Electrochemical strategies for detection of diazinon:
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1041
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059; http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
Open Access : : ISSN 1847-9286
www.jESE-online.org
Review
Electrochemical strategies for detection of diazinon
Azadeh Lohrasbi Nejad
Department of Agricultural Biotechnology, Shahid Bahonar University of Kerman, Kerman, Iran
Corresponding author: a.lohrasbi@uk.ac.ir
Received: May 15, 2022; Accepted: July 30, 2022; Published: September 17, 2022
Abstract
Diazinon (DZN) was first registered as an insecticide in the U.S. However, it was categorized
in the limited group of pesticides due to its high toxicity for birds, aquatic animals, and
humans. Like other organophosphorus pesticides, this compound exhibits inhibitory effects
on the acetylcholinesterase enzyme. The inhibition of the enzyme leads to the accumulation
of acetylcholine and causes the death of insects. DZN is considered a toxic compound for
humans due to its high adsorption via skin and inhalation, which leads to the emergence of
different symptoms of toxicity. When DZN is used for plants, the compound residues in crops
enter the food chain bringing about different health problems. Moreover, the compound is
easily washed by surface water and enters the groundwater. Its entrance into aquatic envi-
ronments can negatively affect a wide range of non-targeted organisms. Thus, researchers
seek to find fast and precise methods for the analysis of DZN. The electrochemical method
for recognizing the compound in real samples is preferable to other analytical methods.
Because this method can be used without spending time preparing the sample, it is simple,
fast, and cost-effective. Since such determinations may be made by using electrochemical
sensors and biosensors, numerous researchers have developed such sensors for DZN
detection, and different sensitive materials were used in order to improve the selectivity,
sensitivity, and detection limit. The present study aims to present the main progress and
performance characteristics of electrochemical sensors and biosensors used to detect DZN,
as it is reported in a number of relevant scientific papers published mainly in the last decade.
Keywords
Pesticide; electrochemistry; modified electrodes
Introduction
Pesticides are used worldwide to protect agricultural crops and avoid plant damage caused by
pests. Organophosphates are the most extensive and diverse class of pesticides [1]. The organo-
phosphorus pesticides (OPPs) and organic ester derivatives of phosphorus are widely used as
insecticides in agriculture [2,3]. Diazinon (DZN) with the scientific name O,O-diethyl-O-(2- isopropyl-
4-methyl-6-pyrimidinyl)-O,O-diethyl-O-(2-isopropyl-4-methyl-6-pyrimidinyl)-phosphorothioate is
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
http://www.jese-online.org/
mailto:a.lohrasbi@uk.ac.ir
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1042
widely used as an insecticide in agriculture. DZN is ranked as the most common organophosphorus
pesticide globally after malathion [4-6]. Although DZN is a thiophosphoric ester, it shares a common
mechanism of toxicity with other organophosphorus insecticides like chlorpyrifos, malathion and
parathion [7]. DZN inhibits acetylcholinesterase (AChE) and prevents acetylcholine (ACh) hydrolysis
in cholinergic synapses and neuromuscular junctions. Therefore, it leads to abnormal accumulation
of ACh in the nervous system [8]. Since that pesticide is chemically stable, its improper application
can result in environmental contamination [9] and ultimately threaten human health [10,11]. The
compound belongs to the contact insecticide group and kills the insects by altering typical
neurotransmitters in their nervous system [7]. U.S. Environmental Protection Agency (EPA) canceled
all residential uses of DZN in 2004. Nowadays, it is only allowed to be used in agricultural
environments [12]. DZN is relatively stable and mobile and cannot be absorbed by soil [13,14].
Microbial degradation in the soil is the most important process for DZN removal from the
environment [7]. Conducted studies demonstrated that half-lives of DZN in soil were 21 to 103 days
depending on the type of soil [15]. A compound called diazoxon is formed by DZN hydrolysis and is
rapidly hydrolyzed to oxypyrimidine, which is more mobile in the environment than the original
compound [7]. In addition, DZN can be decomposed by the photolysis process. In this case, the half-
life of this compound on the soil surface is estimated to be between 17.3 to 37.4 hours [14]. DZN
and its metabolites can be contaminated the groundwater considering their stability and mobility
[13]. In the atmosphere, DZN is transformed into diazoxon, which is a more powerful AChE inhibitor
compared to DZN, with a half-life of 4 hours [16]. Low levels of DZN applied outdoors can be carried
indoors through airflow, dust, soil, and pets exposed to the compound [17].
The main problem of DZN application is that it can be absorbed by plant roots in soil [18]. The
compound can degrade in leafy vegetables, forage crops, and grass with half-lives ranging from 2 to
14 days. However, low temperature and high oil content cause the half-life of DZN to increase in
plants [18]. Pyrimidinol, as well as hydroxypyrimidinol, are the compounds resulting from DZN
hydrolysis in plants. Since diazoxon can also be found in plants, the measured pyrimidinol may be a
product of diazoxon hydrolysis rather than DZN hydrolysis [19]. DZN poses relatively high toxicity to
vertebrates. Once entering the body, DZN is decomposed to diazoxon by oxidation which is more
toxic than DZN and mainly inhibits acetylcholinesterase (AChE) [20]. The oxidation of DZN to
diazoxon is carried out by the liver microsomal enzyme and requires O2 and NADPH. DZN can also
be decomposed through oxidation in the liver. Both reactions are likely to be catalyzed
nonspecifically by the same mixed-function oxidase. Hydrolases further decompose DZN in the
microsomal and other intracellular functions inside the liver. Mammals metabolize diazoxon with
an estimated half-life of 2 to 6 weeks. Insects lack the hydrolysis step, and hence, the toxic substance
is rapidly accumulated in their bodies.
The toxic compound can enter the body through skin contact, feeding, and inhalation [21]. The
signs and symptoms of toxicity by DZN are similar to other toxins inhibiting AChE. Depending on the
exposure period, different symptoms emerge, including colic, diarrhea or vomiting, vertigo,
headaches, miosis, bradycardia, sudden drop in blood pressure, convulsion, and apnea after several
minutes to hours of exposure [22,23]. Since DZN is lipid-soluble, it has the potential to be stored in
fat tissues so that it can heighten delayed toxicity. It is important to detect and control
organophosphorus chemicals regarding their toxicity and adverse effects on human life.
So far, various in vitro methods have been proposed to detect those compounds, such as high-
performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) [24,25], liquid chromatography coupled with mass
spectroscopy (LC-MS) [26], gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (GC-MS) [27], capillary gas
https://wikivisually.com/wiki/Acetylcholinesterase_inhibitor
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1043
chromatography [28], electrochemical analysis [29-32], and colorimetric method [33]. However, the
above methods suffer from several inherent flaws. For example, despite their high precision,
instrumental analysis methods are usually time-consuming and expensive. Some methods require
complicated isolation processes, careful washing steps, and reagent addition. The colorimetric
assays are not sensitive enough to detect pesticide traces [34].
However, electrochemical analysis has many advantages, including simplicity, repeatability, good
stability, high sensitivity, and no need to sample preparation steps compared to other detection
techniques mentioned above [35-49]. A drawback of this method is that it suffers from weak
selectivity, which is resolved by modifying the electrode surface to improve the sensitivity and
selectivity of electrochemical sensors and avoid surface fouling [50-63]. Chemical modification of
electrodes is a quite useful technique for detecting organophosphorus toxins [64]. Such
technologies are appropriate alternatives to increase the electron transfer rate in electrochemical
sensors [65-70].
Nanotechnology has been considered a technology of general use, being common in almost all
technological sectors. This is due to the fact that the interactions between different materials when
they are at the nanoscale (10−9 m), are able to generate new properties where unique phenomena
may occur, different from those observed at the macroscopic scale, thus giving rise to the possibility
of new applications for these materials [71-90]. Various materials such as carbon-based
nanomaterials, metal oxides, metals complex, polymers, and biological compounds can be used to
modify electrode surfaces [91-107].
This work aims to explain the current developments in electrochemical sensors and biosensors
for monitoring DZN.
Development of electrochemical DZN sensors
Electrochemical sensors are the most rapidly growing group of chemical sensors among presently
available systems for practical applications. The most common electrochemical system used for
laboratory study is made up of a reference electrode, counter electrode, and a working electrode
(sensing electrode) immersed in an electrolyte which measures the potential and current generated
from oxidative or reductive reactions. The working principle behind electrochemical sensors
involves the generation of electrical signals from the analyte of interest, which is affected by the
concentration of the analyte [108-112].
DZN is an electrochemically-active molecule, but its direct determination is difficult because of
the weak response of DZN in conventional electrochemical sensors. Different types of electrode
modifications for electrochemical methods have been developed for the determination of DZN
because they possess high sensitivity, short analysis time, good handling convenience and low cost.
This section introduced examples of developed electrochemical DZN sensors. Then, Table 1
tabulates information about the electrochemical sensor, electrochemical method, limit of detection
(LOD), and linear range, which have been reported by various works.
In 2003, a simple and easy electrochemical method was used by Erdogdu for the determination
of DZN. In this method, the surface of the glassy carbon electrode was coated with Nafion-
perfluorinated ion-exchange powder (NCGCE), and square-wave voltammetry (SWV) was used for
the quantitative estimation. The author demonstrated that the peak current slightly changed in the
potential range from 0 to 0.35 V because DZN could not be reduced in this potential range. However,
a sudden increase was observed in the peak current at 0.40 V. The effect of SW response was studied
in the mentioned conditions because the peak current for DZN obtained in SWV depended on
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1044
different parameters such as SW amplitude, SW frequency, and step height. Hence, modulation
amplitude, 25 mV; modulation frequency, 14 Hz; modulation step, 4 mV s-1 were considered optimal
conditions for DZN detection. The results of the Erdogdu study showed that combining the SWV and
electrode surface modification with Nafion film worked excellently for DZN detection. Thus, the
proposed voltammetric procedure for DZN detection could be useful in many different applications.
In this method, the minimum LOD for diazinon was reported to be 75 nM. The results of 20
successive measurements showed a coefficient of variation of 1.9 % for NCGC electrodes. Therefore,
the modified electrode possessed a good reproducibility surface [113].
Arvand et al. [114].used the differential pulse voltammetric (DPV) methods to investigate the
electrochemical behavior of DZN at carbon paste electrode modified with tris(ethylenediamine)
cobalt(II) iodide (Co-CPME). Cobalt complex showed an anodic peak at 620 mV (vs. Ag/AgCl, in KNO3
0.1 M as supporting electrolyte) at Co-CPME. In the presence of DZN, anodic peak intensity
increased with increasing concentration of DZN that confirming the electrocatalytic activity of cobalt
complex for oxidation of DZN (EC’ mechanism). Under optimized conditions, a linear calibration
curve for diazinon was obtained in the range from 0.05 to 27.0 µg/L with a detection limit 0.015 nM
(3Sb/m). Applications of the modified electrode to the determination of DZN in different water
samples were also tested. The results showed a very good precision (RSD < 0.04 %) and a very stable
voltammetric response towards DZN [114].
In a study by Motaharian et al. an electrochemical sensor based on molecularly imprinted poly-
mer (MIP) nanoparticles for selective and sensitive determination of DZN pesticides was developed.
The nanoparticles of DZN imprinted polymer were synthesized by suspension polymerization and
then used to modify carbon paste electrode composition to prepare the sensor. Cyclic voltammetry
(CV) and SWV methods were applied for electrochemical measurements. The obtained results
showed that the carbon paste electrode modified by MIP nanoparticles (nano-MIP-CPE) has a much
higher adsorption ability for DZN than the CPE-based non-imprinted polymer nanoparticles (nano-
NIP-CPE). Under optimized extraction and analysis conditions, the proposed sensor exhibited
excellent sensitivity (95.08 μA L μmol-1) for DZN with two linear ranges of 2.5 to 100 nmol L-1 (R2 =
0.9971) and 0.1 to 2.0 mol L-1 (R2 = 0.9832) and also a detection limit of 0.79 nmol L-1. The sensor
was successfully applied for the determination of DZN in well water and apple fruit samples with
recovery values in the range of 92.53–100.86 % [115].
Ghodsi and Rafati described a voltammetric sensor for DZN pesticide determination based on
DZN reduction on glassy carbon electrode surface modified with multi-walled carbon nanotubes
covered by TiO2 nanoparticles (MWCNTs/TiO2NPs/GCE). Voltammetric investigations were carried
out by CV, linear sweep voltammetry (LSV), DPV and SWV. MWCNTs/TiO2NPs nanocomposite was
characterized with scanning electron microscopy (SEM), X-ray diffraction (XRD) and energy
dispersive X-ray analysis (EDX) techniques. The MWCNTs/TiO2NPs nanocomposite showed suitable
synergic electrocatalytic properties in DZN reduction, which resulted in the completely sensitive
determination of DZN in the laboratory and real samples, including city piped water and agricultural
well water. Linear range, LOD and LOQ obtained by MWCNTs/TiO2NPs/GCE sensor were 11.0 to
8360.0 nM, 3.0 nM and 10.0 nM successively. Also, the sensor was successfully examined for DZN
determination in real water samples, including agricultural well water and city piped water and
obtained results showed acceptable recovery amounts [116].
Khadem et al. introduced the composition of carbon paste electrodes modified with MIP and
MWCNTs as the easy-to-use electrochemical sensor (MWCNTs-MIP/CPE) for selective and sensitive
determination of DZN pesticide in environmental and biological samples. The MWCNTs enhance the
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1045
sensor responses due to increasing of the electrode surface area, as well as improving the electron
transfer between the electrode and the supporting electrolyte. The presence of MIPs can greatly
increase the selectivity of the electrode. Instrumental parameters affecting the square wave
voltammetric response were adjusted to obtain the highest current intensity. The obtained linear
range was 0.5 nM to 1.0 M. The detection limit of the sensor was 0.13 nM and the relative standard
deviation for analysis of the target molecule by the proposed sensor was 2.87 % [117].
Akyuz and Koca constructed a mimic enzymeless electrochemical sensor (M-Eless-ES) based on
the terminal alkynyl substituted manganese phthalocyanine (MnPc-TA) and 4-azido polyaniline (N3-
PANI) hybrid and tested as a sensitive and selective pesticide sensor. During the construction of
ITO/MnPc-TA/N3-PANI electrode, MnPc-TA was firstly deposited on indium tin oxide coated glass
substrate (ITO) with Langmuir Blodgett (LB) technique. Then 4-azidoaniline (N3-ANI) was bonded to
the terminal alkynyl substituents of MnPc-TA (ITO/MnPc-TA/N3-ANI) with click chemistry (CC), and
finally, ANI groups of the solid MnPcTA/N3-ANI hybrid film was electropolymerized on ITO surface
to form ITO/MnPc-TA/N3-PANI electrode. The structure of the modified electrode was characterized
by SWV, XRD, FT-IR and SEM analyses. The result of the analyses indicated successful construction
of ITO/MnPc-TA/N3-PANI electrode. ITO/MnPcTA/N3-PANI electrode was tested as a potential
sensor for various pesticides and the results showed that it was used as a sensitive sensor for the
DZN with LOD of 0.062 µmol dm-3 and a wide linear range [118].
Accordingly, Zahirifar et al. employed a carbon paste electrode modified with multi-walled
carbon nanotubes (MWCNT/CPE) to detect DZN in solutions and real samples (fruit juices). The
obtained results showed that CNTs increased the sensor response due to their large surface area,
improved electrocatalytic activity, and enhanced electron-transfer rate between electrode and
electrolyte. The MWCNT/CPE electrode could recognize DZN in fruit samples with a desirable LOD
with little interference of other compounds. Because the thickness of CNT can affect the electrode
response, Zahirifar et al. recorded the amount of CNT used to make an optimized CNT/CPE electrode
and its effect on the peak current of DZN. The results showed that the peak current rose as the
quantity of CNT increased. The maximum peak current level was observed when the amount of CNT
increased up to 10 %. However, any amount higher than 10 % negatively affected the sensor
response in DZN detection. The researchers introduced the sensor as a proper candidate for the
recognition of DZN in foodstuffs regarding its ability to detect DZN in the concentration range of 0.1
to 10 nM by the designed electrode. The limit of detection for DZN in this sensor was determined
by the DPV technique, and it was found to be 0.45 nM [119].
Tadayon and Jahromi constructed a sensitive and selective electrochemical sensor based on
bimetallic gold and palladium nanoparticles coated on a mixture of reduced graphene oxide and
multiwall carbon nanotube nanocomposite modified glassy carbon electrode (Au–Pd/rGO–
–MWCNTs/GCE)for determination of an organophosphorus insecticide, DZN. The effect of various
parameters includes pH of the solution, scan rate, accumulation time and potential, and
instrumental parameter was optimized. Under optimized conditions, the proposed sensor showed
that the stripping oxidation peak current of DZN was linearly proportional to its concentrations in
an appropriate range of 0.009 to 11.3 µM with a LOD and LOQ of 0.002 and 0.009 µM, respectively.
Finally, the Au–Pd/rGO–MWCNTs/GCE was successfully used for measurement of DZN in water,
apple and cucumber samples recoveries ranging from 96 to 105 % [120].
Ghiasi et al. employed the composition of graphene quantum dots (GQDs), chitosan (CS), and
nickel molybdate nanocomposites (NiMoO4, NMO) for the modification of activated glassy carbon
electrode (NMO/GQDs/CS/GCEox) as an electrochemical sensor for DZN determination (Figure 1).
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1046
The NMO/GQDs/CS/GCEox for precise and swift analysis of DZN in cucumber and tomato as real
samples has been effectively used as a sensitive voltammetric sensor. Under optimized conditions,
the constructed sensor illustrated a linear range between 0.1 to 330.0 μM and a LOD of 30.0 nM
using differential pulse voltammetry methods [121].
Figure 1. Electrochemical sensor based on modified glassy carbon electrode with graphene quantum dots,
chitosan and nickel molybdate nanocomposites for the determination of diazinon [121]
Topsoy et al. described a new simple, sensitive, and easy method to manufacture voltammetric
sensor based on MWCNT-screen-printed electrode modification with poly(ε-caprolactone)/chitosan
(PCL/CHS) electrospun nanofibers (PCL/CHS nanofiber/MWCNT-SPE). The images of unmodified and
modified electrodes in DZN detection are shown in Figure 2.
Figure 2. The schematic diagram of bare MWCNT-SPE and PCL/CHS nanofiber-modified MWCNT-SPE [122]
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1047
The effects of different parameters such as coating thickness, analyte concentration, pH value of
the buffer solution, and scan rate on the electrochemical behavior of unmodified and modified screen-
printed carbon electrodes were investigated via CV, DPV, and electrochemical impedance
spectroscopy (EIS) techniques. The spinning time, pH value and scan rates were optimized at 6 min,
5.25, and 50 mV s-1, respecttively. The prepared PCL/CHS nanofiber/MWCNT-SPE displayed good
electrochemical performances with a wide detection range of 3.0–100.0 nM in 0.1 M acetate buffer
solution (pH 5.25), and a detection limit of 2.888 nM, respectively. Meanwhile, the sensor was
successfully applied for the determination of DZN in the tomato juice sample with recovery values in
the range of 93.27–108.30 % [122].
Porto et al. presented, for the first time, a fast and highly sensitive electrochemical method for
the determination of three organophosphorus compounds (OPs), DZN, malathion (MLT), and
chlorpyrifos (CLPF), using a modified pyrolytic graphite electrode (PGE) coupled to batch injection
analysis system with multiple pulse amperometric detection (BIA–MPA). The PGE was modified by
a nanocomposite based on functionalized carbon nanotubes and silver nanoparticles (CNTf-
AgNP/PGE). The OPs samples were directly analyzed on the modified working electrode surface by
BIA-MPA system in Britton-Robinson (BR) buffer 0.15 mol L− 1 at pH 6.0. The MPA detection of DZN,
MLT and CLPF was performed using two potential pulses, which were sequentially applied on
modified PGE at − 1.3 V (100 ms) and +0.8 V (100 ms) for selective determination of these three OPs
and working electrode cleaning, respectively. Under optimized conditions, the sensor presented a
linear range of 0.1–20.0 μM for DZN. The LOD and LOQ of 0.35 and 1.18 μM for DZN were obtained.
Also, CNTf-AgNP/PGE sensor exhibited high sensitivity of 0.068 mA μM for DZN detection.
Furthermore, the BIA-MPA system provided an analytical frequency of 71 determinations per hour
for the direct determination of these OPs in water and food samples. The modified PGE coupled to
BIA-MPA system showed high stability of electrochemical response for OPs detection with a relative
standard deviation (RSD) of 1.60 % (n = 20). The addition-recovery studies of the proposed method
were carried out in tap water, orange juice, and apple fruit real samples, which showed suitable
recovery values between 77 and 124 % [123].
Table 1. Features of various electrochemical sensors for the analysis of DZN.
Electrochemical sensor Electrochemical method LOD, nM Linear range Ref.
NCGCE SWV 75.0 0-5.0 µM [113]
Co-CPME DPV 0.015 0.05-27.0 µg / L [114]
nano-MIP-CPE SWV 0.79 2.5-2000.0 nM [115]
MWCNTs/TiO2NPs/GCE CV, SWV 3.0 11.0-8360.0 nM [116]
MWCNTs-MIP/CPE SWV 0.13 0.5-1000.0 nM [117]
ITO/MnPcTA/N3-PANI electrode SWV 62 - [118]
MWCNT/CPE DPV 0.45 0.1-10.0 nM [119]
Au–Pd/rGO–MWCNTs/GCE SWASV 2.0 0.009-11.3 µM [120]
NMO/GQDs/CS/GCEox DPV 30.0 0.1-330.0 μM [121]
PCL/CHS nanofiber/MWCNT-SPE DPV 2.888 3.0-100.0 nM [122]
CNTf-AgNP/PGE BIA-MPA 354.0 0.1-20.0 μM [123]
Development of electrochemical DZN biosensors
Biosensor-related research has experienced explosive growth over the last two decades. A
biosensor is generally defined as an analytical device that converts a biological response into a
quantifiable and processable signal [124]. In most biosensors developed so far, electrochemical
detection has been used in one way or another, i.e., amperometric, voltammetric, and impedimetric
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1878818119307194#!
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1048
detection. The basic principle for electrochemical biosensors is that chemical reactions between the
immobilized biomolecule and target analyte produce or consume electrons which cause some
change in the measurable electrical properties of the solution, such as electric current, conductance,
and potential [125-128].
Electrochemical biosensors, as a subclass of biological sensors, consist of a biological sensing ele-
ment and an electrochemical transducer. The recognition element (enzymes, antibodies, DNA/RNA,
proteins or other biomolecules) reacts selectively with the target analyte, and as a result, an electrical
signal is produced and then transmitted via the transducer to the signal processor [129-132]. A
bioreceptor allows the binding between the specific analyte of interest with the sensing surface for
measurement with minimum intervention from other components in a complex mixture. So, parallel
development in the immobilization of bioreceptors through robust attachment methods like electro-
deposition and nanoparticle-bound entities at the working electrode interface is a significant step in
the improved application of biosensors in various analytes analysis. The selection of robust and sui-
table immobilization methodology and precise selection of the bioreceptor molecule plays a great part
in the better specificity, selectivity, and affinity for their target analytes in electrochemical biosensing.
This section introduced examples of developed electrochemical DZN biosensors. Then, Table 2
tabulates information about electrochemical biosensor, electrochemical methods, limit of detection
(LOD), and linear range, which have been reported by various works.
Somerset et al. constructed a biosensor for organophosphate and carbamate detection with a
gold electrode coated with a mercaptobenzothiazole (MBT) self-assembled monolayer (SAM) and a
polyaniline derivative poly(o-methoxyaniline, POMA) or poly(2,5-dimethoxyaniline, PDMA) polymer
film in the presence of polystyrene sulfonic acid (PSSA), on which AchE was immobilized
(Au/MBT/POMA-PSSA/AChE or Au/MBT/PDMA-PSSA/AChE biosensors). The pesticide biosensors
were applied in the aqueous phase detection of DZN and carbofuran pesticides using Osteryoung
SWV and DPV at low frequencies. Between 85 and 94 % inhibition of the Au/MBT/PDMA-PSSA/AChE
and Au/MBT/POMA-PSSA/AChE biosensors, respectively, by 1.19 ppb of these neurotoxins attests
to their potency. Both Au/MBT/PDMA-PSSA/AChE and Au/MBT/POMAPSSA/AChE biosensors
exhibited low detection limits, which were calculated using the inhibition methodology. The
Au/MBT/POMA-PSSA/AChE biosensor exhibited lower detection limits of 0.07 ppb for DZN and
0.06 ppb for carbofuran than the Au/MBT/PDMA-PSSA/AChE sensor system that had detection
limits values of 0.14 ppb for DZN and 0.11 ppb for carbofuran. The average sensitivity of the
pesticide biosensor systems is 4.2 µA/ppb [133].
In 2007, Albuquerque and Ferreira used acetyl cellulose–graphite composite film modified with
Cobalt phthalocyanine (CoPc) to modify the electrode surface (CoPc-CGCE). First, graphite powder was
mixed homogeneously with CoPc. Then, acetyl cellulose was applied to the mixture. After homo-
genization, the final composite was applied to polycarbonate support. Tyrosinase and bovine serum
albumin (BSA) were then immobilized on the modified electrode's surface (Tyr-BSA-CoPc-CGCE) by
adding glutaraldehyde. The authors used the biosensor to measure organophosphorus and
carbamates concentration. First, the immobilized tyrosinase enzyme activity was evaluated by
measuring the quantity of catechol consumed or o-quinone formed in the reaction (Figure 3). They
monitored the increased concentration of o-quinone produced or the reduced concentration of the
consumed catechol at a potential of -0.20 and +0.60 V, respectively. After stabilizing the background
current, all amperometric measurements were carried out with the biosensor at a constant potential
of -0.20 V versus Ag/AgCl as the counter and reference electrode. To detect pesticides using a
biosensor containing tyrosinase, they measured the enzyme activity in two steps using a solution
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1049
containing catechol. In the first step, the biosensor was submerged in a solution containing catechol.
The enzyme on the surface of the electrode converted the catechol to o-quinone, and then o-qui-
none produced was measured at −0.20 V after 2 minutes. In the second step, the biosensor was
submerged in the catechol solution after adding a given amount of pesticide, and the biosensor
activity was evaluated after 2 minutes. The results show that methyl parathion and carbofuran can
lead to a competitive inhibition process of the enzyme, while diazinon and carbaryl act as mixed
inhibitors. Linear relationships were found for methyl parathion (6.0–100.0 ppb), DZN (19.0 to
50.0 ppb), carbofuran (5.0–90.0 ppb) and carbaryl (10.0–50.0 ppb). Analysis of natural river water
samples spiked with 30 ppb of each pesticide showed recoveries between 92.50 and 98.50 % and
relative standard deviations of 2 % [134].
Figure 3. Principle of the enzymatic and electrochemical coupled reactions for the detection of catechol as
substrate [134]
Somerset et al. modified a gold disc electrode with a mercaptobenzothiazole selfassembled
monolayer prior to polyaniline electropolymerization, followed by AChE immobilization and polyvinyl
acetate coating in creating a thick film electrode (Au/MBT/PANI/AChE/PVAc) for sensitive organo-
phosphorous pesticide detection. The dual role of polyaniline shows electrocatalytic activity towards
thiocholine and serves as an immobilization matrix for the AChE as an enzyme, and that of polyvinyl
acetate as a binder in this thick film electrode is demonstrated. Relatively low detection limits were
obtained for the Au/MBT/PANI/AChE/PVAc pesticide bioelectrodes using the inhibition methodology
and an incubation time of 20 min. The values for the detection limits were 0.147 ppb for DZN and
0.172 ppb for fenthion in acetone-saline phosphate buffer solution [135].
Zehani et al. developed two novel impedimetric biosensors for highly sensitive and rapid
quantitative detection of DZN in an aqueous medium using two types of lipase, from Candida Rugosa
(microbial source) (CRL) and porcine pancreas (animal source) (PPL) immobilized on the function-
nalized gold electrode (CRL immobilized gold electrode, PPL immobilized gold electrode). Lipase is
characterized to specifically catalyze the hydrolysis of ester functions leading to the transformation
of DZN into diethyl phosphorothioic acid (DETP) and 2-isopropyl-4-methyl-6-hydroxypyrimidine
(IMHP). The developed biosensors both presented a wide range of linearity up to 50 μM with a
detection limit of 10 nM for CRL immobilized gold electrode biosensors and 0.1 μM for PPL
immobilized gold electrode biosensor. A comparative study was carried out between the two
biosensors and the results showed higher efficiency of CRL immobilized gold electrode biosensor.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1050
Moreover, it presented good accuracy and reproducibility and had very good storage and multiple-
use stability for 25 days when stored at 4 °C [136].
Arvand and Dehsaraei constructed a chemically modified glassy carbon electrode by graphene
oxide (GO), functionalized double-strand DNA (ds-DNA) and gold nanorods (GNRs). Interaction
between oxygenated groups of GO and GNRs with amine-thiol groups of ds-DNA was used to
construct a sandwich-modified electrode named GNRs/ds-DNA/GO/GCE. Then, they examined the
response of the GNRs/ds-DNA/GO/GCE to the sensing of DZN. To find the effects of modifiers on
DZN detection, CV and electrochemical impedance spectroscopy were used in each modification
step. The pH and scan rate were optimized at 6.0 and 0.1 V s−1, respectively. The dynamic range of
GNRs/ds-DNA/GO/GCE in DZN determination was studied by amperometry with the linear con-
centration range of 1.9 to 56 M and a detection limit of 0.19 M. Finally, the application of modi-
fied electrode was evaluated on two polluted river water samples with 98.5 to 101 % recovery [137].
Pajooheshpour et al. employed an enzyme-less electrochemical biosensor based on a glassy carbon
electrode modified with bovine serum albumin (BSA) templated Au-Pt bimetallic nanoclusters and
graphene nanoribbons (GNRs) (Au-Pt@BSAGNRs/GCE) for the determination of DZN. The synthesized
novel sensing layer not only demonstrated attractive structural features but was known to possess
excellent electrochemical characteristics, which enabled the development of a reliable, sensitive,
robust and selective electrochemical sensor for DZN. The electrochemical properties of the biosensor
were investigated by CV, square wave anodic stripping voltammetry (SWASV) and electrochemical
impedance spectroscopy. The results showed that Au-Pt@BSAGNRs/GCE significantly catalyzes the
oxidation and reduction of DZN during electrochemical detection. The linear ranges of DZN were
between 0.01 to 10.0 and 10.0 to 170.0 µM, with a detection limit of 0.002 µM. The results indicate
the excellent capability of the method for the detection of DZN in real samples in comparison with the
standard method [138].
Hassani et al. developed a novel label-free electrochemical thiolated aptasensor immobilized on
gold nanoparticle-modified screen-printed gold electrodes (aptamer/ Au NP/ SPGEs) in order to
detect minimum levels of DZN in biological samples with high sensitivity and fast performance, as
illustrated in Figure 4.
Figure 4. Schematic construction of the designed aptasensor for detection of diazinon [139]
Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy and CV were used to characterize the electrochemical
properties of the novel aptasensor. Electrochemical detection was carried out through DPV in
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1051
[Fe(CN)6]3-/4- solution. Fluctuation of the current was examined in the DZN concentration range of
0.1 to 1000.0 nM. According to the results, the designed aptasensor has exhibited the minimum
limit of detection for DZN (0.0169 nM) [139].
Zare et al. developed an electrochemical biosensor for the detection of DZN. For this purpose,
they modified the surface of a glassy carbon electrode with MWCNTs and poly-l-lysine to immobilize
a double-strain DNA (ds-DNA) on the surface of the electrode (DNA/PLL/MWCNTs/GCE). The
interaction of DZN with ds-DNA was transduced via electrochemical impedance and UV–Vis
spectroscopy in the first step. The results revealed an interaction between DZN and ds-DNA. L-lysine
as a polycation and small-sized MWCNTs provides a surface with positive charges and a high surface
area for the immobilization of ds-DNA. This interaction leads to reduced interfacial charge-transfer
resistance (Rct). The difference in the Rct before and after the interaction is considered a suitable
signal for DZN detection. The proposed biosensor has a low detection limit (0.3 nM), a wide linear
dynamic range (0.001‒100.0 µM), and high selectivity for the determination of DZN. Finally, the
performance of the biosensor for detecting DZN is verified in real samples such as river water,
agricultural wastewater, lettuce juice, and tomato juice [140].
Khosropour et al. [141] synthesized the vanadium disulfide quantum dots (VS2QDs) by a facile
hydrothermal method and doped them on the graphene nanoplatelets/carboxylated multiwalled
carbon nanotubes (GNP/CMWCNTs) as a new group of the nanocomposite. They incubated the
VS2QDs-GNP/CMWCNTs nanocomposite on a glassy carbon electrode with the DZN binding aptamer
(DZBA) through electrostatic interaction (GCE/VS2QDsGNP/CMWCNTs/DZBA). The GCE/VS2QDs-
GNP/CMWCNTs/DZBA was used for the low detection of DZN by monitoring the oxidation of
[Fe(CN)6]3-/4- as the redox probe. The characterizations of the modified electrode were performed by
several electrochemical methods, including CV, DPV, and EIS. The DZBA selectively adsorbs DZN on
the modified electrode, leading to a decrease and increase in the current of DPV and charge transfer
resistance (Rct), respectively, as analytical signals. The developed electrochemical aptasensor at the
optimal conditions has a low LOD equal to 1.1×10-5 and 2.0×10-6 nM with wide dynamic ranges of
5.0×10-5-10 nM and 10-5-10 nM for DPV and EIS calibration curves, respectively. Moreover, the
analytical approach was further utilized for DZN determination in human serum, Zayandehrood river
water, soil, apple, and lettuce samples and the GCE/VS2QDs-GNP/CMWCNTs/DZBA/BSA aptasensing
strategy exhibited a recovery rate from 97.0 to 107.0 % [141].
Table 2. Features of various electrochemical biosensors for the analysis of DZN
Electrochemical sensor Electrochemical method LOD Linear range Ref.
