Flower-like MoS2 screen-printed electrode based sensor for the sensitive detection of sunset yellow FCF in food samples: http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 1099 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109; http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 Open Access : : ISSN 1847-9286 www.jESE-online.org Original scientific paper Flower-like MoS2 screen-printed electrode based sensor for the sensitive detection of sunset yellow FCF in food samples Peyman Mohammadzadeh Jahani School of Medicine, Bam University of Medical Sciences, Bam, Iran Corresponding author: peymanjahani1234@gmail.com Received: June 19, 2022; Accepted: July 1, 2022; Published: July 23, 2022 Abstract In this study, synthesis and electrochemical sensor application of flower-like MoS2 for sunset yellow FCF sensing were evaluated. Linear sweep voltammetry (LSV), chronoam- perometry and differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) were used to determine flower-like MoS2 electrochemical sensor performances, which had LOD of 0.04 μM in the linear working range of 0.1–150.0 μM calculated from DPV. The sensor was successfully applied for the determination of sunset yellow FCF in real samples. Keywords Electrochemical sensor; modified electrode; voltammetric determination Introduction Over the past centuries, food and beverage products used different colors to maintain nutria- tional and health-related advantages. These compounds actively participate in various biological processes. Nowadays, color additives are commonly applied in a variety of foods, including dairy products, beverages, cereals, snack foods and ice creams, to make them more attractive and appetitive. Among various types of food additives, food colorants are played an important role in foodstuff due to their physical appearance and consumer acceptance. Food colorants are categorized into natural and synthetic dyes. However, synthetic food dyes are widely used in the food industry compared to natural colorants due to higher light, oxygen, and pH stability. In addition, they provide a uniform color and a strong tinting ability. Synthetic color additives are organic pigments using artificial synthesis methods and are generally made from coal tar from aniline dyes as raw material [1]. Among the most used dyes by the food industry are those that contain an azo group (–N=N–), including the sunset yellow (SY), the Bordeaux red, and the tartrazine yellow. These dyes are extensively used in cereals, candies, dairy products, jellies, ice creams, fillings, liqueurs, powdered juices, soft drinks, and yogurts [2-4]. Sunset yellow (SY), also known as evening yellow, E110 or edible yellow 3, is one of the most used azo dyes. It has an orange color and is used in a great number of fruit products, like sodas, juices, candies, and ice creams. Usually, it is the only http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 http://www.jese-online.org/ mailto:peymanjahani1234@gmail.com J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 MoS2 SPE FOR DETECTION OF SUNSET YELLOW 1100 artificial dye present in soft orange beverages. SY also has a large use in the pharmaceutical industry and in cosmetics. Nevertheless, it also causes some side effects in humans, and its consumption has been related to renal failure and hepatocellular damage [5-7]. Until now, different methods such as high-performance liquid chromatography, near-infrared spec- troscopy and interval random forest, surface-enhanced Raman spectroscopy and fluorescence spec- troscopy have been reported for the determination of sunset yellow [8-11]. In addition, voltammetry was also used to determine sunset yellow dye based on their electrochemical activity [12-14]. Electrochemical sensor systems do not require particular expertise or expensive apparatus for operation. As a result, miniaturization of these systems for in-situ analysis of ecological contaminants is enabled. The advent of screen-printed electrodes (SPEs) has prospects for direct electrochemical mechanisms outside centralized laboratories. Features like rapid response, mass production, low power requirement, and compactness have reinforced SPEs as ideal transducers for environmental assays. Further, the sample volume required for an SPE is as low as 50 μL. Additionally, the surface of the SPEs’ working electrode may be readily modified to improve the sensibility, lowering the detection limit, and increasing the selectivity of the electrochemical methods [15,16]. The chemical modification of inert substrate electrodes offers significant advantages in the design and development of electrochemical sensors [17-30]. In operations, the redox-active sites shuttle electrons between a solution of the analyte and the substrate electrodes often along with a significant reduction of the activation overpotential. A further advantage of chemically modified electrodes is that they are less prone to surface fouling and oxide formation compared to inert substrate electrodes [31-45]. The development of nanoscience and nanotechnology has allowed attempts to apply different nanomaterials in different scientific fields [46-51], including the fabrication of chemically modified electrodes [52-56]. In recent years, various nanomaterials have been used singly or in composite form for the modification of electrodes [57-69]. MoS2 obtained by different preparation methods have different morphology, such as 2D-layered structures, nanorods, nanotubes and three-dimensional structures. Among them, flower-like MoS2 has a unique three-dimensional structure. Because of its large specific surface area, ultra-short transmission path, high interfacial transfer, and excellent catalytic activity as a matrix, it is widely used in energy storage, catalysis, sensing and other fields. MoS2 can increase electrocatalytic activity. Molybdenum disulfide (MoS2), which is a two-dimensional (2D) transition metal dichalcogenides (TMDs), has gained immense attention over the past few years. As a semiconductor with an indirect energy band of 1.29 eV, MoS2 has a typical 2D layered structure, and each layer is composed of two sulfur atoms and a molybdenum (Mo) atom, forming an S–Mo–S sandwich structure. MoS2 shows tunable electric properties, excellent electrocatalytic activity, electrochemiluminescent (ECL) signal amplification, photochemical reactivity, fluorescence quenching ability, and adsorption performance and hence is a candidate for catalysis, biology, medicine, sensor monitoring, energy storage and conversion [70, 71]. The aim of this study was to synthesize flower-like MoS2 (FL-MoS2) to modify the screen-printed electrodes for the detection of sunset yellow FCF food dye. Experimental Apparatus and chemicals All the electrochemical measurements were carried out on a PGSTAT302N potentiostat/galvano- stat Autolab. Screen-printed electrodes (SPE) (DropSens; DRP-110: Spain) consisted of a graphite counter electrode, a graphite working electrode, and a silver pseudo-reference electrode. Solution pH values were determined using a 713 pH meter combined with glass electrode (Metrohm, Switzer- P. M. Jahani J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 1101 land). Sunset yellow and other chemicals used were of analytical grade and were purchased from Merck. Flower-like MoS2 was synthesized in our laboratory [72]. A typical SEM is shown in Figure 1. Figure 1. SEM image of flower-like MoS2 Preparation of FL-MoS2/SPE First, 1 mg of prepared FL-MoS2 was added into an aqueous solution (1 ml), followed by sonication for 30 min to give a homogeneous solution. Then, 4 μL of FL-MoS2 was dispersed on the surface of SPE dropwise. Following the solvent's evaporation, the sensor's surface was washed several times with deionized water to clean free modifier molecules and subsequently air-dried. The obtained electrode was noted as FL-MoS2/SPE. The surface areas of the FL-MoS2/SPE and the bare SPE were obtained by cyclic voltammetry using 1 mM K3Fe(CN)6 at various scan rates. Using the Randles–Ševčik equation for FL-MoS2/SPE, the electrode surface was found to be 0.11 cm2 which was about 3.5 times greater than bare SPE. Results and discussion Electrochemical behavior of sunset yellow at the surface of various electrodes The effect of the electrolyte pH on the oxidation of 60.0 μM sunset yellow was investigated at FL-MoS2/SPE using DPV measurements in the phosphate buffer solution (PBS) in the pH range from 2.0 to 9.0. According to the results, the oxidation peak current of sunset yellow depends on the pH value and increases with increasing pH until it reaches the maximum at pH 7.0, and then decreases with higher pH values. The optimized pH corresponding to the higher peak current was 7.0, indicating that protons are involved in the reaction of sunset yellow oxidation. This result indicates the oxidation mechanism of sunset yellow involving electron transfers coupled with proton exchange. It is well-known that the hydroxyl group of sunset yellow undergoes a 1e-/1H+ oxidation mechanism at the surface of reported electrodes. The electrochemical behavior of sunset yellow was investigated by LSV. The linear sweep voltammetry was obtained using the bare SPE (curve b) and FL-MoS2/SPE (curve a) in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) in the presence of 100.0 μM sunset yellow are shown in Figure 2. On a bare SPE, a signal with a low oxidation current of 3.3 μA was obtained with a peak potential of 760 mV. In contrast, http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 MoS2 SPE FOR DETECTION OF SUNSET YELLOW 1102 FL-MoS2/SPE exhibited an enhanced sharp anodic peak current (Ipa = 14.0 μA) at much lower overpotential Ep = 740 mV. These results confirmed that the FL-MoS2/SPE improved the sensitivity of the modified electrode by enhancing peak current and decreasing the overpotential of the oxidation of sunset yellow. Figure 2. Linear sweep voltammograms of (a) FL-MoS2/SPE and (b) bare SPE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) in