Evidence Hub

An electrochemical and computational study for discrimination of D- and L-cystine by reduced graphene oxide/β-cyclodextrin

Zor E, Bingol H, Ramanaviciene A, Ramanavicius A, Ersoz M

The Analyst, 2015

Abstract

Here, we report a novel enantioselective electrochemical biosensor for the discrimination of cystine enantiomers (d- and l-cystine) using a chiral interface for the specific recognition of d- and l-cystine. The biosensor is based on reduced graphene oxide modified by β-cyclodextrin (rGO/β-CD) at the GCE surface. During the preparation of rGO/β-CD/GCE, the modified electrode surfaces were characterized by cyclic voltammetry (CV), electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM). The electrochemical behaviours of the d- and l-cystine were investigated using the rGO/β-CD/GCE by CV and compared to bare GCE. A clear separation between the oxidation peak potentials of d- and l-cystine was observed at 1.32 and 1.42 V, respectively. The electrochemical discrimination performance of the fabricated chiral sensor was also examined by differential pulse voltammetry (DPV) in a mixed solution of d- and l-cystine. In addition, the DPV technique was used for the determination of d- and l-cystine at low concentration values in the range of 1.0-10.0 μM. To investigate the amperometric response of rGO/β-CD/GCE towards d- and l-cystine, the chronoamperometry technique was used in the concentration range of 10.0-100.0 μM. The interactions of the enantiomers with rGO/β-CD were modelled by molecular docking using AutoDock Vina, and the interaction energies were predicted to be -4.8 and -5.3 kcal mol(-1) for d- and l-cystine, respectively. The corresponding values…

How strong is the evidence?

Evidence Hub reads this as a experimental / empirical study, done in computer models (in silico), not in people. Its evidence level is 5 of 5 (Very low · case / narrative / animal / in vitro / in silico). Case reports, narrative reviews, and animal, cell or computer-model studies give the weakest evidence for human health.

How the five levels of evidence work. The level is assigned automatically from the abstract and can be wrong, so check the paper.

Read the paper

Related studies

Go deeper in Evidence Hub

Evidence Hub adds a study data sheet (design, sample size, evidence level, key numbers), an AI summary and a chat grounded in the paper's text.

Open this study Sign up free