Au/MBT/PDMA-PSSA/AChE SWV 0.14 ppb
- [133]
Au/MBT/POMAPSSA/AChE DPV 0.07 ppb
Tyr-BSA-CoPc-CGCE Amperometric - 19.0–50.0 ppb [134]
Au/MBT/PANI/AChE/PVAc Amperometric 0.147 ppb - [135]
CRL immobilized gold electrode
Impedimetric
10.0 nM 0.01-50.0 µM
[136]
PPL immobilized gold electrode 0.1 µM 0.1-50.0 µM
GNRs/ds-DNA/GO/GCE Amperometric 190.0 nM 1.9 - 56.0 M [137]
Au-Pt@BSAGNRs/GCE SWASV 0.002 µM 0.01-170.0 µM [138]
aptamer/ Au NP/ SPGEs DPV 0.0169 nM 0.1-1000.0 nM [139]
DNA/PLL/MWCNTs/GCE Impedimetric 0.3 nM 0.001-100.0 µM [140]
GCE/VS2QDs-
GNP/CMWCNTs/DZBA/BSA
Impedimetric 2.0×10-1 nM 10-5-10.0 nM
[141]
DPV 1.1 ×10-14 M 5.0×10-5-10.0 nM
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1052
Conclusion
Diazinon is a pesticide belonging to the organophosphorus pesticides class, which is widely used in
agriculture to control pests in soil, vegetables, and fruits. Residues of pesticides can enter the food
chain and cause many problems. DZN is considered one of the most important contaminants, and its
amount in the environment, waters, and crops should be managed due to its toxicity and long half-
life. Thus, we need analytical methods to be able to detect the amount of that compound quickly. The
electrochemical technique has many advantages for environmental research compared to other
analytical techniques; for example, it does not require sample preparation steps and is fast, simple,
cost-effective, and non-destructive. The limit of detection obtained by this technique possesses good
sensitivity to the target molecules and environmental applications. In addition to sensitivity, the
technique's specificity in recognizing the target molecule is critical. The challenging problems
associated with promoting specificity and selectivity make the researchers seek new substances to
modify electrodes and develop new electrochemical sensors. Thus, different modifying methods have
been used to recognize DZN, which are different in terms of the type of the working electrode, the
applied technique, and the method of modifying the surface. From the above discussion, it is evident
that nanomaterials, such as CNTs, graphene, metal nanoparticles,etc., are promising materials for
fabricating electrochemical sensors by signal amplification, thereby improving the sensitivity of the
assay. Nanotechnology is one of the likely areas to show encouraging prospects for developing sensors
for the detection of DZN by overcoming the shortcomings of currently-available analytical procedures.
Although each method can detect DZN, it seems that the techniques based on biological components
such as DNA and enzymes have the lowest LOD for recognition of DZN compared to other techniques.
However, biological receptors allow for specific recognition of the target molecules and are widely
used in the detection, bioassays, and chemical sensors.
Apart from these advantages, the real challenges for the future are those of good electrode
materials, miniaturization and of measurements in as close to real-time as possible.
Another trend for future research on electrochemical sensors is to develop them for in vivo
analysis and continuous testing as well as for in vitro testing. Sensor arrays for detecting multi-
analyte will be required and the densities of arrays for more complete and rapid information need
to increase. Microfluidic sensor systems, capable of expanding sizes of arrays while reducing sample
volume, as well as non-invasive biosensors, will revolutionize sensor techniques and technology.
References
[1] R. Osterauer, H. Kohler, Aquatic Toxicology 86 (2008) 485-494. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.aquatox.2007.12.013
[2] G. K. Sidhu, S. Singh, V. Kumar, D. S. Dhanjal, S. Datta, J. Singh, Critical Reviews in
Environmental Science and Technology 49 (2019) 1135-1187. https://doi.org/10.1080/10
643389.2019.1565554
[3] Q. Long, H. Li, Y. Zhang, S. Yao, Biosensors & Bioelectronics 68 (2015) 168-174.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2014.12.046
[4] A. Salehzadeh, R. Abbasalipourkabir, B. Shisheian, A. Rafaat, A. Nikkhah, T. Rezaii, Drug
and Chemical Toxicology 42 (2019) 280-285. https://doi.org/10.1080/01480545.2018.14
49852
[5] D. G. Karpouzas, K. B. Advances in Microbial Physiology 51 (2006) 185-122.
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2911(06)51003-3
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2007.12.013
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aquatox.2007.12.013
https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2019.1565554
https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2019.1565554
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2014.12.046
https://doi.org/10.1080/01480545.2018.1449852
https://doi.org/10.1080/01480545.2018.1449852
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0065-2911(06)51003-3
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1053
[6] National pesticide information center, Diazinon, Technical Fact Sheet. http://npic.orst.edu/
factsheets/archive/diazinontech.html (accessed September 17, 2022)
[7] Environmental Risk Assessment for Diazinon, Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S.
Government Printing Office: Washington DC, USA, 2000.
[8] C. Timchalk, Organophosphate Insecticide Pharmacokinetics. Handbook of Pesticide
Toxicology, R. Krieger, Ed., Academic Press: San Diego, 2 (2010) 1409-1433.
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374367-1.00066-5
[9] Y. Yi, G. Zhu, C. Liu, Y. Huang, Y. Zhang, H. Li, J. Zhao, S. Yao, Analytical Chemistry 85
(2013) 11464-11470. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac403257p
[10] S. Mostafalou, M. Abdollahi, Toxicology 409 (2018) 44-52. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.tox.2018.07.014
[11] P. Wang, H. Li, M. M. Hassan, Z. Guo, Z.-Z. Zhang, Q. Chen, Journal of Agricultural and
Food Chemistry 67 (2019) 4071-4079. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b07201
[12] Environmental Protection Agency, I.R.E.D Facts, Diazinon, Pesticides and Toxic
Substances, U.S. Office of Pesticide Programs 2004. https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/Zy
PURL.cgi?Dockey=10004G10.TXT (accessed September 17, 2022)
[13] EPA, Reregistration Eligibility Decision (RED) for Diazinon, Pesticides and Toxic Substances,
U.S. Government Printing Office, Washington DC, USA, 2006. https://www3.epa.gov/pe
sticides/chem_search/reg_actions/reregistration/red_PC-057801_31-Jul-06.pdf
[14] P. E. Howard, Handbook of Environmental Fate and Exposure Data for Organic Chemicals,
Lewis Publishers, Inc., Chelsea MI, USA, 1991 209. ISBN 9780873713283
[15] A. G. Hornsby, R. D. Wauchope, A. E. Herner, Pesticide Properties in the Environment,
Springer-Verlag, New York, USA, 1996, 83. ISBN 978-0-387-94353-4
[16] ToxGuide for Diazinon; U.S. Department of Health and Human Services, Agency for Toxic
Substances and Disease Registry, Atlanta, 2006.
https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxguides/toxguide-86.pdf
[17] M. K. Morgan, D. M. Stout, P. A. Jones, D. B. Barr, Environmental Research 107 (2008)
336-342. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2008.03.004
[18] M. A. Kamrin, Pesticide Profiles: Toxicity, Environmental Impacts, and Fate, Lewis
Publishers, Boca Raton FL, USA, 1997, 157. https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1998.0047
2425002700040038x
[19] T. R. Roberts, D. H. Hutson, Metabolic Pathways of Agrochemicals - Part 2: Insecticides
and Fungicides, The Royal Society of Chemistry: Cambridge, UK, 1999, 258.
https://doi.org/10.1039/9781847551375-00937
[20] A. Kretschmann, R. Ashauer, K. Hitzfeld, P. Spaak, J. Hollender, B. I. Escher, Environmental
Science & Technology 45 (2011) 4980-4987. https://doi.org/10.1021/es1042386
[21] D. C. Villeneuve, R. F. Willes, J. B. Lacroix, W. E. J. Phillips, Toxicology and Applied
Pharmacology 21 (1972) 201-205. https://doi.org/10.1016/0041-008X(72)90010-5
[22] J. R. Reigart, J. R. Roberts, Organophosphate Insecticides. Recognition and Management
of Pesticide Poisonings, 5th ed., U.S Environmental Protection Agency, Office of
Prevention, Pesticides and Toxic Substances, Office of Pesticide Programs, U.S.
Government Printing Office, Washington DC, USA, 1999, 34-47.
[23] S. L. Wagner, Diagnosis and Treatment of Organophosphate and Carbamate Intoxication,
in Human Health Effects of Pesticides; M. C. Keifer, Ed., Hanley and Belfus, Philadelphia,
USA 12 (1997) 239-249.
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/archive/diazinontech.html
http://npic.orst.edu/factsheets/archive/diazinontech.html
https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-374367-1.00066-5
https://doi.org/10.1021/ac403257p
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2018.07.014
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.tox.2018.07.014
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b07201
https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=10004G10.TXT
https://nepis.epa.gov/Exe/ZyPURL.cgi?Dockey=10004G10.TXT
https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/reregistration/red_PC-057801_31-Jul-06.pdf
https://www3.epa.gov/pesticides/chem_search/reg_actions/reregistration/red_PC-057801_31-Jul-06.pdf
https://www.atsdr.cdc.gov/toxguides/toxguide-86.pdf
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2008.03.004
https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1998.00472425002700040038x
https://doi.org/10.2134/jeq1998.00472425002700040038x
https://doi.org/10.1039/9781847551375-00937
https://doi.org/10.1021/es1042386
https://doi.org/10.1016/0041-008X(72)90010-5
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1054
[24] M. Behbahani, A. Veisi, F. Omidi, M.Y. Badi, A. Noghrehabadi, A. Esrafili, H. R. Sobhi, New
Journal of Chemistry 42 (2018) 4289-4296. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7NJ03788K
[25] A. Concha-Meyer, S. Grandon, G. Sepulveda, R. Diaz, J. Antonio Yuri, C. Torres, Food
Chemistry 295 (2019) 64-71. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.05.046
[26] V. K. Gupta, A. K. Singh, L. K. Kumawat, Sensors and Actuators B 195 (2014b) 98-108.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2013.12.092
[27] J. Li, X. Teng, W. Wang, Z. Zhang, C. Fan, Journal of Separation Science 42 (2019) 1990-
2002. https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.201800975
[28] P. Vinas, N. Campillo, I. Lopez-Garcia, N. Aguinaga, M. Hernandez-Cordoba, Journal of
Chromatography A 978 (2002) 249-256. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(02)01443-7
[29] D. Guziejewski, S. Skrzypek, W. Ciesielski, Environmental Monitoring and Assessment 184
(2012) 6575-6582. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2442-7
[30] B. Ondes, M. Soysal, Journal of the Electrochemical Society 166 (2019) B395-B401.
