Table 1.
Comparison of CuO/Cu2O-based non-enzymatic electrochemical glucose sensors.
| Electrode Material | Substrate | Sensitivity (µA mM−1 cm−2) |
Linear Range (mM) |
Applied Potential (V) |
LOD (µM) |
Reference |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CuO nanofibers | GCE | 431.3 | 0.006–2.5 | 0.4 | 0.8 | [39] |
| Cu2O nanocubes | SPCE | 1040 | 0.007–4.5 | 0.7 | 31 | [23] |
| Cu2O nanocubes/nafion | GCE | 2864 | 0.05–5.65 | 0.7 | 1.7 | [40] |
| Cu2O NPs/nafion | GCE | 190 | 0.05–1.1 | 0.5 | 47.2 | [41] |
| Cu2O nanowires | Cu foil | 4060 | 0.001–2.0 | 0.55 | 0.58 | [25] |
| Cu2O nanowires | Cu foam | 6680.7 | 0.001–1.8 | 0.5 | 0.67 | [42] |
| CuO/Cu2O nanosheets | Cu foil | 1541 | 0.001–4 | 0.6 | 0.57 | [22] |
| Cu2O nanoclusters | GCE | 1082.5 | 0.1–1 | 0.35 (DPV) | 12 | This work |
| Cu2O nanoclusters | Cellulose PE | 182.9 | 0.1–1 | 0.35 (DPV) | 52.7 | This work |
SPCE = screen printed carbon electrode; NPs = nanoparticles.