Next Article in Journal / Special Issue
A Novel Label-Free Electrochemical Immunosensor Based on a Self-Assembled Monolayer-Modified Electrode for Polychlorinated Biphenyl (PCB) in Environmental Analysis
Previous Article in Journal
Comparative Study of Corrosion Inhibition Efficacy of Alkaloid Extract of Artemesia vulgaris and Solanum tuberosum in Mild Steel Samples in 1 M Sulphuric Acid
Previous Article in Special Issue
A Biodegradable Polymer-Based Plastic Chip Electrode as a Current Collector in Supercapacitor Application
 
 
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Review

Electrochemical Profiling of Plants

by
Mansi Gandhi
1,2,* and
Khairunnisa Amreen
3
1
Department of Chemistry, School of Advanced Sciences, Vellore Institute of Technology, Vellore 632014, India
2
Institute of Chemistry, The Hebrew University of Jerusalem, Jerusalem 9190401, Israel
3
Department of Chemistry, St. Anns College for Women, Mehdipatnam, Hyderabad 500028, India
*
Author to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Electrochem 2022, 3(3), 434-450; https://doi.org/10.3390/electrochem3030030
Submission received: 18 June 2022 / Revised: 22 July 2022 / Accepted: 26 July 2022 / Published: 4 August 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers in Electrochemistry)

Abstract

:
The profiling, or fingerprinting, of distinct varieties of the Plantae kingdom is based on the bioactive ingredients, which are systematically segregated to perform their detailed analysis. The secondary products portray a pivotal role in defining the ecophysiology of distinct plant species. There is a crucial role of the profiling domain in understanding the various features, characteristics, and conditions related to plants. Advancements in variable technologies have contributed to the development of highly specific sensors for the non-invasive detection of molecules. Furthermore, many hyphenated techniques have led to the development of highly specific integrated systems that allow multiplexed detection, such as high-performance liquid chromatography, gas chromatography, etc., which are quite cumbersome and un-economical. In contrast, electrochemical sensors are a promising alternative which are capable of performing the precise recognition of compounds due to efficient signal transduction. However, due to a few bottlenecks in understanding the principles and non-redox features of minimal metabolites, the area has not been explored. This review article provides an insight to the electrochemical basis of plants in comparison with other traditional approaches and with necessary positive and negative outlooks. Studies consisting of the idea of merging the fields are limited; hence, relevant non-phytochemical reports are included for a better comparison of reports to broaden the scope of this work.