https://doi.org/10.1149/2.0631906jes
[31] V. K. Gupta, L. P. Singh, R. Singh, N. Upadhyay, S. P. Kaur, B. Sethi, Journal of Molecular
Liquids 174 (2012) 11-16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2012.07.016
[32] E. Ceballos-Alcantarilla, C. Agullo, A. Abad-Somovilla, J.V.M. A. Abad-Fuentes, Food
Chemistry 288 (2019) 117-126. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.03.007
[33] D. Ferri, P. Gavina, A. M. Costero, M. Parra, J.-L. Vivancos, R. Martinez-Manez, Sensors and
Actuators B-Chemical 202 (2014) 727-731. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2014.06.011
[34] Y. Rong, H. Li, Q. Ouyang, S. Ali, Q. Chen, Spectrochimica Acta Part A: Molecular and
Biomolecular Spectroscopy 239 (2020) 118500. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2020.118500
[35] M. Tefera, S. Admassie, M. Tessema, S. Mehretie, Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry
Research 2 (2015) 139-150. https://dx.doi.org/10.22036/abcr.2015.11928
[36] H. Mahmoudi-Moghaddam, S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, Food Chemistry 286 (2019) 191-196.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.01.143
[37] H. Karimi-Maleh, A. Khataee, F. Karimi, M. Baghayeri, L. Fu, J. Rouhi, R. Boukherroub,
Chemosphere 291 (2022) 132928. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132928
[38] N. Rajabi, M. Masrournia, M. Abedi, Chemical Methodologies 4 (2020) 660-670.
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.109975
[39] J.A. Buledi, N. Mahar, A. Mallah, A.R. Solangi, I.M. Palabiyik, N. Qambrani, F. Karimi, Y.
Vasseghian, H. Karimi-Maleh, Food and Chemical Toxicology 161 (2022) 112843.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112843
[40] H. Mahmoudi-Moghaddam, S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, Microchemical Journal 150 (2019)
104085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2019.104085
[41] M. Montazarolmahdi, M. Masrournia, A. Nezhadali, Chemical Methodologies 4 (2020)
732-742. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113388
[42] H. Karimi-Maleh, F. Karimi, Y. Orooji, G. Mansouri, A. Razmjou, A. Aygun, F. Sen, Scientific
Reports 10 (2020) 11699. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68663-2
[43] M. M. Foroughi, H. Beitollahi, S. Tajik, A. Akbari, R. Hosseinzadeh, International Journal of
Electrochemical Science 9 (2014) 8407. http://www.electrochemsci.org/papers/vol9/912
08407.pdf
[44] M. Motahharinia, H. Zamani, H. Karimi-Maleh, Chemical Methodologies 5 (2021) 107-113.
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119678
https://doi.org/10.1039/C7NJ03788K
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.05.046
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2013.12.092
https://doi.org/10.1002/jssc.201800975
https://doi.org/10.1016/S0021-9673(02)01443-7
https://doi.org/10.1007/s10661-011-2442-7
https://doi.org/10.1149/2.0631906jes
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2012.07.016
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.03.007
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2014.06.011
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2020.118500
https://dx.doi.org/10.22036/abcr.2015.11928
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2019.01.143
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132928
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.109975
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112843
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2019.104085
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113388
https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68663-2
http://www.electrochemsci.org/papers/vol9/91208407.pdf
http://www.electrochemsci.org/papers/vol9/91208407.pdf
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119678
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1055
[45] H. Beitollahi, H. Mahmoudi Moghaddam, S. Tajik, Analytical Letters 52(9) (2019) 1432-
1444. https://doi.org/10.1080/00032719.2018.1545132
[46] S. Saghiri, M. Ebrahimi, M. Bozorgmehr, Chemical Methodologies 5 (1999) 234-239.
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.128530
[47] M. Bijad, H. Karimi-Maleh, M. Farsi, S.-A. Shahidi, Journal of Food Measurement and
Characterization 12 (2018) 634-640. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-017-9676-1
[48] H. Peyman, H. Roshanfekr, A. Babakhanian, H. Jafari, Chemical Methodologies 5 (2021)
446-453. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.135266
[49] A. Moghaddam, H. Zamani, H. Karimi-Maleh, Chemical Methodologies 5 (2021) 373-380.
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.135727
[50] A. Shamsi, F. Ahour, Advanced Journal of Chemistry A 4 (2020) 22-31. https://dx.doi.org/
10.22034/ajca.2020.252025.1215
[51] F. Tahernejad-Javazmi, M. Shabani-Nooshabadi, H. Karimi-Maleh, Talanta 176 (2018) 208-
213. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.08.027
[52] H. Beitollahi, S. Tajik, F. G. Nejad, M. Safaei, Journal of Materials Chemistry B 8(27) (2020)
5826-5844. https://doi.org/10.1039/D0TB00569J
[53] M. Abrishamkar, S. Ehsani Tilami, S. Hosseini Kaldozakh, Advanced Journal of Chemistry A
3 (2020) 767-776. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.114113
[54] H. Beitollahi, F. G. Nejad, Z. Dourandish, S. Tajik, Environmental Research 214 (2022)
113725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.113725
[55] S. Cheraghi, M.A. Taher, H. Karimi-Maleh, Journal of Food Composition and Analysis, 62
(2017) 254-259. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2017.06.006
[56] P. M. Jahani, F. G. Nejad, Z. Dourandish, M. P. Zarandi, M. M. Safizadeh, S. Tajik, H.
Beitollahi, Chemosphere 302 (2022) 134712. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.
2022.134712
[57] S. Azimi, M. Amiri, H. Imanzadeh, A. Bezaatpour, Advanced Journal of Chemistry A 4
(2021) 152-164. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2021.275901.1246
[58] M. Miraki, H. Karimi-Maleh, M. A. Taher, S. Cheraghi, F. Karimi, S. Agarwal, V. K. Gupta,
Journal of Molecular Liquids 278 (2019) 672-676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.20
19.01.081
[59] H. Beitollahi, S. Tajik, H. K. Maleh, R. Hosseinzadeh, Applied Organometallic Chemistry
27(8) (2013) 444-450. https://doi.org/10.1002/aoc.3001
[60] J. Mohanraj, D. Durgalakshmi, R. A. Rakkesh, S. Balakumar, S. Rajendran, H. Karimi-Maleh,
Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 566 (2020) 463-472. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.jcis.2020.01.089
[61] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, F. G. Nejad, K. O. Kirlikovali, Q. Van Le, H. W. Jang, R. S. Varma, O. K.
Farha, M. Shokouhimehr, Crystal Growth & Design 20(10) (2020) 7034-7064.
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.cgd.0c00601
[62] H. Sadeghi, S. Shahidi, S. Naghizadeh Raeisi, A. Ghorbani-HasanSaraei, F. Karimi, Chemical
Methodologies 4 (2020) 743-753. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113657
[63] X. Liu, International Journal of Electrochemistry 2011 (2011) 986494. https://doi.org/
10.4061/2011/986494
[64] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, F. G. Nejad, I. S. Shoaie, M. A. Khalilzadeh, M. S. Asl, Q. Van Le, K.
Zhang, H. W. Jang, M. Shokouhimehr, RSC Advances 10(62) (2020) 37834-37856.
https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RA06160C
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
https://doi.org/10.1080/00032719.2018.1545132
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.128530
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-017-9676-1
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.135266
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.135727
https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.252025.1215
https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.252025.1215
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.08.027
https://doi.org/10.1039/D0TB00569J
https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.114113
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.113725
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jfca.2017.06.006
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134712
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134712
https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2021.275901.1246
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.01.081
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.01.081
https://doi.org/10.1002/aoc.3001
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2020.01.089
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2020.01.089
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.cgd.0c00601
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113657
https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/986494
https://doi.org/10.4061/2011/986494
https://doi.org/10.1039/D0RA06160C
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1056
[65] H. Karimi-Maleh, M. Sheikhshoaie, I. Sheikhshoaie, M. Ranjbar, J. Alizadeh, N. W.
Maxakato, A. Abbaspourrad, New Journal of Chemistry 43(5) (2019) 2362-2367.
https://doi.org/10.1039/C8NJ05581E
[66] Y. Orooji, P. N. Asrami, H. Beitollahi, S. Tajik, M. Alizadeh, S. Salmanpour, M. Baghayeri, J.
