Next Article in Journal
GS-MSDR: Gaussian Splatting with Multi-Scale Deblurring and Resolution Enhancement
Previous Article in Journal
A Reliability Study of Small, Portable, Easy-to-Use, and IMU-Based Sensors for Gait Assessment
Previous Article in Special Issue
Neurophysiology of Downhill Mountain Bike Athletes—Benchmark Assessments of Event-Related Potentials
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
This is an early access version, the complete PDF, HTML, and XML versions will be available soon.
Article

Urea Detection in Phosphate Buffer and Artificial Urine: A Simplified Kinetic Model of a pH-Sensitive EISCAP Urea Biosensor

1
Innovation Center for Nanoscience and Technologies, A.B. Nalbandyan Institute of Chemical Physics NAS RA, P. Sevak 5/2, Yerevan 0014, Armenia
2
Materials Research Laboratory, University of Nova Gorica, Vipavska 13, 5000 Nova Gorica, Slovenia
3
Institute of Physics, Yerevan State University, A. Manoogian 1, Yerevan 0025, Armenia
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Sensors 2025, 25(21), 6596; https://doi.org/10.3390/s25216596 (registering DOI)
Submission received: 7 September 2025 / Revised: 16 October 2025 / Accepted: 24 October 2025 / Published: 26 October 2025
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in Biosensors Section 2025)

Abstract

A simplified kinetic model for the quantitative analysis of a potentiometric, pH-based urea biosensor is presented. The device was an electrolyte–insulator–semiconductor capacitor (EISCAP) with a pH-sensitive Ta2O5 gate functionalized by a polyallylamine hydrochloride (PAH)/urease bilayer. Within the steady-state approximation, the kinetic equations yielded an implicit algebraic relation linking the bulk urea concentration to the local pH at the sensor surface. Numerical solution of this equation, combined with a fitting routine, provides the apparent Michaelis–Menten constant (KM) and the normalized maximum reaction rate (k¯V). Validation against the literature data confirmed the reliability of the approach. Experimental results were then analyzed in both phosphate buffer (PBS) and artificial urine (AU), covering urea concentrations of 0.1–50 mM. The fitted parameters showed comparable KM values of 10.9 mM (PBS) and 32.4 mM (AU), but strongly different k¯V values: 2.2×104 (PBS) versus 8.6×107 (AU). The three-order reduction in AU was attributed to the inhibitory effects inherent to complex biological fluids. These findings highlight the importance of the model-based quantitative analysis of EISCAP biosensors, enabling the accurate characterization of immobilized enzyme layers and guiding optimization for applications in realistic sample matrices.
Keywords: Kinetic model; data fitting; steady-state approximation; urea biosensor; urease; artificial urine Kinetic model; data fitting; steady-state approximation; urea biosensor; urease; artificial urine

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Simonyan, K.; Tsokolakyan, A.; Buniatyan, V.; Badasyan, A.; Yeranosyan, M. Urea Detection in Phosphate Buffer and Artificial Urine: A Simplified Kinetic Model of a pH-Sensitive EISCAP Urea Biosensor. Sensors 2025, 25, 6596. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25216596

AMA Style

Simonyan K, Tsokolakyan A, Buniatyan V, Badasyan A, Yeranosyan M. Urea Detection in Phosphate Buffer and Artificial Urine: A Simplified Kinetic Model of a pH-Sensitive EISCAP Urea Biosensor. Sensors. 2025; 25(21):6596. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25216596

Chicago/Turabian Style

Simonyan, Karen, Astghik Tsokolakyan, Vahe Buniatyan, Artem Badasyan, and Mkrtich Yeranosyan. 2025. "Urea Detection in Phosphate Buffer and Artificial Urine: A Simplified Kinetic Model of a pH-Sensitive EISCAP Urea Biosensor" Sensors 25, no. 21: 6596. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25216596

APA Style

Simonyan, K., Tsokolakyan, A., Buniatyan, V., Badasyan, A., & Yeranosyan, M. (2025). Urea Detection in Phosphate Buffer and Artificial Urine: A Simplified Kinetic Model of a pH-Sensitive EISCAP Urea Biosensor. Sensors, 25(21), 6596. https://doi.org/10.3390/s25216596

Note that from the first issue of 2016, this journal uses article numbers instead of page numbers. See further details here.

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop