Comparison of various modified electrodes for luteolin detection.
| Electrodes | Linear range (μmol L−1) | LOD (nmol L−1) | Ref. |
|---|---|---|---|
| GCE | 0.01–1.0 | 5.0 | 42 |
| AuNCs/CILE | 0.001–1.0 | 0.4 | 10 |
| MWCNTsa–PEIb/GCE | 0.0024–1.75 | 0.5 | 11 |
| GNsc/HAd/GCE | 0.2–10.0 | 10.0 | 43 |
| HAP–CNTe/GCE | 0.4–12.0 | 80.0 | 44 |
| PDDA–G–CNTsf/β-CDg/GCE | 0.05–60.0 | 20.0 | 45 |
| Au–BMIPF6h–CPEi | 0.1–5.8 | 28.0 | 46 |
| PCVj/MWCNTs/GCE | 0.2–10.0 | 5.0 | 47 |
| Pt–BPC/CILE | 0.008–100.0 | 2.6 | This study |
a
Multi-walled carbon nanotubes.
b
Polyethyleneimine.
c
Graphene nanosheets.
d
Hydroxyapatite.
e
Hydroxyapatite–carbon nanotube.
f
Poly (diallyldimethylammonium chloride)–graphene sheets–multiwalled carbon nanotubes.
g
β-Cyclodextrin.
h
1-Butyl-3-methylimidazolium hexafluorophosphate.
i
Carbon paste electrode.
j
Poly (crystal violet).