Rouhi, A. L. Sanati, F. Karimi, Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 15(5)
(2021) 4098-4104. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-00982-y
[67] L. C. Fajardo, A. I. B. Tamayo, A. M. E. Guas, Journal of Electrochemical Science and
Engineering 11 (2021) 247-261. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1005
[68] F. G. Nejad, M. H. Asadi, I. Sheikhshoaie, Z. Dourandish, R. Zaimbashi, H. Beitollahi, Food
and Chemical Toxicology 166 (2022) 113243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113243
[69] S. A. Alavi-Tabari, M. A. Khalilzadeh, H. Karimi-Maleh, Journal of Electroanalytical
Chemistry 811 (2018) 84-88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2018.01.034
[70] B. Kamble, K.M. Garadkar, K.K. Sharma, P. Kamble, S. Tayade, B.D. Ajalkar, Journal of
Electrochemical Science and Engineering 11 (2021) 143-159. https://doi.org/10.5599/
jese.956
[71] I. Amar, A. Sharif, M. Ali, S. Alshareef, F. Altohami, M. Abdulqadir, M. Ahwidi, Chemical
Methodologies 4 (2020) 1-18. https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.1.1
[72] H. Karimi-Maleh, C. Karaman, O. Karaman, F. Karimi, Y. Vasseghian, L. Fu, A. Mirabi,
Journal of Nanostructure in Chemistry 12 (2022) 429-439. https://doi.org/10.1007/
s40097-022-00492-3
[73] A. Dehno Khalaji, Chemical Methodologies 4(1) (2020) 34-39. https://doi.org/10.33945/
SAMI/CHEMM.2020.1.3
[74] S. Mafi, K. Mahanpoor, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(1) (2020) 59-77.
http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.7
[75] H. Karimi-Maleh, R. Darabi, M. Shabani-Nooshabadi, M. Baghayeri, F. Karimi, J. Rouhi, C.
Karaman, Food and Chemical Toxicology 162 (2022) 112907. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.fct.2022.112907
[76] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, F. G. Nejad, Z. Dourandish, M. A. Khalilzadeh, H. W. Jang, R. A.
Venditti, R. S. Varma, M. Shokouhimehr, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research
60(3) (2021) 1112-1136. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.0c04952
[77] M. Rohaniyan, A. Davoodnia, S. Beyramabadi, Chemical Methodologies 4 (2020) 285-296.
https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM/2020.3.6
[78] E. Naderi; N. Akbarzadeh-T; T. Kondori; A. Tahkor, Eurasian Chemical Communications
2(2) (2020) 265-271. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.12
[79] S. Sarli; N. Ghasemi, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(3) (2020) 302-318.
http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.3.2
[80] S. Tajik, Y. Orooji, Z. Ghazanfari, F. Karimi, H. Beitollahi, R. S. Varma, H. W. Jang, M.
Shokouhimehr, Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 15(4) (2021) 3837-
3852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-00955-1
[81] F. Raoufi, H. Aghaei, M. Ghaedi, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(2) (2020) 226-233.
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.8
[82] S.S. Mohammadi, N. Ghasemi M. Ramezani, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(1)
(2020) 87-102. https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.10
[83] B. Baghernejad, M. Rostami Harzevili, Chemical Methodologies 5(2) (2021) 90-95.
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119641
https://doi.org/10.1039/C8NJ05581E
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-00982-y
https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1005
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113243
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2018.01.034
https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.956
https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.956
https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.1.1
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00492-3
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00492-3
https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.1.3
https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.1.3
http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.7
http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.7
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112907
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112907
https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.0c04952
https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM/2020.3.6
http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.12
http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.3.2
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-00955-1
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.8
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.10
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119641
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1057
[84] Z. Hoseini, A. Davoodnia, A. Khojastehnezhad, M. Pordel. Eurasian Chemical
Communications 2(3) (2020) 398-409. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.3.10
[85] S. Tajik, Y. Orooji, F. Karimi, Z. Ghazanfari, H. Beitollahi, M. Shokouhimehr, R. S. Varma, H.
W. Jang, Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 15(5) (2021) 4617-4622.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01027-0
[86] N. Ahmadi, A. Ramazani, S. Rezayati, F. Hosseini, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(8)
(2020) 862-874. http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.108366
[87] M. Alidadykhoh, H. Pyman, H. Roshanfekr, Chemical Methodologies 5(2) (2021) 96-106.
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119677
[88] M. Ozdal, S. Gurkok, ADMET and DMPK 10 (2022) 115-129. https://doi.org/10.5599/
admet.1172
[89] S. Staroverov, S. Kozlov, A. Fomin, K. Gabalov, V. Khanadeev, D. Soldatov, I. Domnitsky, L.
Dykman, S.V. Akchurin, O. Guliy, ADMET and DMPK 9 (2021) 255-266. https://doi.org/
10.5599/admet.1023
[90] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, H. W. Jang, M. Shokouhimehr, Talanta 232 (2021) 122379.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2021.122379
[91] F. G. Nejad, S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, I. Sheikhshoaie, Talanta 228 (2021) 122075.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2020.122075
[92] M. Shahsavari, M. Mortazavi, S. Tajik, I. Sheikhshoaie, H. Beitollahi, Micromachines 13(1)
(2022) 88. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13010088
[93] S.S. Moshirian-Farahi, H.A. Zamani, M. Abedi, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(9)
(2020) 702-711. https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.6.7
[94] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, Z. Dourandish, P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani, I. Sheikhshoaie, M. B.
Askari, M. Shokouhimehr, Electroanalysis 34(7) (2022) 1065-1091.
https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.202100393
[95] T. Eren, N. Atar, M. L. Yola, H. Karimi-Maleh, Food Chemistry 185 (2015) 430-436.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.03.153
[96] S. Tajik, A. Lohrasbi-Nejad, P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani, M. B. Askari, P. Salarizadeh, H.
Beitollahi, Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 16(1) (2022) 722-730.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01201-4
[97] M. Payehghadr; Y. Taherkhani; A. Maleki; F. Nourifard, Eurasian Chemical
Communications 2(9) (2020) 982-990. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.114589
[98] S. Tajik, M. B. Askari, S. A. Ahmadi, F. G. Nejad, Z. Dourandish, R. Razavi, H. Beitollahi, A. Di
Bartolomeo, Nanomaterials 12(3) (2022) 491. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12030491
[99] A. Hosseini Fakhrabad; R. Sanavi Khoshnood; M.R. Abedi; M. Ebrahimi, Eurasian Chemical
Communications 3(9) (2021) 627-634. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2021.288271.1182
[100] M. Pirozmand, A. Nezhadali, M. Payehghadr, L. Saghatforoush, Eurasian Chemical
Communications 2(10) (2020) 1021-1032. http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.24
1560.1063
[101] T. Girish, J.G. Manjunatha, P.A. Pushpanjali, N. S. Prinith, D. K. Ravishankar, G. Siddaraju,
Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 11 (2021) 27-38. https://doi.org/
10.5599/jese.934
[102] M. R. Aflatoonian, S. Tajik, B. Aflatoonian, M. S. Ekrami-Kakhki, K. Divsalar, I. Sheikh
Shoaie, Z. Dourandish, M. Sheikhshoaie, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(4) (2020)
505-515. https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.4.8
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.3.10
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01027-0
http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.108366
https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119677
https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1172
https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1172
https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1023
https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1023
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2021.122379
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2020.122075
https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13010088
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.6.7
https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.202100393
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.03.153
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01201-4
https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.114589
https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12030491
https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2021.288271.1182
http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.241560.1063
http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.241560.1063
https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.934
https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.934
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.4.8
J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059 ELECTROCHEMICAL STRATEGIES FOR DETECTION OF DIAZINON
1058
[103] H. Pyman, H. Roshanfekr, S. Ansari, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(2) (2020) 213-
225. https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.7
[104] H. Karimi-Maleh, A. F. Shojaei, K. Tabatabaeian, F. Karimi, S. Shakeri, R. Moradi,
Biosensors and Bioelectronics 86 (2016) 879-884. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.20
16.07.086
[105] M. R. Aflatoonian, B. Aflatoonian, R. Alizadeh, R. Abbasi Rayeni, Eurasian Chemical
Communications 2(1) (2020) 35-43. https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.4
[106] S. Mafi, K. Mahanpoor, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(1) (2020) 59-77.
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.7
[107] F. G. Nejad, I. Sheikhshoaie, H. Beitollahi, Food and Chemical Toxicology 162 (2022)
112864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112864
[108] H. Karimi-Maleh, H. Beitollahi, P. S. Kumar, S. Tajik, P. M. Jahani, F. Karimi, C. Karaman, Y.
Vasseghian, M. Baghayeri, J. Rouhi, P. L. Show, Food and Chemical Toxicology 164 (2022)
112961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112961
[109] A. Dinu, C. Apetrei, Sensors 20(9) (2020) 2496. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20092496
[110] S. Tajik, Z. Dourandish, F. G. Nejad, A. Aghaei Afshar, H. Beitollahi, Micromachines 13(3)
(2022) 369. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13030369
[111] A. Hojjati-Najafabadi, M. Mansoorianfar, T. X. Liang, K. Shahin, H. Karimi-Maleh, Science of
The Total Environment 824 (2022) 153844. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.15
3844
[112] G. Erdoğdu, Journal of Analytical Chemistry 58(6) (2003) 569-572. https://doi.org/10.10
23/A:1024120320359
[113] M. Arvand, M. Vaziri, M. A. Zanjanchi, Journal of Analytical Chemistry 68(5) (2013) 429-
435. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1061934813050043
[114] A. Motaharian, F. Motaharian, K. Abnous, M. R. M. Hosseini, M. Hassanzadeh-Khayyat,
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 408(24) (2016) 6769-6779.
