Skip to main content
. 2022 Aug 22;12:14289. doi: 10.1038/s41598-022-18305-6

Table 2.

Comparison of the analytical features of different electrodes used for determination of NTX.

Electrode Method Optimum pH LOD/M Linear Range/M Ref
Dropping mercury electrode 6.0 0.1 × 10–3–0.5 × 10–3 22
Mercury electrode DC-polarography 6.0 3 × 10–5 3 × 10–5–2.5 × 10–4 18
Differential-pulse adsorptive stripping voltammetry 6.0–7.0 1.31 × 10–8
Square-wave adsorptive stripping voltammetry 6.0–7.0 8.4 × 10–10
Glassy carbon electrode (GCE) SWV 2.0 0.28 × 10–6 3.49 × 10–6–47.62 × 10–6 24
GCE modified with SWCNT SWV 2.0 0.36 × 10–6 2.00 × 10–6–99.10 × 10–6 23
GCE modified with MWCNT 0.16 × 10–6 0.99 × 10–6–90.91 × 10–6
GCE modified with Graphene functionalized using carboxylic groups 0.11 × 10–6 2.99 × 10–6–65.42 × 10–6
GCE modified with carbon nanohorns (CNHs) 0.34 × 10–6 2.00 × 10–6–90.91 × 10–6
Carbon paste electrode (CPE) SWV 3.0 3.1 × 10–7 3.9 × 10–6–1.0 × 10−4 This work