSe nanoparticles | 0–800 nM | 2.7 nM | 10 min | tap, pond and river water | [35] |
| colorimetric | gold nanoparticles and aptamer | 10–1000 nM | 17.3 nM | 20 min | tap, rivers, lakes and ocean water | [34] |
| Raman spectroscopy | silver nanoparticles | 1–1000 μM | 10 nM | 30 min | drinking mineral water | [32] |
| fluorescence | Phosphorothioate RNA Modifications | 0–50 nM | 1.7 nM | 20 min | lake water | [37] |
| fluorescence | MoS2 nanosheet/DNA/ carbon dot |
0–10 nM | 1.02 nM | 15 min | tap and lake water | [19] |
| fluorescence | fluorescent 8-amino BODIPY-based probe |
0.5–5 μM | 49 nM | 50 min | SMMC-7721 cells | [31] |
| fluorescence polarization | CdTe/CdS QDs | 10–800 nM | 8.6 nM | 2.0 h | lake and spiked lake water |
[36] |
| fluorescence | polyT-TMPyP | 5–100 nM | 1.3 nM | 60 s | Tap and river water | this work |