Fe3O4/GO nanocomposite modified glassy carbon electrode as a novel voltammetric sensor for determination of bisphenol A: http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 1205 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214; http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 Open Access : : ISSN 1847-9286 www.jESE-online.org Original scientific paper Fe3O4/GO nanocomposite modified glassy carbon electrode as a novel voltammetric sensor for determination of bisphenol A Fariba Beigmoradi1 and Hadi Beitollahi2, 1Department of Chemistry, Graduate University of Advanced Technology, Kerman, Iran 2Environment Department, Institute of Science and High Technology and Environmental Sciences, Graduate University of Advanced Technology, Kerman, Iran Corresponding author: h.beitollahi@yahoo.com; Tel: +98 3426226613; Fax: +98 3426226617 Received: August 3, 2022; Accepted: August 23, 2022; Published: September 14, 2022 Abstract A new voltammetric sensor is proposed for the determination of bisphenol A, using a glassy carbon electrode (GCE) modified with Fe3O4/graphene oxide (GO) nanocomposite. The modification of the electrode surface was performed by dispersion drop-casting. The electro- chemical behavior of bisphenol A was evaluated by cyclic voltammetry (CV). The oxidation peak was observed during the anodic potential scan at potentials of 0.45 V. Higher anodic peak currents (Ipa) were observed at Fe3O4/GO/GCE modified electrode than at bare GCE. The elec- trochemical determination by differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) revealed a linear response in the concentration range of 1.0×10-7 to 5.0×10-5 M, with a detection limit of 9.0×10-8 M. The proposed method was successfully applied using water samples, with good recoveries. Keywords Modified electrode, water samples; differential pulse voltammetry; high repeatability Introduction Bisphenol A (BPA) is a polyphenol used in the production of polycarbonates and epoxy resins, and then it can be found in plastic packaging and canning coatings [1]. Because of its large-scale use and physicochemical properties, there is a risk of contamination of food or water by bisphenol migration from the packages. Bisphenol A shows estrogenic effects for humans, and it may increase the probability of developing prostate cancer and decrease fertility in animals, among other diseases [2]. As an emerging pollutant, threshold limits have not been established by environmental regulations. Still, bisphenol A was included as a future substance in the “list of 33 priority substances” in Annex II of the 2008/105/EC. Moreover, the European community has established a maximum daily intake of 0.05 mg kg-1 of body weight [3-5]. Because of these health concerns, bisphenol A has been determined in urine, river, sea, and tap waters [6-8]. Thus, the development of a sensitive and selective method for the detection of bisphenol A is very important for both human health and environmental protection. Methods that have been used to monitor these http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 http://www.jese-online.org/ mailto:h.beitollahi@yahoo.com J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 MODIFIED GCE FOR DETERMINATION OF BISPHENOL A 1206 analytes include electrochemical sensors, mass spectrometry (GC/MS) and high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC) with detection by fluorescence or spectrophotometry (UV), or mass spectrometry (LC/MS or LC/MS/MS) [9-14]. Electrochemical methods have the advantages of being simpler and more sensitive, offering excellent repeatability and short analysis times, and are less expensive compared to traditional methods [15-31]. Glassy carbon (GC) is a type of non-graphitic carbon formed by the pyrolysis of certain polymeric precursors. The microstructure of GC is composed of discrete fragments of curved carbon planes, like imperfect fullerene-related nanoparticles. GC synthesized at high temperatures above 2000 °C exhibits a network of stacked graphite-like ribbon molecules. Entities of polyhedral graphite crystals were also detected in commercial glassy carbon, as used in our studies [32]. The network of randomly and tangled carbon planes forms a dense carbon structure. Due to the low reactivity, high hardness, impermeability and good electrical conductivity of GC, it is commonly employed as an electrode material for electroanalysis [33,34]. Due to the assumed chemical inertness, it is also often used as a substrate to cast powder catalysts in order to evaluate their catalytic performance in electrochemical reactions. However, the response signal of conventional sensors toward analytes detection is quite weak, making it very difficult to achieve accurate measurements of analytes. Therefore, in order to improve the response signal of the analyte determination, electrochemical sensors are modified with various materials [35-47]. Nanomaterials have unique physicochemical properties, such as a large surface area to mass ratio, ultra-small size and high reactivity, which differ from bulk materials with the same composition. The unique property or desirable characteristics of nanomaterials decide its potential application in many fields [48-64]. Owing to its superior electronic, thermal and mechanical properties as well as chemical stability, graphene, as a well-defined, two-dimensional honeycomb structure of carbon materials, has been attracting more and more attention from both experimental and theoretical scientific communities [65,66]. Graphene and graphene oxide (GO) are potential nanoscale building blocks for new hybrid materials because of their layered structure and special surface properties [67-69]. It is believed that the composites of metal oxides and graphene would have better functionalities and performances in their applications. Among those hybrid materials, the ones with the magnetic nanoparticles (e.g., Fe3O4, Fe2O3) are an important class of materials due to their numerous applications in various technological fields [70]. Magnetite (Fe3O4) nanoparticles (NPs) have attracted worldwide research attention not only because of their unique size- and morphology- dependent physical and chemical properties but also for their potential applications in many fields, including magnetic storage, biosensors, communication materials, magnetic resonance imaging and as materials for microwave absorbing and shielding research [71-73]. According to the previous points, it is important to create suitable conditions for the analysis of bisphenol A in real samples. In this study, we describe the application of Fe3O4/GO nanocomposite as a nanostructure sensor for the voltammetric determination of bisphenol A. The proposed sensor showed a good electrocatalytic effect on bisphenol A. The modified electrode shows advantages in terms of reproducibility and sensitivity. Also, we evaluate the analytical performance of the suggested sensor for bisphenol A determination in water samples. F. Beigmoradi and H. Beitollahi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 1207 Experimental Chemicals and apparatus The electrochemical measurements were performed with an Autolab potentiostat/galvanostat (PGSTAT 302N, Eco Chemie, the Netherlands). The experimental conditions were controlled with General Purpose Electrochemical System (GPES) software. A conventional three electrodes cell was used at 25 ± 1 °C. An Ag/AgCl/KCl (3.0 M) electrode, a platinum wire, and the Fe3O4/GO/GCE were used as the reference, auxiliary and working electrodes, respectively. A Metrohm 710 pH meter was employed for pH measurements. Bisphenol A and all other reagents were analytical grade and were purchased from Merck (Darmstadt, Germany). Phosphate buffer solution (PBS) was prepared with phosphoric acid and adjusted by NaOH to the desired pH value in the range of 2.0–9.0. Preparation of the modified electrode The bare glassy carbon electrode was coated with Fe3O4/GO nanocomposite according to the following simple procedure. 1 mg Fe3O4/GO nanocomposite was dispersed in 1 mL aqueous solution within 45 min ultrasonication. Then, 5 µl of the prepared suspension was dropped on the surface of carbon working electrodes. It remains at room temperature until it becomes dry. The surface areas of the Fe3O4/GO/GCE and the unmodified electrode were obtained by CV using 1 mM K3Fe(CN)6 at various scan rates. Using Randles-Ševčik formula [74], in Fe3O4/GO/GCE, the electrode surface was found 0.13 cm2 which was approximately 4.1 times greater than the unmodified electrode. Results and discussion Electrochemical profile of the bisphenol A on the Fe3O4/GO/GCE To study the electrochemical behaviour of bisphenol A which is pH-dependent, it is necessary to obtain the optimized pH value to achieve accurate results. By performing the experiments using modified electrodes at various pH values ranging from 2.0–9.0, it was revealed that the best results for electrooxidation of bisphenol A occur at pH 7.0. Scheme 1 demonstrates the electrooxidation process of bisphenol A. Scheme 1. Elector-oxidation reaction of bisphenol A The obtained cyclic voltammograms in the presence of 30.0 μM bisphenol A using the Fe3O4/GO/GCE (trace a) and unmodified GCE (trace b) are shown in Figure 1. According to CV results, the oxidation current peak of bisphenol A on the Fe3O4/GO/GCE appears at 450 mV, which is about 150 mV more