the presence of 100.0 μM sunset yellow at the scan rate 50 mVs-1 Effect of scan rate on the determination of sunset yellow at FL-MoS2/SPE The influence of the scan rate () on the peak currents (Ipa) of sunset yellow at FL-MoS2/SPE was investigated by LSV (Figure 3). Figure 3. Linear sweep voltammograms of FL-MoS2/SPE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) containing 50.0 μM sunset yellow at various scan rates; 1-6 correspond to 5, 15, 45, 70, 100 and 200 mV s-1, respectively Figure 4 shows the voltammetric response of 50.0 μM sunset yellow at FL-MoS2/SPE at different scan rates in the range of 5 to 200 mV/s. The oxidation peak current of sunset yellow increases P. M. Jahani J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 1103 linearly with increasing scan rate. The linear regression equation was obtained from the plot Ipa and vs. 1/2 (square root of scan rate) as follows; Ipa = 1.9165ʋ1/2 - 0.0611 (R2 = 0.9996) for the oxidation process, which indicates that the reaction of sunset yellow at FL-MoS2/SPE is diffusion controlled. Figure 4. Plot of anodic peak current vs. 1/2 at different scan rates in the range of 5 to 200 mV/s. Chronoamperometric analysis The analysis of chronoamperometry for sunset yellow samples was performed by use of FL- MoS2/SPE at 0.77 V. The Chronoamperometric results of different concentrations of sunset yellow in PBS (pH 7.0) are demonstrated in Figure 5. The Cottrell equation for the chronoamperometric analysis of electroactive moieties under mass transfer limited conditions is as in eq. (1) I = nFAD1/2Cbπ-1/2t-1/2 (1) Figure 5. Chronoamperograms obtained at FL-MoS2/SPE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) for different concentration of sunset yellow. Numbers 1-4 correspond to 0.1, 0.75, 1.1 and 1.5 mM of sunset yellow where D is diffusion coefficient (cm2 s-1), and Cb is the applied bulk concentration (mol cm-3). Experimental results of I vs. t-1/2 were plotted in Figure 6A, with the best fits for different concentrations of sunset yellow. The resulting slopes corresponding to straight lines in Figure 6A, http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 MoS2 SPE FOR DETECTION OF SUNSET YELLOW 1104 were then plotted against the concentration of sunset yellow (Figure 6B). The mean value of D was determined to be 1.1×10-5 cm2/s according to the resulting slope and Cottrell equation. Figure 6. (A) Plots of I vs. t-1/2 obtained from chronoamperograms 1-4, (B) plot of the slope of the straight lines against sunset yellow concentration (0.1-1.5 mM) Calibration curve Because DPV commonly has a higher sensitivity than cyclic voltammetry technology, the DPV technique was applied for the quantitative detection of sunset yellow. Figure 7 shows the differential pulse voltammograms of sunset yellow at various concentrations using FL-MoS2/SPE (Step potential = 0.01 V and pulse amplitude = 0.025 V). Figure 7. DPVs of FL-MoS2/SPE in 0.1 M (pH 7.0) containing different concentrations of sunset yellow. Numbers 1–7 correspond to 0.1, 2.5, 10.0, 30.0, 70.0, 100.0 and 150.0 µM of sunset yellow As seen, the oxidation peak currents of sunset yellow enhance gradually by increasing its con- centration. The oxidation peak currents show a good linear relationship with the concentrations of P. M. Jahani J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 1105 sunset yellow ranging from 0.1 M to 150.0 μM. The linear equation is Ipa = 0.1315Csunset yellow + + 1.0472 (R2 = 0.9994) (Figure 8). Also, the limit of detection (LOD) was estimated to be 0.04 μM. csunset yellow / M Figure 8. Plot of the electrocatalytic peak current as a function of sunset yellow concentration in the range of 0.1-150.0 µM The performance of this sensor is compared with some of the recently reported electrodes for sunset yellow quantification (see Table 1) [73-76]. Table 1. Comparison the sensing performances toward the detection of sunset yellow between the existing modified electrodes and the proposed FL-MoS2/SPE Electrochemical Sensor Method Linear range, µM LOD, µM Ref. Poly(L-phenylalanine)-modified glassy carbon electrode DPV 0.04–14.0 0.04 [73] Graphene oxide decorated with silver nanoparticles–molecular imprinted polymers- modified glassy carbon electrode LSV 0.1-12.0 0.02 [74] Gold nanoparticles - modified carbon paste electrode DPV 0.1-2.0 0.03 [75] Multi-walled carbon nanotubes modified glassy carbon electrode DPV 0.55-7.0 0.12 [76] FL-MoS2/SPE DPV 0.1–150.0 0.04 This work Stability and repeatability The long-term stability test of the FL-MoS2/SPE sensor using DPV was performed at room temperature. The results exhibited that the peak current of 35.0 μM sunset yellow at the FL- MoS2/SPE stayed at 93.2 % of its primary current after 7 days, 90.8 % after 14 days, and 89.97 % after 21 days, indicating the superior long-term stability of the proposed sensor. The oxidation of sunset yellow (35.0 μM) on the same FL-MoS2/SPE sensor was performed by ten repeated voltammetric measurements, the results of which confirmed the