MnO2 nanorods modified screen-printed electrode for the electrochemical determination of Sudan dye in food sample: http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 1121 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131; http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 Open Access : : ISSN 1847-9286 www.jESE-online.org Original scientific paper MnO2 nanorods modified screen-printed electrode for the electrochemical determination of Sudan dye in food sample Peyman Mohammadzadeh Jahani1 and Sayed Ali Ahmadi2, 1School of Public Health, Bam University of Medical Sciences, Bam, Iran 2Department of Chemistry, Kerman Branch, Islamic Azad University, Kerman, Iran Corresponding author: ahmadi.iauk59@gmail.com Received: June 19, 2022; Accepted: July 1, 2022; Published: July 30, 2022 Abstract A novel MnO2 nanorods modified screen-printed electrode was fabricated and used as a voltammetric sensor for Sudan determination. MnO2 nanorods were characterized using Field emission-scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM). Electrochemical measurements were performed using cyclic voltammetry (CV), linear sweep voltammetry (LSV), differential pulse voltammetry (DPV), and chronoammperometry (CA). The MnO2 nanorods on the electrode surface act as an excellent catalyst for the Sudan oxidation reaction. Our modified electrode presents good electrocatalytic activity toward Sudan, a short response time of <10 s, a low detection limit of around 0.08 µM, and linear detection range from 0.25 to 300.0 µM. Keywords Voltammetric sensor; cyclic voltammetry; electroanalysis; Sudan red Introduction All food dyes can be divided into two basic, general categories: natural dyes and artificial dyes. The natural food dyes are derived from grapes, saffron, paprika, carrots, beets, and algae and are used to color a variety of foods. The artificial food dyes (AFCs), mostly derived from petroleum, contain a single or more azo functional groups (–N=N–), most frequently connecting the two aromatic parts. People associate specific colors with specific flavors, therefore, the colors of food can affect their perception of taste, especially their perception of sweets and beverages. Artificial dyes may improve on natural variations in color, may enhance colors that occur naturally, or may provide color to colorless and “fun” food, thereby making it appear more attractive and appetizing, e.g., adding a red, yellow or green color to gummy sweets, which would naturally be colorless [1,2]. Sudan red I (1-phenylazo-2-naphthol), a synthetic azo dye, is considered to be a genotoxic carcinogen and classified as a category 3 carcinogen by the International Agency for Research on Cancer (IARC) (1975). Its presence is prohibited in foodstuffs for any purpose at any level worldwide. Unfortunately, a variety of foodstuffs contaminated with Sudan dyes and Para red, particularly http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 http://www.jese-online.org/ mailto:ahmadi.iauk59@gmail.com J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 MnO2 NANORODS SPE FOR DETERMINATION OF SUDAN DYE 1122 Sudan red I, have been detected throughout Europe and Asia [3-5]. High-performance liquid chromatography-mass spectrometry (HPLC–MS) has been proven to be an excellent method for the direct determination of Sudan reds (I, II, III, and IV). Although sensitive and specific, this method can be time-consuming and expensive. Therefore, it is necessary to develop a rapid and economical method for detecting Sudan red I [6]. The electrochemical sensors are the most developed analytical tools for detecting the analyte. Electrochemical detection has the advantages of simple operation, low cost, and easy to carry, but the specific recognition of the electrochemical method in detection is poor. The chemical modification of inert substrate electrodes offers significant advantages in the design and development of electrochemical sensors [7-26]. A further advantage of chemically modified electrodes is that they are less prone to surface fouling and oxide formation compared to inert substrate electrodes [27-39]. In this context, electrochemical sensors based on screen-printed electrodes (SPEs) have gained increasing interest as analytical tools for food analysis since SPEs provide great advantages that make these kinds of sensors have the important characteristics of ideal sensors: ease of use, low cost, and portability [40-42]. So, the screen-printed technology has significantly contributed to the transition from the traditional unwieldy electrochemical cells to miniaturized and portable electrodes that meet the needs for on-site analysis. Although a screen-printed electrode (SPE) is not as robust as a conventional electrode, such as glassy carbon or gold disk, and the surface of its working electrode is not as perfect as the one of a mirror-like polished solid electrode, the advantages of SPEs regarding cost and size led to their increasing use in the last years as transducers in sensing. The use of SPE-based sensors in the control of food spoilage as complementary analytical tools to the conventional methods allows a rapid screening at any point of the food production chain, preventing the occurrence of foodborne illnesses and the reduction of food waste [43]. The development of nanoscience and nanotechnology has allowed trials to apply different nano- materials to fabricate chemically modified electrodes [44-53]. In recent years, various nanomaterials have been used singly or in composite form to modify electrodes [54-60]. Manganese dioxide (MnO2), as a type of transition metal oxide, has received much more attention for its role as an electrode material for sensors, batteries and supercapacitors attributed to its good electrochemical performance in the neutral electrolyte, high theoretical capacity and nontoxicity [61]. In this research work, an electrochemical sensor modified with MnO2 nanorods (MnO2–NRs) was designed using a screen-printed electrode for the determination of Sudan. Experimental Apparatus and chemicals All the electrochemical measurements were carried out on a PGSTAT302N potentiostat/gal- vanostat Autolab. The measurement cell consisted of SPE (DropSens; DRP-110: Spain) containing 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 a glass electrode (Metrohm, Switzerland). Sudan and other chemicals used were analytical grade and were purchased from Merck. Orthophosphoric acid and its salts (NaH2PO4, Na2HPO4 and Na3PO4) were utilized to prepare the phosphate buffer solutions (PBSs), and sodium hydroxide was used for adjusting the desired pH values (pH range between 2.0 and 9.0). MnO2 nanorods (MnO2-NRs) were synthesized in our laboratory. So that first, 0.316 g of KMnO4 was dissolved in deionized water (30 ml) under stirring. Then, 1.4 mL of HCl (3.0 M) was added into the above solution under stirring for 30 min. P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani and S. A. Ahmadi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 1123 The achieved solution was transferred into a Teflon Lined autoclave at 160 °C for 6 h. Next, it was cooled down at room temperature to gather the products via centrifugation, followed by washing with ethanol and deionized water several times. The product was finally dried in an oven at 60 °C for 12 h. Figure 1 shows the FE-SEM image of MnO2-NRs. Figure 1. FE-SEM image of MnO2-NRs Preparation of MnO2-NRs/SPE First, 1 mg of prepared MnO2-NRs was added into an aqueous solution (1 ml), followed by sonication for 30 min to give a homogeneous solution. Then, 4 μL of MnO2–NRs were 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 MnO2-NRs/SPE. The schematic of SPE surface modification for the oxidation of Sudan is shown in Scheme 1. The surface areas of the MnO2-NRs/SPE and the unmodified SPE were obtained by CV using 1 mM K3Fe(CN)6 at various scan rates. Using the Randles–Ševčik equation for MnO2-NRs/SPE, the electrode surface was found to be 0.122 cm2 which was about 3.9 times greater than un-modified SPE. Scheme 1. Schematic of SPE surface modification for the oxidation of Sudan http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 MnO2 NANORODS SPE FOR DETERMINATION OF SUDAN DYE 1124 Results and discussion Electrochemical behavior of Sudan at the surface of various electrodes The effect of the electrolyte pH on the oxidation of 70.0 μM Sudan was investigated at MnO2- NRs/SPE using differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) measurements in the PBS in the pH range from 2.0 to 9.0. According to the results, the oxidation peak current of Sudan depends on the pH value and increases with increasing pH until it reaches the maximum at pH 7.0 and then decreases at higher pH values. The optimized pH corresponding to the higher peak current was 7.0, indicating that protons are involved in the reaction of Sudan oxidation. The electrochemical behavior of Sudan was also investigated by CV. The cyclic voltammetry obtained using the bare SPE (trace b) and MnO2-NR/SPE (trace a) in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) in the presence of 100.0 μM Sudan is shown in Figure 2. On a bare SPE, a signal with a low oxidation current of 3.2 μA was obtained with a peak potential of 680 mV. In contrast, MnO2-NRs/SPE exhibited an enhanced sharp anodic peak current (Ipa =11.0 μA) at a much lower overpotential Ep = 610 mV. These results confirmed that the MnO2-NRs/SPE improved the sensitivity of the modified electrode by enhancing peak current and decreasing the overpotential of the oxidation of Sudan. Figure 2. Cyclic voltammograms of (a) MnO2–NRs/SPE and (b) bare SPE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) in the presence of 