Table 1.

Comparison in performance of electrochemical biosensors for detection of MC−LR.

Electrode	Signal Labels	Linear Range	Detection Range (LOD)	Recovery (%)	Detection Techniques	Ref
Gold-GNPs	mAb	0.05–15 µg/L	20 ng/L	95.6−105	DPV	[9]
SWCNT/SiO2/Go ld	mAb	1−1000 ng/L	0.6 ng/L	84.7–124.2	Electrical resistance	[14]
AuNPs/GCE	HRP-mAb	0.01−100 µg/L	4 ng/L	94.1−98.1	EIS	[32]
Au (Non-labeled)	Ab, Au NPs	0.05−15.00 μg/L	20 ng/L	95.6−105	DPV	[9]
AuNp-polyDPB- G-AuNP/GCE	Polyclonal Ab	0.1−8 pg/L	0.037 pg/L	96.3–105.8	DPV	[16]
GSs-CS/GCE	HRP-CNS-Ab	0.05−15 µg/L	16 ng/L	88–107.8	DPV	[17]
CNT@Co silicate	Multi-HRP- (Fe3O4@PDA-Au)- Ab	0.005−50 µg/L	4 ng/L	91.6–110.7	CV	[18]
GS/GCE	Ab1, PtRu-Ab2	0.01−28 ng/mL	9.63 pg/mL	99.5–102	Chronoamper ometry	[8]
CNFs/PEG/GCE	Ab1, Au-Ab2	0.0025−5 µg/L	1.68 ng/L	98−99.2	DPV	[15]
GCE modified	aptamer	0.1−1.1 µg/L	40 pg/mL	94.3−115	CV	[21]
GSPE	Ferrocene, aptamer	0.1−1000 ng/L	1.9 ng/L	91.7	SWV	[4]
Au (Non-labeled)	aptamer	1.0 × 10−7−5.0 × 10−11 mol/L	1.8 × 10−11 mol/L	91.2−113.7	EIS	[33]
Au (Labeled)	aptamer	0.001−0.75 ng/L	0.53 pg/mL	96.11−108.43	SWV	this method