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00216-016-9802-7
[115] J. Ghodsi, A. A. Rafati, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 807 (2017) 1-9.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2017.11.003
[116] M. Khadem, F. Faridbod, P. Norouzi, A. Rahimi Foroushani, M. R. Ganjali, S. J. Shahtaheri,
R. Yarahmadi, Electroanalysis 29(3) (2017) 708-715. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.20
1600293
[117] D. Akyüz, A. Koca, Sensors and Actuators B 283 (2019) 848-856. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.snb.2018.11.155
[118] F. Zahirifar, M. Rahimnejad, R. A. Abdulkareem, G. Najafpour, Biocatalysis and
Agricultural Biotechnology 20 (2019) 101245. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.20
19.101245
[119] F. Tadayon, M. Jahromi, Journal of the Iranian Chemical Society 17(4) (2020) 847-857.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13738-019-01819-8
[120] T. Ghiasi, S. Ahmadi, E. Ahmadi, M. R. T. B. Olyai, Z. Khodadadi, Microchemical Journal 160
(2021) 105628. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2020.105628
[121] O. K. Topsoy, F. Muhammad, S. Kolak, A. Ulu, Ö. Güngör, M. Şimşek, B. Ateş,
Measurement 187 (2022) 110250. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2021.110250
[122] L. S. Porto, L. F. Ferreira, W. T. P. Dos Santos, A. C. Pereira, Talanta 246 (2022) 123477.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2022.123477
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.7
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.07.086
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.07.086
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.4
https://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.7
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112864
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112961
https://doi.org/10.3390/s20092496
https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13030369
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153844
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2022.153844
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024120320359
https://doi.org/10.1023/A:1024120320359
https://doi.org/10.1134/S1061934813050043
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007%2Fs00216-016-9802-7
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2017.11.003
https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201600293
https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201600293
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2018.11.155
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2018.11.155
https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/abs/pii/S1878818119307194#!
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101245
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bcab.2019.101245
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13738-019-01819-8
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2020.105628
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2021.110250
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2022.123477
A. L. Nejad J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1041-1059
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379 1059
[123] D. Grieshaber, R. MacKenzie, J. Vörös, E. Reimhult, Sensors 8(3) (2008) 1400-1458.
https://doi.org/10.3390/s80314000
[124] Z. Dourandish, S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, P. M. Jahani, F. G. Nejad, I. Sheikhshoaie, A. Di
Bartolomeo, Sensors 22(6) (2022) 2238. https://doi.org/10.3390/s22062238
[125] I. G. Munteanu, C. Apetrei, International Journal of Molecular Sciences 22(23) (2021)
13138. https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms222313138
[126] H. Karimi-Maleh, Y. Orooji, F. Karimi, M. Alizadeh, M. Baghayeri, J. Rouhi, A. Al-Othman,
Biosensors and Bioelectronics 184 (2021) 113252. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.20
21.113252
[127] E. Cesewski, B. N. Johnson, Biosensors and Bioelectronics 159 (2020) 112214.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2020.112214
[128] P. Bollella, G. Fusco, C. Tortolini, G. Sanzò, G. Favero, L. Gorton, R. Antiochia, Biosensors
and Bioelectronics 89 (2017) 152-166. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.03.068
[129] R. Monošík, M. Stred'anský, E. Šturdík, Journal of Clinical Laboratory Analysis 26(1) (2012)
22-34. https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fjcla.20500
[130] Z. Ma, C. Meliana, H. S. H. Munawaroh, C. Karaman, H. Karimi-Maleh, S. S. Low, P. L.
Chemosphere 306 (2022) 135515. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135515
[131] H. Beitollahi, S. Tajik, Z. Dourandish, K. Zhang, Q. V. Le, H. W. Jang, M. Shokouhimehr,
Sensors 20(11) (2020) 3256. https://doi.org/10.3390/s20113256
[132] V. S. Somerset, M. J. Klink, M. M. Sekota, P. G. Baker, E. I. Iwuoha, Analytical Letters 39(8)
(2006) 1683-1698. https://doi.org/10.1080/00032710600713834
[133] Y. D. T. de Albuquerque, L. F. Ferreira, Analytica Chimica Acta 596(2) (2007) 210-221.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2007.06.013
[134] V. S. Somerset, M. J. Klink, P. G. Baker, E. I. Iwuoha, Journal of Environmental Science and
Health, Part B 42(3) (2007) 297-304. https://doi.org/10.1080/03601230701229288
[135] N. Zehani, S. V. Dzyadevych, R. Kherrat, N. J. Jaffrezic-Renault, Frontiers in Chemistry 2
(2014) 44. https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2014.00044
[136] M. Arvand, M. Dehsaraei, Ionics 24(8) (2018) 2445-2454. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11581-
017-2373-6
[137] N. Pajooheshpour, M. Rezaei, A. Hajian, A. Afkhami, M. Sillanpää, F. Arduini, H. Bagheri,
Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 275 (2018) 180-189. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.snb.2018.08.014
[138] S. Hassani, M. R. Akmal, A. Salek-Maghsoudi, S. Rahmani, M. R. Ganjali, P. Norouzi, M.
Abdollahi, Biosensors and Bioelectronics 120 (2018) 122-128. https://doi.org/10.1016/
j.bios.2018.08.041
[139] A. R. Zare, A. A. Ensafi, B. Rezaei, Journal of the Iranian Chemical Society 16(12) (2019)
2777-2785. https://doi.org/10.1007/s13738-019-01741-z
[140] H. Khosropour, B. Rezaei, P. Rezaei, A. A. Ensafi, Analytica Chimica Acta 1111 (2020) 92-
102. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2020.03.047
©2022 by the authors; licensee IAPC, Zagreb, Croatia. This article is an open-access article
distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution license
(https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1379
https://doi.org/10.3390/s80314000
https://doi.org/10.3390/s22062238
https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms222313138
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2021.113252
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2021.113252
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2020.112214
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.03.068
https://doi.org/10.1002%2Fjcla.20500
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.135515
https://doi.org/10.3390/s20113256
https://doi.org/10.1080/00032710600713834
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2007.06.013
https://doi.org/10.1080/03601230701229288
https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2014.00044
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11581-017-2373-6
https://doi.org/10.1007/s11581-017-2373-6
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2018.08.014
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2018.08.014
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2018.08.041
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2018.08.041
https://doi.org/10.1007/s13738-019-01741-z
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2020.03.047
https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/)
@Article{LohrasbiNejad2022,
author = {Lohrasbi‑Nejad, Azadeh},
journal = {Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering},
title = {{Electrochemical strategies for detection of diazinon:}},
year = {2022},
issn = {1847-9286},
month = {sep},
number = {6},
pages = {1041--1059},
volume = {12},
abstract = {Diazinon (DZN) was first registered as an insecticide in the U.S. However, it was categorized in the limited group of pesticides due to its high toxicity for birds, aquatic animals, and humans. Like other organophosphorus pesticides, this compound exhibits inhibitory effects on the acetylcholinesterase enzyme. The inhibition of the enzyme leads to the accumulation of acetylcholine and causes the death of insects. DZN is considered a toxic compound for humans due to its high adsorption via skin and inhalation, which leads to the emergence of different symptoms of toxicity. When DZN is used for plants, the compound residues in crops enter the food chain bringing about different health problems. Moreover, the compound is easily washed by surface water and enters the groundwater. Its entrance into aquatic environments can negatively affect a wide range of non-targeted organisms. Thus, researchers seek to find fast and precise methods for the analysis of DZN. The electrochemical method for recognizing the compound in real samples is preferable to other analytical methods. Because this method can be used without spending time preparing the sample, it is simple, fast, and cost-effective. Since such determinations may be made by using electrochemical sensors and biosensors, numerous researchers have developed such sensors for DZN detection, and different sensitive materials were used in order to improve the selectivity, sensitivity, and detection limit. The present study aims to present the main progress and performance characteristics of electrochemical sensors and biosensors used to detect DZN, as it is reported in a number of relevant scientific papers published mainly in the last decade.},
doi = {10.5599/JESE.1379},
file = {:D\:/OneDrive/Mendeley Desktop/Lohrasbi‑Nejad - 2022 - Electrochemical strategies for detection of diazinon(2).pdf:pdf;:www/jESE_V12_No6_1041-1059.pdf:PDF},
keywords = {Pesticide, electrochemistry, modified electrodes},
publisher = {International Association of Physical Chemists (IAPC)},
url = {https://pub.iapchem.org/ojs/index.php/JESE/article/view/1379},
}