1. Introduction and Background

The traditional approach to classifying living organisms is ‘uni’ or ‘multicellular’, wherein plants are defined to be majorly eukaryotic multicellular species. They are essential for nature and to maintain distinct domains of living species, with the ultimate ability of food and metabolite resource hubs. Along with representing a food supply to different strata of society, their products are equally vital for the sustenance of shelter, fuel, and innumerable counter-products. The use of sensor technology in agriculture is mainly focused on the soil [1], water [2], weed control [3,4,5], and nutrient analysis [6,7,8]. The platforms are designed to understand the external factors surrounding plants rather than the plant itself. The term “Internet of things” has evolved over time; in a recent report, the authors emphasized a nascent concept concerning plants [9]. Plants have signal communications similar to neurons, and these signals are the basis of sensors and cloud technology. The idea herein, is to understand or decode the signals and employ this knowledge for both agriculture and plant domain. These environmental factors are known to be proxies for estimating the well-being of plants. This further affects the food supply chain and the different stages of plant growth need monitoring to ensure proper yields. This paper focuses on plant profiling rather than surroundings to understand the basics of plants, their features, and characteristics. Plant-based sensor technologies provide all kinds of crucial understanding for the optimization of food production.
When plants are subjected to external stressors, various defensive compounds are released by their systems. These compounds are basically a mixture of secondary metabolites (terpenoids, alkaloids, phenolics, etc.), volatile compounds (ethylene, methylene chloride, salicylic acid, etc.), and chemical defenses (phenyl propanoids, glucosilonates, etc.), which exert interesting functions, as shown in Figure 1. Automated pattern recognition is implemented to categorize the phytonutrients. Unambiguous identification and quantification are based on the bio-activity assay, modes of action in the body systems, target sites, and their source of cultivation. Categorizing wild varieties/species can cause potential problems in variety identification, as well as quality aspects, with catastrophic consequences. Taxonomy is one such study that offers a clear understanding of plant origins, relationships, and evolutionary patterns. The concept of the ‘origin of species’ is such an understanding wherein a phylogenetic relationship is derived for clear infragenic identification. Many other fields contribute to the achievements of botany, involving molecular biology, ecology, genomic understanding, cytology, bioinformatics, and biochemistry. These together are penetrated or interlinked with each other, providing directions for new explorations and modelling/untangling the core of life’s existence.
Plants consist of a mix of complexes or a rather soup of bio-synthesized nutrients as a part of their metabolic pathway. These metabolites are not easy to segregate for qualitative and quantitative estimations. The electrochemical approach involves detecting only a fraction called phyto-actives with response to the current–voltage plot, while the rest remain silent. Fortunately, the combination of these secondary metabolites is often taxonomically distinct and causes oxidative stress to plants; consequently, these are detectable using electrochemical approaches. An interesting example of the Herbivory group is the aggression-induced profile of undamaged pepper from chemical reactions due to beetles. The divergence in signals points towards the alterations in chemicals involved in defense mechanisms upon oxidative stress (polyphenols and terpenes). These changes were regarded to be the chemical communications of plants using volatile organic compounds. The first report for a potentiometric sensor involving the tissue of the yellow squash plant variety was postulated by Kuriyama et al. for glutamate sensing [10]. Following this example, another report for dopamine using ‘Banantrode’ (a banana pulp modified clark oxygen electrode) was demonstrated by Sidwell et al. in 1985 [11]. In continuation, new electrochemical platforms were developed based on corn kernels for the sensing of pyruvate [12], whereas a cucumber-plant-leaf-based system was used for cysteine detection [13]. Transgenic plants used as platforms themselves were reported in 2002 [14]. This includes the genetic alteration of genes with green fluorescent protein (GFP) via the use of an alcohol dehydrogenase promoter under variable conditions.
In the plant kingdom, many different ubiquitous secondary metabolites have an immensely positive impact on human individuals. These metabolites are responsible for herbivore defenses that exert cytotoxicity towards pathogens; and these features can be exploited in the pharmaceutical industry as antimicrobial supplements. Defensive products against neurotoxin activity can be potent muscle-relaxants, anti-depressants, etc. In continuation, many secondary products evolve and target molecular cells and tissues in competing trophic levels. Meanwhile, species of plants can contribute as defenses against insects and can be utilized as insect repellents. Ginko, an ornamental plant, improves peripheral and cerebrovascular circulation and the treatment of medical conditions associated with tinnitus and vertigo, because it is particularly effective in the scavenging of free radicals [15,16,17]. Kava, an indigenous species of ‘Oceania’ islands, is an intoxicating beverage used for treating tension, insomnia, anxiety, and agitation issues, because their profile includes benzodiazapines [18]. The property of radical scavenging is attributed to the ‘antioxidant power’ of a plant variety. With its widespread empirical use, the varieties necessitate accurate and reliable information on their phytochemical and antioxidant properties. However, there is no universal method for accurately and quantitatively measuring power. In electroanalysis, the total electrochemical antioxidant power (TEAP) of various plant material is dependent on the peak maxima [19]. The other established methods include 2,2-diphenyl 1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) assays, Folin–Ciocalteu assays, oxygen radical absorbance capacity (ORAC), lipid peroxide inhibition, dichlorofluorescein-diacetate (DCHF-DA), and the ferric reducing ability of plasma (FRAP) for assessing their total antioxidant activity. The electrochemical approach makes the total estimation relatively rapid, simple, and low cost.