superior repeatability of the fabricated sensor with the relative standard deviation (RSD) of 2.9 %. http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 MoS2 SPE FOR DETECTION OF SUNSET YELLOW 1106 Analysis of real samples The real samples for the analysis were prepared and quantified by DPV method. The developed sensor was applied to detect sunset yellow in orange and apple juice samples. The results are summarized in Table 2. Each measurement was repeated five times. The recovery and relative standard deviation (RSD) values confirmed that the FL-MoS2/SPE sensor has a great potential for analytical application. Table 2. The application of FL-MoS2/SPE for the determination of sunset yellow in real samples (n=3) Sample Concentration, µM Recovery, % RSD, % Spiked Found Apple juice 0.0 3.0 - 3.4 2.0 1.9 3.0 2.2 Orange juice 0.0 2.5 - 2.1 3.0 3.0 4.0 2.8 Conclusion In the present study, sensing of sunset yellow FCF was attempted and implemented successfully with flower-like MoS2 (FL-MoS2) modified screen-printed electrodes. The morphology of flower-like MoS2 was characterized by SEM. Using linear sweep voltammetry and differential pulse voltammetry, the electrochemical oxidative sensing of sunset yellow FCF was investigated. The FL-MoS2/SPE showed a linear response of 0.1 μM to 150.0 μM for sunset yellow FCF, respectively, and their detection limit was equal to 0.04 μM. The stability of the modified electrode was indeed excellent. References [1] K. Rovina, P. P. Prabakaran, S. Siddiquee, S. M. Shaarani, Trends in Analytical Chemistry 85 (2016) 47-56. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2016.05.009 [2] K. M. S. Gomes, M. V. G. A. D. Oliveira, F. R. D. S. Carvalho, C. C. Menezes, A. P. Peron, Food Science and Technology 33 (2013) 218-223. https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612 013005000012 [3] V. Khakyzadeh, H. Rezaei-Vahidian, S. Sediqi, S. Azimi, R. Karimi-Nami, Chemical Methodologies 5(4) (2021) 324-330. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.131300 [4] K. Rovina, S. Siddiquee, S. M. Shaarani, Critical Reviews in Analytical Chemistry 47(4) (2017) 309-324. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408347.2017.1287558 [5] J. Wang, B. Yang, H. Wang, P. Yang, Y. Du, Analytica Chimica Acta 893 (2015) 41-48. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2015.08.042 [6] M. Motahharinia, H. A. Zamani, H. Karimi Maleh, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(7) (2020) 760-770. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.7.3 [7] B. G. Botelho, L. P. de Assis, M. M. Sena, Food Chemistry 159 (2014) 175-180. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.03.048 [8] C. Tatebe, T. Ohtsuki, N. Otsuki, H. Kubota, K. Sato, H. Akiyama, Y. Kawamura, American Journal of Analytical Chemistry 3(8) (2012) 570-575. http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ajac.2012.38075 [9] J. Liu, S. Sun, Z.Tan, Y. Liu, Spectrochimica Acta A 242 (2020) 118718. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2020.118718 [10] Y. Ou, X. Wang, K. Lai, Y. Huang, B.A. Rasco, Y. Fan, Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry 66(11) (2018) 2954-2961. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b00007 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.trac.2016.05.009 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612013005000012 https://doi.org/10.1590/S0101-20612013005000012 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.131300 https://doi.org/10.1080/10408347.2017.1287558 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.7.3 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.03.048 http://dx.doi.org/10.4236/ajac.2012.38075 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.saa.2020.118718 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jafc.8b00007 P. M. Jahani J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 1107 [11] J. Wang, G. Chen, T. Zhu, S. Gao, B. Wei, L. Bi, Chinese Optics Letters 7(11) (2009) 1058-1060. [12] Y. Ni, J. Bai, J., Talanta 44(1) (1997) 105-109. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039- 9140(96)02028-0 [13] J. B. Nevado, J. R. Flores, M. V. Llerena, Talanta 44(3) (1997) 467-474. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/S0039-9140(96)02105-4 [14] M. Gomez, V. Arancibia, C. Rojas, E. Nagles, International Journal of Electrochemical Science, 7(8) (2012) 7493-7502. [15] M. R. Aflatoonian, S. Tajik, M. S. Ekrami-Kakhki, B. Aflatoonian, H. Beitollai, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(5) (2020) 609-618. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.5.7 [16] P. Janjani, U. Bhardwaj, R. Gupta, H. S. Kushwaha, Analytica Chimica Acta, 1202 (2022) 339676. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2022.339676 [17] 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 [18] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, Food and Chemical Toxicology 165 (2022) 113048. https://doi.org/ 10.1016/j.fct.2022.113048 [19] M. Payehghadr, Y. Taherkhani; A. Maleki; F. Nourifard, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(9) (2020) 982-990. http://www.echemcom.com/article_114589.html [20] A. Shamsi, F. Ahour, Advanced Journal of Chemistry A 4(1) (2020) 22-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.252025.1215 [21] F. Garkani Nejad, M. H. Asadi, I. Sheikhshoaie, Z. Dourandish, R. Zaeimbashi, Food and Chemical Toxicology 166 (2022) 113243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113243 [22] R. Torre, E. Costa-Rama, H. Nouws, C. Delerue-Matos, Biosensors 10(10) (2020) 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios10100139 [23] H. Pyman, H. Roshanfekr, S. Ansari, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(2) (2020) 213- 225. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.7 [24] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, M. Torkzadeh-Mahani, Journal of Nanostructure in Chemistry 12 (2022) 581-588. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00496-z [25] H. Peyman, H. Roshanfekr, A. Babakhanian, H. Jafari, Chemical Methodologies 5(5) (2021) 446-453. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.135266 [26] M. Alizadeh, F. Garkani Nejad, Z. Dourandish, S. Tajik, F. Karimi, P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani A. Aghaei Afshar, R. Zaimbashi, I. Sheikhshoaie, H. Beitollahi, Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 16 (2022) 3423-3437. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-022-01421-2 [27] J. Huang, Y. Liu, H. Hou, T. You, Biosensors and Bioelectronics 24 (2008) 632-637. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2008.06.011 [28] 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 [29] 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 [30] 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 [31] S. Tajik, Y. Orooji, F. Karimi, Z. Ghazanfari, M. Shokouhimehr, H. W. Jang, Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 15 (2021) 4617-4622. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694- 021-01027-0 [32] 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 [33] S. S. Mohammadi; N. Ghasemi; M. Ramezani, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(1) (2020) 87-102. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.10 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-9140(96)02028-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-9140(96)02028-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-9140(96)02105-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-9140(96)02105-4 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.5.7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2022.339676 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.03.153 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113048 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113048 http://www.echemcom.com/article_114589.html https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.252025.1215 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113243 https://doi.org/10.3390/bios10100139 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.7 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00496-z https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.135266 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-022-01421-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2008.06.011 https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.114113 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00492-3 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-00982-y https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01027-0 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01027-0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132928 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.10 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 MoS2 SPE FOR DETECTION OF SUNSET YELLOW 1108 [34] J. Wang, Z. Wang, J. Liu, H. Li, Q.X. Li, J. Li, T. Xu, Food Chemistry 136(3-4) (2013) 1478-1483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.09.047 [35] 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 [36] J. B. Raoof, R. Ojani, H. Beitollahi, International Journal of Electrochemical Science 2(7) (2007) 534-548. [37] S. Sarli; N. Ghasemi, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(3) (2020) 302-318. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.3.2, [38] S. Tajik, M. B. Askari, S. A. Ahmadi, F. G. Nejad, Z. Dourandish, R. Razavi, A. Di Bartolomeo, Nanomaterials 12(3) (2022) 491. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12030491 [39] J. Mohanraj, D. Durgalakshmi, R. A. Rakkesh, S. Balakumar, S. Rajendran, Journal of Colloid and Interface Science 566 (2020) 463-472. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2020.01.089 [40] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, S. Shahsavari, F. G. Nejad, Chemosphere 291 (2022) 132736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132736 [41] 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 [42] N. Rajabi, M. Masrournia, M. Abedi, Chemical Methodologies 4(5) (2020) 660-670. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.109975 [43] S. Tajik, Y. Orooji, Z. Ghazanfari, F. Karimi, H. Beitollahi, R. S. Varma, M. Shokouhimehr, Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 15 (2021) 3837-3852. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-00955-1 [44] R. Sadeghi, H. Karimi-Maleh, A. Bahari, M. Taghavi, Physics and Chemistry of Liquids 51 (2013) 704-714. https://doi.org/10.1080/00319104.2013.782547 [45] T. Zabihpour, S. A. Shahidi, A. Ghorbani-HasanSaraei, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(3) (2020) 362-373. http://www.echemcom.com/article_96649.html [46] S. Azimi, M. Amiri, H. Imanzadeh, A. Bezaatpour, Advanced Journal of Chemistry A 4(2) (2021) 152-164. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2021.275901.1246 [47] S. Kianfar, A. N. Golikand, B. Zare Nezhad, Journal of Nanostructure in Chemistry 11 (2021) 287-299. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-020-00366-6 [48] S. Staroverov, S. Kozlov, A. Fomin, K. Gabalov, V. Khanadeev, D. Soldatov, O. Guliy, ADMET and DMPK 9(4) (2021) 255-266. https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1023 [49] M. Ozdal, S. Gurkok, ADMET and DMPK 10 (2022) 115-129. https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1172 [50] I. Amar, A. Sharif, M. Ali, S. Alshareef, F. Altohami, M. Abdulqadir, M. Ahwidi, Chemical Methodologies 4(1) (2020) 1-18. https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.1.1 [51] P. Shen, B.Zhang,Y. Wang, X. Liu, C. Yu, T. Xu, S. S. Mofarah, Y. Yu, Y. Liu, H. Sun, H. Arandiyan, Journal of Nanostructure in Chemistry 11 (2021) 33-68 https://doi.org/10.1007/ s40097-020-00367-5 [52] 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.2019.01.081 [53] A. Derakhshan-Nejad, M. Cheraghi, H. Rangkooy, R. Jalillzadeh Yengejeh, Chemical Methodologies 5(1) (2021) 50-58. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.118774 [54] N. H. Khand, I. M. Palabiyik, J. A. Buledi, S. Ameen, A. F. Memon, T. Ghumro, A. R. Solangi, Journal of Nanostructure in Chemistry 11 (2021) 455-468 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097- 020-00380-8 [55] S. A. Alavi-Tabari, M. A. Khalilzadeh, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 811 (2018) 84- 88. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2018.01.034 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.09.047 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112907 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.3.2 https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12030491 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2020.01.089 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132736 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68663-2 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.109975 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-00955-1 https://doi.org/10.1080/00319104.2013.782547 http://www.echemcom.com/article_96649.html https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2021.275901.1246 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-020-00366-6 https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1023 https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1172 https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.1.1 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-020-00367-5 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-020-00367-5 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.01.081 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.118774 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-020-00380-8 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-020-00380-8 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2018.01.034 P. M. Jahani J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1099-1109 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1413 1109 [56] A. Hosseini Fakhrabad, R. Sanavi Khoshnood, M.R. Abedi, M. Ebrahimi, Eurasian Chemical Communications 3(9) (2021) 627-634. http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2021.288271.1182 [57] H. Mahmoudi-Moghaddam, S. Tajik, Microchemical Journal 150 (2019) 104085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2019.104085 [58] S. Ranjbar, G. Haghdoost, A. Ebadi, Chemical Methodologies 5(2) (2021) 190-199. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.125035 [59] 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 [60] 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.2016.07.086 [61] H. Tashakkorian, B. Aflatoonian, P. M. Jahani, M. R. Aflatoonian, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 12(1) (2022) 71-79. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1145 [62] P. M. Jahani, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 12(1) (2022) 81-90. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1133 [63] H. Sadeghi, S. Shahidi, S. Naghizadeh Raeisi, A. Ghorbani-HasanSaraei, F. Karimi, Chemical Methodologies 4(6) (2020) 743-753. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113657 [64] F. Nemati, M. Rezaie, H. Tabesh, K. Eid, G. Xu, M. R. Ganjali, Environmental Research 208 (2022) 112685. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.112685 [65] M. Pirozmand, A. Nezhadali, M. Payehghadr, L. Saghatforoush, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(10) (2020) 1021-1032. http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.241560.1063 [66] M. Montazarolmahdi, M. Masrournia, A. Nezhadali, Chemical Methodologies 4(6) (2020) 732-742. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113388 [67] M. Fouladgar, H. Karimi-Maleh, Ionics 19(8) (2013) 1163-1170. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11581-012-0832-7 [68] F. G. Nejad, I. Sheikhshoaie, H. Beitollahi, Food and Chemical Toxicology 162 (2022) 112864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112864 [69] H. Karimi-Maleh, M. Sheikhshoaie, I. Sheikhshoaie, M. Ranjbar, J. Alizadeh, N. W. Maxakato, A. Abbaspourrad, New Journal of Chemistry 43 (2019) 2362-2367. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8NJ05581E [70] S. Han, Y. Ding, F. Teng, A. Yao, Q. Leng, Food Chemistry 387 (2022) 132899. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2022.111219 [71] W. A. N. G. Ri, C. Y. Xiong, X. I. E. Yong, H. A. N. Ming-Jie, X. U. Yu-Hao, B. I. A. N. Chao, X. I. A. Shan-Hong, Chinese Journal of Analytical Chemistry 50(3) (2022) 100066. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjac.2022.100066 [72] S. Tajik, Z. Dourandish, F. G. Nejad, A. Aghaei Afshar, H. Beitollahi, Micromachines 13(3) (2022) 369. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13030369 [73] M. Chao, X. Ma, Food Analytical Methods 8 (2015) 130-138. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-014-9879-6 [74] C. Qin, W. Guo, Y. Liu, Z. Liu, J. Qiu, J. Peng, Food Analytical Methods 10 (2017) 2293-2301. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-016-0753-6 [75] S. M. Ghoreishi, M. Behpour, M. Golestaneh, Food Chemistry 132 (2012) 637-641. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.10.103 [76] P. Sierra-Rosales, C. Toledo‐Neira, J. A. Squella, Sensors and Actuators B 240 (2017) 1257- 1264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2016.08.135 ©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.1413 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2021.288271.1182 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2019.104085 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.125035 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01201-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.07.086 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1145 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1133 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113657 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.112685 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.241560.1063 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113388 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11581-012-0832-7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112864 https://doi.org/10.1039/C8NJ05581E https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eurpolymj.2022.111219 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cjac.2022.100066 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-014-9879-6 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-016-0753-6 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2011.10.103 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2016.08.135 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) @Article{Jahani2022, author = {Jahani, Peyman Mohammadzadeh}, journal = {Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering}, title = {{Flower-like MoS2 screen-printed electrode based sensor for the sensitive detection of sunset yellow FCF in food samples:}}, year = {2022}, issn = {1847-9286}, month = {jul}, number = {6}, pages = {1099--1109}, volume = {12}, abstract = {In this study, synthesis and electrochemical sensor application of flower-like MoS2 for sunset yellow FCF sensing were evaluated. Linear sweep voltammetry (LSV), chrono­am­perometry and differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) were used to determine flower-like MoS2 electrochemical sensor performances, which had LOD of 0.04 $\mu$M in the linear working range of 0.1–150.0 $\mu$M calculated from DPV. The sensor was successfully applied for the determination of sunset yellow FCF in real samples.}, doi = {10.5599/JESE.1413}, file = {:D\:/OneDrive/Mendeley Desktop/Jahani - 2022 - Flower-like MoS2 screen-printed electrode based sensor for the sensitive detection of sunset yellow FCF in food samples.pdf:pdf;:www/jESE_V12_No6_1099-1109.pdf:PDF}, keywords = {Electrochemical sensor, modified electrode, voltammetric determination}, publisher = {International Association of Physical Chemists (IAPC)}, url = {https://pub.iapchem.org/ojs/index.php/JESE/article/view/1413}, }