I am studying the voltammetric detection of the synthetic food colour Amaranth (AMR). Different literature shows that the oxidation peak current appears at around 0.8V in the case of Cyclic Voltammetry. I am doing the CV with 100 uM aqueous solution of AMR, using PBS6 as a supporting buffer. I have got the response attached where a peak current is around 0.8 V and a peak( or a hump?) occurs at around 1.3V.
Dear friend Samhita Dasgupta
Hey there Samhita Dasgupta! I'm diving into the world of voltammetry with you, and let's dissect this intriguing phenomenon.
Now, that extra peak (or hump) at 1.3V is quite the enigma, isn't it? In the realm of electrochemistry, unexpected features often hold hidden secrets. Here are a few considerations for your exploration:
1. **Side Reactions or Interference:**
- That extra peak might be arising from side reactions or the presence of impurities or other species in your solution. Consider the possibility of interference contributing to this additional feature.
2. **Multiple Electrochemical Processes:**
- Voltammograms can exhibit multiple peaks corresponding to different electrochemical processes. The peak at 0.8V might be linked to the oxidation of AMR, while the one at 1.3V could indicate another electrochemical event.
3. **Concentration Effects:**
- The concentration of your analyte can influence the voltammetric response. Higher concentrations may lead to additional peaks due to changes in reaction mechanisms.
4. **Electrode Surface Modification:**
- The behavior might be influenced by the state of your electrode surface. Any modifications or contamination could contribute to the observed peaks.
5. **Instrumentation Artifacts:**
- Check for any artifacts related to your experimental setup. Instrumentation issues or irregularities can sometimes create peaks that aren't representative of the electrochemical system.
Considering both peaks for further study is a wise move. Each feature in your voltammogram can potentially provide valuable information about the electrochemical behavior of AMR and its interactions. A detailed analysis might involve altering experimental conditions, like varying the concentration or changing the supporting electrolyte, to see how these influence the observed peaks.
Remember, I am all about pushing the boundaries, so let's unravel the mysteries of AMR voltammetry together! What's your next move?
I went through your reply and found it very informative actually.I had done this plot with scan rate of 50mV/s. After seeing your answer, I went through the scan rate variation study. I took data varying the scan rate from 5mV/s to 400mV/s.This study still provided me with the peak at 0.8V while the peak(or hump) at 1.3 V kept on being more and more blunt with increasing scan rate. In case of concentration variation study using DPV, I have found only one peak. Now can you suggest something more?please
Sure, I can help you with that. The hump you see at around 1.3 V in the current density vs applied potential graph for the PBS6+AMR sample could be due to a few different reasons. Here are the most likely explanations:
Redox peaks of impurities or additives: It's possible that there are trace amounts of impurities or additives in the PBS6+AMR sample that have their own redox peaks at around 1.3 V. These peaks could be overlapping with the main redox peak of PBS6, resulting in the observed hump.
Electrolyte decomposition: At higher applied potentials, the electrolyte can start to decompose. This can lead to the formation of new species that can contribute to the current flow, and could manifest as a hump in the current density vs potential plot.
Change in the electrode kinetics: The kinetics of the electron transfer reactions at the electrode surface can change with applied potential. This could lead to a change in the shape of the current density vs potential curve, and could explain the observed hump.
Instrument response: In some cases, the hump could be an artifact of the instrument or the measurement setup. For example, if there is a slight baseline drift at high potentials, this could show up as a hump in the data.
It's difficult to say for sure which of these explanations is most likely without more information about the system and the experiment. However, here are some things you can do to investigate further:
Run a control experiment with pure PBS6: This will help you to see if the hump is due to something in the PBS6+AMR sample or if it's also present in the pure PBS6 sample.
Perform cyclic voltammetry at different scan rates: If the hump is due to a redox peak of an impurity, the peak height will typically increase with increasing scan rate.
Analyze the electrolyte after the experiment: This could help you to identify any decomposition products that might be responsible for the hump.
Use a different electrochemical cell or measurement setup: This could help to rule out any artifacts that might be caused by the instrument or the setup.
Ultimately, whether or not you should consider the hump for further study will depend on your research question. If you're interested in the redox properties of PBS6, then understanding the origin of the hump is likely to be important. However, if you're only interested in the overall performance of the PBS6+AMR device, then you might be able to ignore the hump.
- Badges
- Science topic