Table 3.
Water sample | Original [MC-LR], C0 (μg/L) | Spiked [MC-LR], C1 (μg/L) | ELISA (μg/L) | FL-SERS sensor, C2 | RSD | Recovery percentage | |||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
FL (μg/L) | SERS (μg/L) | FL (%) | SERS (%) | FL (%) | SERS (%) | ||||
Tap water | undetectable | 2.03 | 2.14 | 2.08 | 2.12 | 5.77 | 9.91 | 102.46 | 104.43 |
Dongting Lake | 1.82 | 5.01 | 6.71 | 6.89 | 6.99 | 3.34 | 6.29 | 99.42 | 102.34 |
Xiang River | undetectable | 1.46 | 1.52 | 1.38 | 1.55 | 6.52 | 12.9 | 94.52 | 106.16 |
Note: the real water samples from tap, Dongting Lake and Xiang River were made through spiking with the stock solution of MC-LR, respectively; original [MC-LR] were measured by the standard ELISA method; RSD is the relative standard deviation.