Intelligent systems/studies are now being used to simplify and interpret large sets of plant profiles developed as a collaborative initiative to systematically classify the folk taxonomies based on plant characteristics. Stobiecki et al. reported the profiling of Arabidopsis thaliana of phenolic glycosidic conjugates [20]. Umoh et al. compiled a phylogeny based on subjective knowledge and through a multidisciplinary approach using metabolite investigations [21]. Berkov et al. recently elaborated the basic chemodiversity, chemotaxonomy, and chemoecology of Amaryllidaceae alkaloids, which were subdivided into 59 genera [21]. Herein, we present a basic method for ‘taxa’ characteristics in order to understand the phylogenetic relationships and profiling of plants using an electrochemical approach. This review accounts for various approaches accounted to date, including non-electrochemical techniques. A brief comparative study of techniques is presented in Figure 2.
Electrochemistry has been used in the building of sensor platforms in order to detect biomolecules in a laboratory setting, which has been extended to miniaturized point-of-care kits [22]. Globally, it has changed the perspective of medical and clinical diagnostics [23]. The sample manipulation of biosensors enables a wide spectrum of bio-compound measurements [24]. The minute quantities of the sample sizes involve just a few microliters to several nanoliters and simple pre-treatment steps before the initiation of experiments. The investigation requires tens of seconds to few minutes, making it the best choice in establishing on-site or in-field biosensing and detection systems [25]. These sensors represent a perfect interface with the incorporation of methodologies establishing a bio-recognition system consisting of electrode coatings with distinct transducers [26], reporter molecules [27], probes [28], nanomaterials [29], polymers [30], dendrimers [31], bio-derived assemblies [32], etc., with the scope of improved biocompatibility [33], enhanced signal intensities [34], additional binding attributes [35], etc. The aim is to combine the two separate categories of nanomaterials and nanofabrication in a recent trend of designs including contributions of MEMS and portable platforms for the diagnostics of fluidic, gaseous, and solid interfaces. Thus, commercialized diagnosis devices are the end goal of these sensor developments, incorporating confined sample pretreatment, delivery, and analysis sections [36,37,38]. The signal readouts are an amalgamation of responses from the electrode, capture and/or reporter probe, molecular linkers, enzyme molecule, etc., which are integrated to enhance the performance [39]. The presence of a nanomaterial matrix on the electrode system is quite favorable in establishing a high surface-to-volume output, strengthening attachment to the target substrate, enhancing biological compatibility, uplifting signal intensity, and establishing a better recognition base for adjoining molecules. Thus, the extensive use of nano-molecules has become a trend in the approach for developing electrochemical sensors. Many nano-molecules, such as carbon nano-materials (such as MWCNT, SWCNT, DWCNT, and graphene), metal nanoparticles (such as TiO2, Ag, and Ni), and bulk carbon (such as carbon black, mesoporous carbon, activated charcoal) have been developed. A number of extensive studies have been performed on these nano-molecules to establish well-defined relationships [40,41]. Carbon nanomaterials assure immobilization characteristics for enzymes, and at the same time, act as amperometric transducers [42,43,44]. There are a few key attributes of a potential sensor, including: the detection speed (complete recognition within a few minutes; easy signal readout), sensitivity (from several fM to aM, without any issues of sample amplification), specificity (stringency for recognition; single-base mismatch detection), convenience (MEMS + nanotechnology; portable in-field assays; point of care biosensing), and multiplexing (combination of different biomarkers/bio-molecules correlates better accuracy; simultaneous detection) [45]. These sensors enable device miniaturization with a choice of batch-fabrication and well-defined precision capabilities.
DNA oxidation via electrochemistry opens the door to powerful techniques assembling the kinetics and thermodynamic information on a same scale. This approach can be utilized for analyzing DNA damage [46]. Liang et al. reported ruthenium tris(bipyridine) immobilized on a tin oxide nanoparticle electrode to identify DNA oxidation based on each nucleotide [47]. The quest for DNA-specific binding agents is fueled by the desire to modulate gene expression, to search for new antitumor drugs, and to develop molecular probes for DNA. This feature review article is not intended to be an exhaustive review, but rather, a compilation of classical and new avenues for the profiling of various plants in recent studies. Additionally, a critical outlook towards the state of the art and important advancements for the electroanalysis field are the focus. The aim of this study was to provide a new outlook of merging the electrochemical setup with the Plantae kingdom and to exploit the various domains to extract inherent information.

