Demonstrates selective voltammetric detection of Cu(II) in environmental waters, implying practical applications for monitoring.
A simple and cost-effective graphite paste electrode modified with 5-(4-aminophenyl)-4-amino-1,2,4-triazole-3(2H)-thione was developed for the selective voltammetric determination of Cu(II) ions in environmental water samples. The N,S-donor ligand was incorporated into a graphite–polystyrene matrix without the use of nanomaterials, providing a reproducible and straightforward electrode fabrication route. Scanning electron microscopy revealed a rough, porous surface morphology with an enhanced electroactive surface area of 0.065 cm2, approximately twice the geometric area. Electrochemical impedance spectroscopy confirmed diffusion-controlled mass transport, while cyclic voltammetry indicated quasi-reversible behaviour of the Cu(II)/Cu(0) redox system with a linear dependence of peak current on the square root of the scan rate. Differential pulse voltammetry under optimised conditions (0.1 mol·L−1 H2SO4, pH 1.0–1.2) yielded a linear analytical response over the concentration range of 0.01–0.4 μmol·L−1 (R2 = 0.99507), with a limit of detection of 0.02 μmol·L−1 and a limit of quantification of 0.06 μmol·L−1—well below the WHO guideline for copper in drinking water. The sensing mechanism involves selective N,S-bidentate coordination of Cu(II) at the electrode surface, followed by electrochemical reduction, as supported by FT-IR spectroscopic evidence. The sensor demonstrated good selectivity toward Cu(II) in the presence of common interfering metal ions at up to 20-fold excess. The method was successfully validated against ICP-OES (recovery 99.8%, RSD < 0.33%) and confirmed by spike–recovery experiments (99.0–99.5%), confirming its practical applicability for trace-level environmental monitoring. The modified electrode retained approximately 93% of its initial response after 30 consecutive measurements and 91% after 14 days of storage, demonstrating good operational stability.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Qutlimurotova et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: