The surface composition analysis by XPS:
The binding energy (eV) and ionizations of NMs analyzed by the XPS investigation. The resultant data presented at Fig. 1 showing the orbitals of Zn2p level located at 1022 and 1045 eV with the respect of Zn2p3/2 and Zn2p1/2 spin orbitals separately. The Zn2p level's spin orbitals separate with 23 eV, a characteristic value of Zn2+ oxidation, which has been reported previously [32-34]. The O1s orbital shows an XPS peak located at 531 eV and can recognize as chemisorbed oxygen on NMs surface involved the oxidation of O2-[35-37]. The orbitals of Sn3d level recognized as the spin orbitals of Sn3d5/2 and Sn3d3/2 are shown in Fig. 1(c) and positioned at 487 and 495 eV correspondingly with the binding energy separation of 8 eV, which is conformed Sn4+ oxidation in the synthesized ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs [38-40]. XPS peak of Ru3d shows two recognized orbitals (spin) located at 281.08 and 285.12 eV, which are corresponded to Ru3d5/2 and Ru3d3/2 spin orbitals shown in Fig. 1(d), but the spin-orbital of Ru3d3/2 overlapped with C1s orbital. The spin energy difference between Ru3d5/2 and Ru3d3/2 is equal to 4.04 eV a characteristic value of Ru4+ ionized state [41, 42].
The morphology of synthesized ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs:
The FESEM analysis performed to evaluate the structural morphology as-prepared ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs exemplified in Fig. 2(a-b) showing the low and high magnifying images of prepared nanomaterials. As seemed at Fig. 1(a-b), the prepared nanomaterials consist of grains of distinct shapes and sizes. The similar information’s explores in EDS report as in Fig. 2(c), and it confirmes that the synthesized NMs have contained various shape and sizes containing Zn, O, Sn and Ru only shown in Fig. 2(d). The weight compositions of nanomaterials are Zn 43.29%, Sn 48.99%, O 1.26% and Ru 8.97%.
Powdered X-ray diffraction pattern of ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs:
To assess, the grains crystallinity and size of ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs evaluate by XRD analysis performed at 2θ degree (20~80° range) shown in Fig.3, and the resultant XRD data confirmes the existence of the crystalline phases of ZnO, SnO2 and RuO2 only. The crystalline peaks of SnO2 are (110), (201), (220), (310), (301) and (321) perceive in Fig. 3, and identified by JCPDS no. 0045-0937 and previously reported articles on SnO2 [43,44]. Besides this, the diffracted peaks associated with ZnO such as (002), (101), (200) and (202) verified by JCDS no. 0036-1451 and prior authors illustrated in Fig. 3 [45,46]. Moreover, the trace RuO2 shows two pecks associated with plans of (211) and (220) as explored in Fig. 3 and identified by reported articles [47,48]. The average crystal size ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs estimates following the Scherrer Equation.
D= (0.94λ)/(βCosθ) (v)
Herein λ (wavelength of X-ray radiation) and β (the width at half of peak). The calculated crystal size of synthesized NRs is 7.75 nm at SnO2 (110).
The cholesterol detection with ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs sensor:
The sensor selective to cholesterol amassed with wet-chemically prepared ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs layered on GCE as a film. The GCE modified by the slurry of ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs in ethanol, and the coating did as an efficient way to form a layer of NMs film. The stability of NMs film on GCE enhanced by adding a few drops of Nafion, which improved it’s the working duration in buffer solution. The Nafion is known as conductive co-polymer. Therefore, the use of Nafion in the working electrode is enhanced the electron transfer rate of the sensor. As a result, the sensor shows high I-V performances, in the buffer phase, in the cholesterol analyze. The observations like this have reported detecting chemicals and biochemical [49-53]. It appears ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs first time onto GCE to analyze cholesterol and any report regarding this not available. The sensor in the I-V technique is a two-electrode system (working and counter electrode). In the electrochemical investigation of cholesterol in the buffer phase, the holding time in Keithley electrometer set as 1 s.
Initially, the fabricated sensor based on ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE was applied to investigate several biochemical including D-glucose, uric acid, folic acid, L-leucine, bilirubin, testosterone, L-lactic acid, choline, tannic acid and cholesterol and achieved data presented in Fig. 4(a). The experimented results show in Fig. 4(a), which did at 0.1 µM of each biochemical and applied volts ranging from 0 to +1.5V in the buffer phase of pH 7.0. It explores in Fig. 4(a) that cholesterol exhibits the uppermost current against the applied potential (v) and on a comparison of the highest I-V outcome, the cholesterol identifies as selective for the sensor with ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE. Then, the selected cholesterol subjected to analyze in a rage of concentration of 0.1nM~0.1mM in buffer system of pH 7.0 as exemplified in Fig. 4(b). From the explored I-V curve in Fig. 4(b), it is found that the I-V responses of cholesterol increased with increasing of cholesterol concentration from lower to higher and the resulted I-V outcomes are completely a parted from each other in the sequence of lower-higher concentration of cholesterol. Thus, as shown, the I-V plots are varied with the corresponding concentration of cholesterol as a similar observation has described by earlier authors [54-59].