100.0 μM Sudan at the scan rate 50 mVs-1 Effect of scan rate on the determination of Sudan at MnO2–NRs/SPE The influence of the scan rate () on the peak currents (Ipa) of Sudan at MnO2-NRs/SPE was investigated by LSV (Figure 3). Figure 4 shows the voltammetric response of 100.0 μM Sudan at MnO2- NRs/SPE at different scan rates in the range of 5 to 400 mV/s. The oxidation peak current of Sudan increases linearly with increasing scan rate. A linear regression equation was obtained from the plot Ipa vs. 1/2 (square root of scan rate) as follows; Ipa = 1.4523 1/2 + 0.8751 (R2 = 0.9990) for the oxidation process, which indicates that the reaction of Sudan at MnO2-NRs/SPE is diffusion controlled. P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani and S. A. Ahmadi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 1125 Figure 3. Linear sweep voltammograms of MnO2-NRs/SPE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) containing 100.0 μM Sudan at various scan rates; 1-7 correspond to 5, 10, 50, 100, 200, 300 and 400 mV s-1 Figure 4. Plot of anodic peak current vs. ν1/2 at different scan rates in the range of 5 to 400 mV/s Chronoamperometric analysis The analysis of chronoamperometry for Sudan samples was performed using MnO2-NRs/SPE at 0.66 V. The chronoamperometric results of different concentrations of Sudan 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 equation (1): I = nFAD1/2Cbπ-1/2t-1/2 (1) http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 MnO2 NANORODS SPE FOR DETERMINATION OF SUDAN DYE 1126 where D represents the 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 Sudan. The resulting slopes corresponding to straight lines in Figure 6A were then plotted against the concentration of Sudan (Figure 6B). The mean value of D was determined to be 4.5×10-5 cm2/s according to the resulting slope and Cottrell equation. t / s Figure 5. Chronoamperograms obtained at MnO2-NRs/SPE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) for different concentrations of Sudan. The 1-4 correspond to 0.1, 0.5, 1.0 and 1.5 mM of Sudan t-1/2 / s-1/2 CSudan / mM 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 Sudan concentration (0.1-1.5 mM) y = 7.2555x + 1.142 R2 = 0.9974 S lo p e , m A s -1 /2 P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani and S. A. Ahmadi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 1127 Calibration curve Because DPV commonly has a higher sensitivity than cyclic voltammetry, the DPV technique was applied for the quantitative detection of Sudan. Figure 7 shows the differential pulse voltammograms of Sudan at various concentrations using MnO2-NRs/SPE (step potential of 0.01 V and pulse amplitude of 0.025 V). As seen, the oxidation peak currents of Sudan enhance gradually by increasing its concen- tration. The oxidation peak currents (Ipa) show a good linear relationship with the concentrations of Sudan ranging from 0.25 to 300.0 μM. The linear equation is Ipa = 0.0952CSudan + 1.296 (R2 = 0.9995) (Figure 8). Also, the limit of detection, Cm, of Sudan was calculated using the equation (2): Cm=3Sb/m (2) where, m is the slope of the calibration plot (0.0952 μA/ μM) and Sb is the standard deviation of the blank response obtained from 15 replicate measurements of the blank solution. The detection limit of 0.08 μM was obtained for the determination of Sudan using this method. Figure 7. DPVs of MnO2-NRs/SPE in 0.1 M (pH 7.0) containing different concentrations of Sudan. Numbers 1-8 correspond to 0.25, 2.5, 10.0, 30.0, 70.0, 100.0, 200.0 and 300.0 µM of Sudan CSudan / mM Figure 8. Plot of the electrocatalytic peak current as a function of CSudan in the range of 0.25-300.0 µM http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 MnO2 NANORODS SPE FOR DETERMINATION OF SUDAN DYE 1128 Analysis of real samples The real samples for the analysis were prepared and quantified by the DPV method. The developed sensor was applied to detect Sudan in tomato paste and ketchup sauce samples. The results are summarized in Table 1. Each measurement was repeated 3 times. The recovery and relative standard deviation (RSD) values confirmed that the MnO2-NRs/SPE sensor has a great potential for analytical application. Table 1. The application of MnO2–NR/SPE for determination of Sudan in real samples (n=3) Sample Concentration, µM Recovery, % RSD, % Spiked Found Tomato paste 0 - - - 4.0 3.9 97.5 3.2 6.0 6.3 105.0 1.8 Ketchup sauce 0 - - - 5.0 5.1 102.0 2.2 7.0 6.9 98.6 2.9 Conclusion Modifications of the screen-printed electrode with MnO2 nanorods for sensing Sudan in food sam- ples were investigated. MnO2-NRs/SPE electrodes were used as Sudan sensors by using CV, LSV, CA and DPV techniques. The results showed that the electrodes gave linearity of 0.25 to 300.0 µM, and a detection limit of 0.08 µM. The diffusion coefficient for Sudan using MnO2-NRs/SPE, 4.5×10-5 cm2/s was obtained. The analysis of real food samples spiked with sudan gave satisfactory results with recovery values between 97.5 and 105.0 %. References [1] N. Vladislavić, M. Buzuk, I. Š. Rončević, S. Brinić, International Journal of Electrochemical Science 13 (2018) 7008-7019. https://doi.org/10.20964/2018.07.39 [2] 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 [3] M. Najafi, M. A. Khalilzadeh, H. Karimi-Maleh, Food Chemistry 158 (2014) 125-131. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.02.082 [4] L. Wang, R. Yang, J. Li, L. Qu, P. de B. Harrington, Sensors and Actuators B 215 (2015) 181- 187. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2015.03.034 [5] H. Karimi-Maleh, M. Moazampour, M. Yoosefian, A. L. Sanati, F. Tahernejad-Javazmi, M. Mahani, Food Analytical Methods 7(10) (2014) 2169-2176. https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-014-9867-x [6] 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 [7] 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 [8] S. Tajik, M. R. Aflatoonian, H. Beitollahi, I. S. Shoaie, Z. Dourandish, F. G. Nejad, B. Aflatoonian, M. Bamorovat, Microchemical Journal 158 (2020) 105182. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2020.105182 [9] M. Payehghadr, Y. Taherkhani, A. Maleki, F. Nourifard, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(9) (2020) 982-990. http://www.echemcom.com/article_114589.html [10] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, Food and Chemical Toxicology 165 (2022) 113048. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113048 https://doi.org/10.20964/2018.07.39 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.131300 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2014.02.082 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2015.03.034 https://doi.org/10.1007/s12161-014-9867-x https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2012.09.047 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.03.153 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2020.105182 http://www.echemcom.com/article_114589.html https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113048 P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani and S. A. Ahmadi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 1129 [11] 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 [12] Y. Wang, Y. Li, L. Tang, J. Lu, J. Li, Electrochemistry communications 11 (2009) 889-892. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elecom.2009.02.013 [13] 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 [14] M. Motahharinia, H. Zamani, H. Karimi-Maleh, Chemical Methodologies 5(2) (2021) 107- 113. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119678 [15] 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 [16] F. G. Nejad, M. H. Asadi, I. Sheikhshoaie, Z. Dourandish, R. Zaeimbashi, H. Beitollahi, Food and Chemical Toxicology 166 (2022) 113243. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113243 [17] Y.-R. Wang, P. Hu, Q.-L. Liang, G.-A. Luo, Y.-M. Wang, Chinese Journal of Analytical Chemistry 36 (2008) 1011-1016. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2040(08)60052-3 [18] 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 [19] H. Karimi-Maleh, C. Karaman, O. Karaman, F. Karimi, Y. Vasseghian, L. Fu, M. Baghayeri, J. Rouhi, P. S. Kumar, P—L. Show, S. Rajendran, A. L. Sanati, A. Mirabi,, Journal of Nanostructure in Chemistry . 12 (2022) 429-439. https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022- 00492-3 [20] D. S. Nayak, N. P. Shetti, Sensors and Actuators B 230 (2016)140-148. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2016.02.052 [21] M. Alizadeh, F. Garkani Nejad, Z. Dourandish, S. Tajik, F. Karimi, P. M. Jahani, A. A. 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 [22] 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 [23] 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 [24] 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 [25] M. Li, L. Jing, Electrochimica Acta 52 (2007) 3250-3257. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2006.10.001 [26] H. Karimi-Maleh, R. Darabi, M. Shabani-Nooshabadi, M. Baghayeri, F. Karimi, J. Rouhi, M. Alizadeh, O. Karaman, Y. Vasseghian, C. Karaman, Food and Chemical Toxicology 162 (2022) 112907. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112907 [27] 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. Sho, S. Rajendran, L. Fu, N. Zare, Food and Chemical Toxicology 164 (2022) 112961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112961 [28] S. Sarli, N. Ghasemi, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(3) (2020) 302-318. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.3.2, [29] 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 [30] N. B. Messaoud, M. E. Ghica, C. Dridi, M. B. Ali, C. M. Brett, Sensors and Actuators B 253 (2017) 513-522. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2017.06.160 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.241560.1063 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.elecom.2009.02.013 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00496-z https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119678 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.7 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.113243 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2040(08)60052-3 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2021.288271.1182 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00492-3 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00492-3 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2016.02.052 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-022-01421-2 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-00982-y https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132928 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.1.10 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2006.10.001 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112907 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112961 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.3.2 https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12030491 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2017.06.160 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 MnO2 NANORODS SPE FOR DETERMINATION OF SUDAN DYE 1130 [31] 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 [32] H. Beitollahi, M. Shahsavari, I. Sheikhshoaie, S. Tajik, P. M. Jahani, S. Z. Mohammadi, A.A. Afshar, Food and Chemical Toxicology 161 (2022) 112824. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112824 [33] 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 [34] A. Afkhami, T. Madrakian, H. Ghaedi, H. Khanmohammadi, Electrochimica Acta 66 (2012) 255-264. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2012.01.089 [35] S. Palanisamy, S. M. Chen, R. Sarawathi, Sensors and Actuators B 166 (2012) 372-377. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2012.02.075 [36] S. Azimi, M. Amiri, H. Imanzadeh, A. Bezaatpour, Advanced Journal of Chemistry-Section A 4 (2021) 152-164. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2021.275901.1246 [37] 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 [38] Y. Hou, X. Y. Li, Q. D. Zhao, X. Quan, G. H. Chen, Advanced Functional Materials 20 (2010) 2165-2174. https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.200902390 [39] M. Abrishamkar, S. Ehsani Tilami, S. Hosseini Kaldozakh, Advanced Journal of Chemistry- Section A 3 (2020) 767-776. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.114113 [40] M. R. Aflatoonian, S. Tajik, B. Aflatoonian, H. Beitollahi, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 9(3) (2019) 197-206. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.643 [41] M.R. Aflatoonian, S. Tajik, B. Aflatoonian, M.S. Ekrami-Kakhki, R. Alizadeh, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(5) (2020) 563-572. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.5.1 [42] H. Beitollahi, S. Tajik, M. R. Aflatoonian, A. Makarem, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 12(1) (2022) 199-208. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1231 [43] R. Torre, E. Costa-Rama, H. Nouws, C. Delerue-Matos, Biosensors 10(10) (2020) 139. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios10100139 [44] 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 [45] 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 [46] A. Hatami, A. Heydarinasab, A. Akbarzadehkhiyavi, F. Pajoum Shariati, Chemical Methodologies 5(2) (2021) 153-165. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.121496 [47] 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 [48] S. Ranjbar, G. Haghdoost, A. Ebadi, Chemical Methodologies 5(2) (2021) 190-199. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.125035 [49] S. Tajik, A. Lohrasbi-Nejad, P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani, M. B. Askari, P. Salarizadeh, H. Beitollahi, Journal of Food Measurement and Characterization 16 (2022) 722-730. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01201-4 [50] F. Zare Kazemabadi, A. Heydarinasab, A. Akbarzadehkhiyavi, M. Ardjmand, Chemical Methodologies 5(2) (2021) 135-152. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.121495 [51] 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 [52] 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 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2020.01.089 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112824 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68663-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2012.01.089 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2012.02.075 https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2021.275901.1246 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2008.06.011 https://doi.org/10.1002/adfm.200902390 https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.114113 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.643 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.5.1 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1231 https://doi.org/10.3390/bios10100139 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.01.081 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.118774 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.121496 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2018.01.034 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.125035 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11694-021-01201-4 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.121495 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.07.086 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113657 P. Mohammadzadeh Jahani and S. A. Ahmadi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1121-1131 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1415 1131 [53] M. Montazarolmahdi, M. Masrournia, A. Nezhadali, Chemical Methodologies 4(6) (2020) 732-742. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113388 [54] F. G. Nejad, I. Sheikhshoaie, H. Beitollahi, Food and Chemical Toxicology 162 (2022) 112864. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112864 [55] N. S. Prinith, J. G. Manjunatha, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 10(4) (2020) 305-315. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.774 [56] A. Mari, M. Vincent, R. Mookkaiah, R. Subramani, K. Nadesan, Chemical Methodologies 4(4) (2020) 424-436. https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.4.5 [57] 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 [58] L. Han, X. Zhang, Electroanalysis: An International Journal Devoted to Fundamental and Practical Aspects of Electroanalysis 21 (2009) 124-129. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.200804403 [59] T. Zabihpour, S. A. Shahidi, H. Karimi Maleh, A. Ghorbani-HasanSaraei, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(3) (2020) 362-373. http://www.echemcom.com/article_96649.html [60] N. Rajabi, M. Masrournia, M. Abedi, Chemical Methodologies 4(5) (2020) 660-670. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.109975 [61] Y. Shu, J. Xu, J. Chen, Q. Xu, Q. X. Xiao, D. Jin, H. Pang, X. Hu, Sensors and Actuators B 252 (2017) 72-78. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2017.05.124 ©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.1415 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113388 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112864 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.774 https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.4.5 https://doi.org/10.1039/C8NJ05581E https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.200804403 http://www.echemcom.com/article_96649.html https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.109975 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2017.05.124 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) @Article{Ahmadi2022, author = {Ahmadi, Sayed Ali and Jahani, Peyman Mohammadzadeh}, journal = {Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering}, title = {{MnO2 nanorods modified screen-printed electrode for the electrochemical determination of Sudan dye in food sample:}}, year = {2022}, issn = {1847-9286}, month = {jul}, number = {6}, pages = {1121--1131}, volume = {12}, abstract = {A novel MnO2 nanorods modified screen-printed electrode was fabricated and used as a voltammetric sensor for Sudan determination. MnO2 nanorods were characterized using Field emission-scanning electron microscopy (FE-SEM). Electrochemical measurements were performed using cyclic voltammetry (CV), linear sweep voltammetry (LSV), differential pulse voltammetry (DPV), and chronoammperometry (CA). The MnO2 nanorods on the electrode surface act as an excellent catalyst for the Sudan oxidation reaction. Our modified electrode presents good electrocatalytic activity toward Sudan, a short response time of <10 s, a low detection limit of around 0.08 µM, and linear detection range from 0.25 to 300.0 µM.}, doi = {10.5599/JESE.1415}, file = {:D\:/OneDrive/Mendeley Desktop/Ahmadi, Jahani - 2022 - MnO2 nanorods modified screen-printed electrode for the electrochemical determination of Sudan dye in food sampl.pdf:pdf;:www/jESE_V12_No6_1121-1131.pdf:PDF}, keywords = {Sudan red, Voltammetric sensor, cyclic voltammetry, electroanalysis}, publisher = {International Association of Physical Chemists (IAPC)}, url = {https://pub.iapchem.org/ojs/index.php/JESE/article/view/1415}, }