negative compared with unmodified GCE. http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 MODIFIED GCE FOR DETERMINATION OF BISPHENOL A 1208 Figure 1. Cyclic voltammograms of (a) Fe3O4/GO/GCE and (b) unmodified GCE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) in the presence of 30.0 μM bisphenol A at the scan rate 50 mVs-1 Effect of scan rate on the results Increasing scan rate leads to enhanced oxidation peak current according to the obtained results from the study of the effect of potential scan rates on the oxidation currents of bisphenol A, Figure 2. In addition, there is a linear relationship between Ip and the square root of the potential scan rate (ν1/2), demonstrating the diffusion control of analyte oxidation. Figure 2. LSVs of Fe3O4/GO/GCE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) containing 15.0 μM bisphenol A at various scan rates; numbers 1-8 correspond to 10, 20, 40, 60, 80, 100, 200 and 300 mV s-1. Inset: variation of Ipa vs. ν 1/2 F. Beigmoradi and H. Beitollahi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 1209 Chronoamperometric analysis The chronoamperometry analysis for bisphenol A samples was performed using of Fe3O4/GO/GCE vs. Ag/AgCl/KCl (3.0 M) at 0.5 V. The results of different concentrations of bisphenol A sample in PBS (pH 7.0) are demonstrated in Figure 3. Figure 3. Chronoamperograms obtained at Fe3O4/GO/GCE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) for different concentrations of bisphenol A. The numbers 1-4 correspond to 0.1, 0.5, 1.5 and 3.0 mM. (A) Plots of I vs. t-1/2 obtained from chronoamperograms 1-4. (B) Plot of the slope of the straight lines against bisphenol A concentration According to the Cotrell equation (equation 1) [68], experimental results of I vs. t−1/2 were plotted in Figure 3A, with the best fits for different concentrations of bisphenol A. The resulting slopes corresponding to straight lines in Figure 3A were then plotted against the concentration of bisphenol A (Figure 3B). The mean value of D was determined to be 4.6 × 10−5 cm2 s-1. I =nFAD1/2Cbπ-1/2t-1/2 (1) Calibration curves Based on the resulting peak currents of bisphenol A using Fe3O4/GO/GCE, the quantitative analysis of bisphenol A was done in water solutions. The modified electrode (Fe3O4/GO/GCE) as a working electrode in the range of bisphenol A concentration in 0.1 M PBS was used in DPV due to the advantages of DPV, including the improved sensitivity and better performance in analytical applications (Figure 4). According to the results, a linear relationship exists between the peak currents and concentrations of bisphenol A within the concentration range of 0.1-50.0 µM with a correlation coefficient of 0.999. The limit of detection, Cm, of bisphenol A was calculated using equation (2): Cm=3Sb/m (2) where, m is the slope of the calibration plot (0.1508 μA μM-1) and Sb is the standard deviation of the blank response obtained from 15 replicate measurements of the blank solution. The detection limit for determination of bisphenol A using this method 0.09 μM was obtained. http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 MODIFIED GCE FOR DETERMINATION OF BISPHENOL A 1210 Figure 4. DPVs of Fe3O4/GO/GCE in 0.1 M PBS (pH 7.0) containing different concentrations of bisphenol A. Numbers 1–9 correspond to 0.1, 0.5, 1.0, 5.0, 10.0, 20.0, 30.0, 40.0 and 50.0 μM. Inset: plot of I vs. bisphenol A concentrations. In all cases the scan rate was 50 mV s-1. Step potential 0.01 V and pulse amplitude 0.025 V Also, Table 1 shows a comparison of the analytical features of merit of the proposed electro- chemical method with a different reported modifier for the determination of bisphenol A [75-79]. Table 1. Comparison of the efficiency of different modifiers used in the detection of bisphenol A Modifier LOD, nM LDR, μM Ref. Multiwalled carbon nanotube and gold nanoparticle 4.0 0.01-0.7 [75] Reduced graphene oxide-silver/poly-L-lysine nanocomposites 540 1.0-80.0 [76] Graphene oxide and cuprous oxide nanocomposite 53 0.1-80.0 [77] Reduced graphene oxide-multi-walled carbon nanotubes 1 0.005-20.0 [78] AuPd nanoparticles-loaded graphene nanosheets 8.0 nM 0.5-10.0 [79] Fe3O4/GO nanocomposite 90 0.1-50.0 This work Analysis of real samples The applicability of this modified electrode in the determination of real samples was assessed through the determination of bisphenol A in water samples using the described method. In order to perform this analysis, the standard addition method was employed and the results are listed in Table 2. Table 2. Application of Fe3O4/GO/GCE for determination of bisphenol A in water samples (n = 5) Sample cbisphenol A / M Recovery,% RSD, % Spiked Found Well water 0 - - - 7.5 7.6 101.3 1.7 12.5 12.4 99.2 2.2 17.5 17.3 98.9 3.1 22.5 23.1 102.7 2.9 River water 0 - - - 10.0 9.9 99.0 2.5 15.0 15.3 102.0 3.1 20.0 19.5 97.5 3.2 25.0 25.9 103.6 1.9 F. Beigmoradi and H. Beitollahi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 1211 Accordingly, the results of bisphenol A recovery are satisfactory and the reproducibility of the results is proved by the mean relative standard deviation (RSD). Conclusions The Fe3O4/GO/GCE sensor showed excellent performance in the determination of bisphenol A, offering an alternative analytical technique that is reliable, effective, and inexpensive. Modifying the electrode surface with Fe3O4/GO nanocomposite resulted in the combination of a large surface area and high conductivity, providing high catalytic activity, highly reproducible and repeatable electrochemical measurements, and satisfactory results in the analysis of water matrices, with recoveries close to 100 %. The detection limit for bisphenol A using Fe3O4/GO/GCE, 0.09 µM was obtained. References [1] U. Alshana, I. Lubbas, N. G. Göger, I. Çok, U. Tamer, N. Ertas, Journal of Liquid Chromatography & Related Technologies 36(20) (2013) 2855. https://doi.org/10.1080/10826076.2012.725700 [2] M. del Olmo, A. Zafra, A. B. Jurado, J. L. Vilchez, Talanta 50 (2000) 1141. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-9140(99)00176-9 [3] A. D. Batista, F. R. P. Rocha, International Journal of Environmental Analytical Chemistry 93 (2013) 1402. https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2013.791974 [4] 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, S. Rajendran, L. Fu, N. Zare, Food and Chemical Toxicology (2022) 112961. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112961 [5] C. F. Nascimento, F. R. P. Rocha, Microchemical Journal 137 (2018) 429. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2017.12.006 [6] E. Yiantzi, E. Psillakis, K. Tyrovola, N. Kalogerakis, Talanta 80 (2010) 2057. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2009.11.005 [7] N. Salgueiro-González, E. Concha-Graña, I. Turnes-Carou, S. Muniategui-Lorenzo, P. López- Mahiá, D. Prada-Rodríguez, Journal of Chromatography A 1223 (2012) 1-8. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2011.12.011 [8] J. López-Darias, M. Germán-Hernández, V. Pino, A. M. Afonso, Talanta 80(5) (2010) 1611. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2009.09.057 [9] Y. Deceuninck, E. Bichon, S. Durand, N. Bemrah, Z. Zendong, M. L. Morvan, P. Marchand, G. Dervilly-Pinel, J. P. Antignac, J. C. Leblanc, B. Le Bizec, Journal of Chromatography A 1362 (2014) 241-249. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2014.07.105 [10] S. E. Baghbamidi, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 12(1) (2022) 37-45. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1103 [11] A. Hajializadeh, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 12 (1) (2022) 185-197. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1211 [12] C. F. Nascimento, F. R. Rocha, Microchemical Journal 137 (2018) 429-434. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2017.12.006 [13] Z. Tan, F. Li, Journal of Central South University 1 (2012) 2136-2141. https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-012-1256-2 [14] J. Vitku, T. Chlupacova, L. Sosvorova, R. Hampl, M. Hill, J. Heracek, M. Bicikova, L. Starka, Talanta 140 (2015) 62-67. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2015.03.013 [15] 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 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 https://doi.org/10.1080/10826076.2012.725700 https://doi.org/10.1016/S0039-9140(99)00176-9 https://doi.org/10.1080/03067319.2013.791974 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112961 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2017.12.006 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2009.11.005 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2011.12.011 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2009.09.057 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2014.07.105 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1103 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1211 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2017.12.006 https://doi.org/10.1007/s11771-012-1256-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2015.03.013 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132928 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 MODIFIED GCE FOR DETERMINATION OF BISPHENOL A 1212 [16] N. Rajabi, M. Masrournia, M. Abedi, Chemical Methodologies 4(5) (2020) 660-670. http://www.chemmethod.com/article_109975.html [17] H. Mahmoudi-Moghaddam, S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, Microchemical Journal 150 (2019) 104085. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2019.104085 [18] K. R. Mahanthesha, B. E. Kumara Swamy, Analytical and Bioanalytical Electrochemistry 10 (2018) 321. [19] M. R. Aflatoonian, B. Aflatoonian, R. Alizadeh, R. Abbasi Rayeni, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(1) (2020) 35-43. http://www.echemcom.com/article_96655.html [20] H. Karimi-Maleh, F. Karimi, Y. Orooji, G. Mansouri, A. Razmjou, A. Aygun, F. Sen, Scientific Reports 10(1) (2020) 11699. https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68663-2 [21] H. Beitollahi, F. G. Nejad, Z. Dourandish, S. Tajik, Environmental Research 214 (2022) 113725. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.113725 [22] E. Shojaei, M. Masrournia, A. Beyramabadi, H. Behmadi, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(7) (2020) 750-759. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.7.2 [23] G. Xu, D. Hou, C. Huo, Y. Zhao, J. Bao, M. Yang, H. Fa, Talanta 178 (2018) 1046-1052. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.08.086 [24] M. Montazarolmahdi, M. Masrournia, A. Nezhadali, Chemical Methodologies 4(6) (2020) 732-742. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113388 [25] 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 [26] B. Sabour, Analytical and Bioanalytical Electrochemistry 10 (2018) 310. [27] 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 [28] S. Tajik, M.A. Taher, H. Beitollahi, Electroanalysis 26 (2014) 796-806. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201300589 [29] A. Shamsi, F. Ahour, Advanced Journal of Chemistry A 4(1) (2020) 22-31. https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.252025.1215 [30] M. Motahharinia, H. Zamani, H. Karimi-Maleh, Chemical Methodologies 5(2) (2021) 107-113. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119678 [31] M. Payehghadr, Y. Taherkhani, A. Maleki, F. Nourifard, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2(9) (2020) 982-990. http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.114589 [32] P. J. F. Harris, Critical Reviews in Solid State and Materials Sciences 30 (2005) 235-253. https://doi.org/10.1080/10408430500406265 [33] A. F. Craievich, Materials Research Bulletin 11 (1976) 1249-1255. https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5408(76)90029-5 [34] G. M. Jenkins, K. Kawamura, Nature 231 (1971) 175-176. https://doi.org/10.1038/231175a0 [35] 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 [36] P. M. Jahani, H. Beitollahi, F. G. Nejad, Z. Dourandish, A. Di Bartolomeo, Nanotechnology 33(39) (2022) 395702. https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6528/ac779f [37] L. L. Paim, N. R. Stradiotto, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 663 (2011) 43-47. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2011.09.027 [38] 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 [39] 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 http://www.chemmethod.com/article_109975.html https://doi.org/10.1016/j.microc.2019.104085 http://www.echemcom.com/article_96655.html https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-020-68663-2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.envres.2022.113725 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.7.2 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.08.086 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.113388 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2022.134712 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jcis.2020.01.089 https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201300589 https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.252025.1215 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.119678 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.114589 https://doi.org/10.1080/10408430500406265 https://doi.org/10.1016/0025-5408(76)90029-5 https://doi.org/10.1038/231175a0 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.foodchem.2015.03.153 https://iopscience.iop.org/article/10.1088/1361-6528/ac779f https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2011.09.027 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2020.241560.1063 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.molliq.2019.01.081 F. Beigmoradi and H. Beitollahi J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 1213 [40] N. Atar, M. L. Yola, T. Eren, Applied Surface Science 362 (2016) 315. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2013.03.050 [41] 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 [42] 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 [43] V. Vikas, B. E. Swamy, C. C. Viswanath, T. S. Naik, Analytical and Bioanalytical Electrochemistry 9 (2017) 164. [44] H. Peyman, H. Roshanfekr, A. Babakhanian, H. Jafari, Chemical Methodologies 5(5) (2021) 446-453. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.135266 [45] 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 [46] S. Jafari, N. Nasirizadeh, M. Dehghani, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 802 (2017) 139- 146. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2017.08.043 [47] 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 [48] 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 [49] M. Ozdal, S. Gurkok, ADMET and DMPK 10(2) (2022) 115-129. https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1172 [50] 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 [51] R. K. Satvekar, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 12 (1) (2022) 25-35. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1116 [52] M. Khatami, H. Q. Alijani, M. S. Nejad, R. S. Varma, Applied Sciences 8 (2018) 411. https://doi.org/10.3390/app8030411 [53] 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 [54] S. Tajik, H. Beitollahi, S. Shahsavari, F. G. Nejad, Chemosphere 291 (2022) 132736. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132736 [55] M. Khatami, I. Sharifi, M. A. Lima Nobre, N. Zafarnia, M. R. Aflatoonian, Green Chemistry Letters and Reviews 11 (2018) 125-134. https://doi.org/10.1080/17518253.2018.1444797 [56] F. Kazemi, H. Zamani, M. Abedi, M. Ebrahimi, Chemical Methodologies 5(6) (2021) 522-533. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.138835 [57] 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 [58] S. M. Mortazavi, M. Khatami, I. Sharifi, H. Heli, K. Kaykavousi, M. S. Sobhani Poor, S. Kharazi, M. A. Lima Nobre, Journal of Cluster Science 28 (2017) 2997-3007. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10876-017-1267-0 [59] Y. Y. Muhi-Alden, K. A. Saleh, Eurasian Chemical Communications 3(10) (2021) 755-762. http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2021.300767.1225 [60] S. Tajik, Z. Dourandish, F. G. Nejad, A. Aghaei Afshar, H. Beitollahi, Micromachines 13(3) (2022) 369. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13030369 [61] J. Ghanaat, M. A. Khalilzadeh, D. Zareyee, Eurasian Chemical Communications 2 (2020) 202- 212. http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.6 http://dx.doi.org/10.5599/jese.1482 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.msec.2013.03.050 https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2020.114113 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2021.288271.1182 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.135266 https://doi.org/10.1039/C8NJ05581E https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2017.08.043 https://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ajca.2021.275901.1246 https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1172 https://doi.org/10.5599/admet.1023 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1116 https://doi.org/10.3390/app8030411 https://doi.org/10.1007/s40097-022-00492-3 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.chemosphere.2021.132736 https://doi.org/10.1080/17518253.2018.1444797 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.138835 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.fct.2022.112907 https://doi.org/10.1007/s10876-017-1267-0 http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/ecc.2021.300767.1225 https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13030369 http://dx.doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/ECC.2020.2.6 J. Electrochem. Sci. Eng. 12(6) (2022) 1205-1214 MODIFIED GCE FOR DETERMINATION OF BISPHENOL A 1214 [62] A. Talavari, B. Ghanavati, A. Azimi, S. Sayyahi, Progress in Chemical and Biochemical Research 4(2) (2021) 177-190. http://dx.doi.org/10.22034/pcbr.2021.270178.1177 [63] 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 [64] M. Khatami, S. M. Mortazavi, Z. Kishani Farahani, A. Amini, E. Amini, H.Heli, Iranian Journal of Biotechnology 15 (2017) 95-101. https://doi.org/10.15171%2Fijb.1436 [65] K. A. Geim, K. S. Novoselov, The rise of graphene, in Nanoscience and Technology: A Collection of Reviews from Nature Journals, P. Rodgers, Ed., Nature Publishing Group (2010) 11-19. https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814287005_0002 [66] A. Behmaneshfar, A. Sadrnia, H. Karimi-Maleha, Chemical Methodologies 4 (2020) 679-694. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.111201 [67] S. S. Low, H. S. Loh, J. S. Boey, P. S. Khiew, W. S. Chiu, M. T. T. Tan, Biosensors and Bioelectronics 94 (2017) 365-373. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2017.02.038 [68] M. Ameri Akhtiar Abadi, M. Masrournia, M. Abedi, Chemical Methodologies 5 (2021) 11-20. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.118260 [69] S. Tajik, A. A. Afshar, S. Shamsaddini, M. B. Askari, Z. Dourandish, F. Garkani Nejad, H. Beitollahi, A. Di Bartolomeo, Industrial & Engineering Chemistry Research (2022). https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.2c00370 [70] A. Dehno Khalaji, M. Ghorbani, Chemical Methodologies 4 (2020) 532-542. https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.4.12 [71] M. Khatami, H. Alijani, I. Sharifi, F. Sharifi, S. Pourseyedi, S. Kharazi, M.A. Lima Nobre, M. Khatami, Scientia Pharmaceutica 85 (2017) 36. https://doi.org/10.3390/scipharm85040036 [72] F. Irannezhad, J. Seyed-Yazdi, and S. H. Hekmatara, Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering 12 (2022) 47-57. https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1101 [73] S. Sajjadifar, I. Amini, S. Habibzadeh, G. Mansouri, E. Ebadi, Chemical Methodologies 4 (2020) 623-634. https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.108149 [74] A. J. Bard, L. R. Faulkner, Electrochemical Methods Fundamentals and Applications, John Wiley & Sons, Inc., New York, 2000. ISBN 978-0-471-04372-0 [75] 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 [76] Y. Li, H. Wang, B. Yan, H. Zhang, Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 805 (2017) 39-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2017.10.022 [77] R. Shi, J. Liang, Z. Zhao, A. Liu, Y. Tian, Talanta 169 (2017) 37-43. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.03.042 [78] H. Yu, X. Feng, X. X. Chen, J. L. Qiao, X. L. Gao, N. Xu, L. J. Gao, Chinese Journal of Analytical Chemistry 45 (2017) 713-720. https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2040(17)61014-4 [79] B. Su, H. Shao, N. Li, X. Chen, Z. Cai, X. Chen, Talanta 166 (2017) 126-132. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.01.049 ©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/10.22034/pcbr.2021.270178.1177 https://doi.org/10.3390/nano12030491 https://doi.org/10.15171%2Fijb.1436 https://doi.org/10.1142/9789814287005_0002 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.111201 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2017.02.038 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2021.118260 https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.iecr.2c00370 https://doi.org/10.33945/SAMI/CHEMM.2020.4.12 https://doi.org/10.3390/scipharm85040036 https://doi.org/10.5599/jese.1101 https://doi.org/10.22034/chemm.2020.108149 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2017.06.160 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2017.10.022 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.03.042 https://doi.org/10.1016/S1872-2040(17)61014-4 https://doi.org/10.1016/j.talanta.2017.01.049 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/) @Article{Beigmoradi2022, author = {Beigmoradi, Fariba and Beitollahi, Hadi}, journal = {Journal of Electrochemical Science and Engineering}, title = {{Fe3O4/GO nanocomposite modified glassy carbon electrode as a novel voltammetric sensor for determination of bisphenol A:}}, year = {2022}, issn = {1847-9286}, month = {sep}, number = {6}, pages = {1205--1214}, volume = {12}, abstract = {A new voltammetric sensor is proposed for the determination of bisphenol A, using a glassy carbon electrode (GCE) modified with Fe3O4/graphene oxide (GO) nanocomposite. The modification of the electrode surface was performed by dispersion drop-casting. The electro­chemical behavior of bisphenol A was evaluated by cyclic voltammetry (CV). The oxidation peak was observed during the anodic potential scan at potentials of 0.45 V. Higher anodic peak currents (Ipa) were observed at Fe3O4/GO/GCE modified electrode than at bare GCE. The elec­trochemical determination by differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) revealed a linear response in the concentration range of 1.0×10-7 to 5.0×10-5 M, with a detection limit of 9.0×10-8 M. The proposed method was successfully applied using water samples, with good recoveries.}, doi = {10.5599/JESE.1482}, file = {:D\:/OneDrive/Mendeley Desktop/Beigmoradi, Beitollahi - 2022 - Fe3O4GO nanocomposite modified glassy carbon electrode as a novel voltammetric sensor for determination.pdf:pdf;:www/jESE_V12_No6_1205-1214.pdf:PDF}, keywords = {differential pulse voltammetry, high repeatability, modified electrode, water samples}, publisher = {International Association of Physical Chemists (IAPC)}, url = {https://pub.iapchem.org/ojs/index.php/JESE/article/view/1482}, }