As illustrated in Fig. 4(c) current versus concentration of cholesterol plot is known as calibration of cholesterol biosensor, and it shows the linearity of current density on a line with corresponding potential (volt) from 0.1nM to 0.01mM of cholesterol, which identified a dynamic range (LDR) to measure. The obtained LDR is consist of a wide range of concentration. To identify the linearity of LDR, current versus log (conc.) was plotted, which matched with the regression coefficient (R2=0.9901) and provided evidence of the linearity of LDR. The sensor sensitivity is an important parameter and calculated from the slope of calibration-curve divided by the cross-section of GCE (0.0316 cm2), and exceptional sensitivity of 11.3513 µAµM-1cm-2 is apparent. The lower limit of the sensor is calculated by applying 3 (S/N) as the signal-noise ratio and found as 91.42±4.57 pM, which might be appreciable.
The response time measures the sensor efficiency, which defines as the minimum time required to complete the I-V analysis of an analyte. The cholesterol sensor's response time executed by the plotting of current versus time shown in Fig. 5(a). As perceived in Fig. 5(a), the currents versus time relation become steady at around 20 s. Therefore, it can conclude that the proposed sensor can complete I-V analysis within 20 s and provides the evidence of high efficiency of cholesterol sensor with ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE. As known, the prepared nanomaterials are a doped mixture of ZnO, SnO2 and RuO2. Thus, the I-V activities of single, binary and ternary metal oxides compared in the detection of cholesterol in the buffer phase and illustrated in Fig. 5(b). As it is exemplified in Fig. 5(b), the doped ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs exhibited the highest electrochemical response, and it is due to the combinational effect of ternary compositions. The reproducibility measures the reliability of a sensor and is an ability to generate identical I-V responses in the analysis of an analyte. For the reliability, the sensor subjected to I-V analysis of cholesterol in the similar conditions such as 0.1 µM concentration, potential range 0~+1.5V in the buffer of pH 7.0 in the continuous seven hours and the outcomes demonstrated in Fig. 5(c). The I-V responses do not change after washing of the electrode in each analysis. The precision of currents data measure at applied potential +1.5V in term of relative standard deviation (RSD), and the outcome is 0.55% (RSD), which is to confirm the high precision. A similar method, the longtime performing ability of sensor tested as shown in Fig. 5(d) at a similar condition as in reproducibility test. The outcomes are analogous with the reproducibility. Thus, the projected cholesterol sensor with ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE is well enough to analyze the cholesterol in real bio-samples in electrochemical approach.
A proposed scheme for cholesterol electrochemical oxidation is presented below. The molecules of cholesterol are adsorbed on ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE surface and oxidized to cholesta-4,6-dien-3-one. In this oxidation of cholesterol, few electrons are formed, which enhances the conductivity buffer solution. As result, the enhanced I-V responses record in the Keithley electrometer. The cholesterol oxidation like similar has described previously [60,61].
The contrast of similar studies are demonstrated in Table 1 in term of the analytical performances of sensor such as LDR, sensitivity and DL [62-64]. Based on the parameters, the cholesterol sensor with ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE shows the appreciable performances.
Table 1: The contract of the similar studies in term of analytical parameters of cholesterol sensor with ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE.
Modified GCE
|
LDR
|
Sensitivity
|
DL
|
Ref.
|
ChEt-ChOx/MWCNT/SiO2-CHIT/ITO /GCE
|
10~500µM
|
3.8*10-3 µAμM−1cm−2
|
--------
|
62
|
Ti/NPAu/ChOx–HRP–ChE/GCE
|
-----------
|
2.93*10-2 µAμM−1cm−2
|
--------
|
63
|
ZnO NRs/GCE
|
0.001~45 mM
|
10*10-3 µAμM−1cm−2
|
---------
|
64
|
ZnO/SnO2/RuO2NMs/GCE
|
0.1nM~0.01mM
|
11.3513 µAμM−1cm−2
|
91.42 pM
|
This work
|
*DL (detection limit), LDR (linear dynamic range), pM(picomole), mM(millimole).
The analysis of bio-samples applying recovery method:
To appropriate the validation of cholesterol sensor with ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE assembly, the bio-samples such as human, mouse and rabbit serums were collected and analyzed by I-V approach. The resulted data are presented in the Table 2 and it seemed to quit satisfactory.
Table 2: The analysis of real environmental samples using ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE chemical sensor by recovery method.
Sample
|
Added cholesterol conc. (µM)
|
Measured cholesterol conc.a by ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE(µM)
|
Average recoveryb (%)
|
RSDc (%)
(n=3)
|
R1
|
R2
|
R3
|
Human serum
|
0.01000
|
0.01026
|
0.01022
|
0.01013
|
102.03
|
0.65
|
Mouse serum
|
0.01000
|
0.01044
|
0.01047
|
0.01031
|
104.06
|
0.82
|
Rabbit serum
|
0.01000
|
0.01012
|
0.01004
|
0.01000
|
100.56
|
0.61
|
aMean of three repeated determination (signal to noise ratio 3) ZnO/SnO2/RuO2 NMs/GCE.
bConcentration of cholesterol determined/Concentration taken. (Unit: µM)
cRelative standard deviation value indicates precision among three repeated measurements (R1,R2,R3).