2. Traditional Approaches for Profiling of Plants

The enormous potential of plant systems can only be prioritized based on completed analyses of bioactive compounds using different traditional protocols such as those detailed subsequently.
High-resolution proton and carbon nuclear magnetic resonance spectroscopy (NMR) measure for high concentrations of metabolites in simplified tissue extracts, biofilm, and intact tissue. It is quite insensitive to a wide range of genetic modifications, toxicology insults, and physiological stimuli using conventional 1H NMR. This approach often suffers due to small chemical shift range, producing significant overlap in resonance, whereas 13C NMR is intrinsically less sensitive due to the lower gyromagnetic ratio of the 13C nucleus. Hence, an alternative is using hyphenated techniques such as GC–MS or LC–MS, thereby improving the sensitivity.
Gas chromatography–mass spectroscopy or liquid chromatography–mass spectroscopy represent better routes for lower concentrations of metabolic fingerprints [48]. Although the theoretical basis involves major detection advantages, no reports are available in the literature. LC in conjugation with coulometric arrays represents a much better technique for the identification of discrete serotypes. Furthermore, LC–MS or GC–MS help in directly importing the data into pattern recognition. Coupling HPLC with MS offers the analysis and quantification of folates present in their natural state, with the added benefit of analyte identification. It ensures the correct analyte identity when compared with a reference library. The confirmation of identities can be achieved by negative ion ESI–MS using authentic reported samples [49]. However, a robust technique to overcome issues of the non-selective extraction and determination of the comprehensive profiling of contents, i.e., folates, polyglutamated status, flavones, etc., has not yet been developed.
Thus, a combination of NMR, LC–MS, GC–MS, FT–MS, and HPLC electrochemical arrays for profiling can be used as a global analytical approach. These include non-directed and class-specific analyses.
Capillary electrophoresis is another alternative with different choices of detectors; analyses of the majority of compounds can be carried out for those of extremely high molecular weight with varying polarity and a thermo-labile nature [50].
Electron spray, ionization spray or atmospheric pressure chemical ionization can be used in conjugation with LC/MS for efficient metabolic profiling. This involves a step for the creation of ions (protonated or de-protonated), exhibiting low internal energy. Thus, the fragmentation of molecules is solely dependent on the potential difference applied between the capillary and entrance in the ion source.
Fluorescence-labeled oligonucleotides labeled with a fluorescent moiety in conjugation with surface modification techniques serve for high-density DNA sequence and gene expression analyses. The detection level can be up to sub-nanomolar.
Size exclusion chromatography–high-performance liquid chromatography coupled electrochemical detectors are a well-defined substitute for ensuring proper differentiation for small and larger molecular systems (especially secondary metabolites).
In contrast, cyclic voltammetry is a unique and simplified tool for characterization, providing specific oxidation–reduction potential based on the chemico-physical properties of molecules [51,52]. It is a relatively rapid technique with nano-concentrations of samples required for analysis. Most widely used is the technique with considerable output referring to thermodynamics with respect to redox properties and kinetics for chemical reactions or adsorbed processes. Various electrochemical techniques have been extended for sensing of plant based systems in Table 1.
Flow injection analysis is a simplified chemical procedure performed with a flowing carrier stream and used in combination with the electrochemical system, and shows similar results to HPLC-coupled ECD.

3. Profiling of Biochemicals

Profiling details a whole plant cellular network constituting of transcription (DNA→mRNA; the first step), followed by translation (mRNA→nucleotide), and finally, post-translational modifications of the gene products. Each step of the analysis is extremely difficult due to the presence of a huge number of primary and secondary metabolites. Countless metabolites are present in cells based on the cell type, differentiation, and specialized type acquired. These essential bio-elements mix with organic moieties, forming natural complexes which are potentially important for survival. It is typical to identify the nucleotide sequences of nuclear and chloroplast regions. Hence, chemotaxonomy is one such classification that can further the understanding of chemical compositions [21,53,84,85].
The chemical analysis concept includes vast domains of estimating nutritional, pharmacological, and chemological properties. Alternatives for the identification and monitoring of chemical species are the “targeted approach” and the “non-targeted or fingerprinting technique”. Figure 3 shows the use of fingerprint recording for the species determination of 14 flowers species of Lycoris. Fingerprinting or non-targeted approaches intense techniques based on organic–inorganic plant interactions due to ignorance in understanding the exact mechanisms. Among such a plethora of complex molecules, ‘n’ is the number of phenolic acids, anthocyanins, procyanidins, and flavonoids which have been observed. The genetic profiles of variant species are directly proportional to their chemo-taxonomical studies; this approach is associated with inherited properties of natural products and synthetic analogues. The use of electrochemical approaches involves representations of simple plant extracts, eliminating the concept of prolonged storage under aerobic environments. The approach is quite simplistic due to the redox-active components; many identified chemical counterparts are non-electroactive in nature. Some examples of these phenolic molecules are rutin, vanillic acid, salicylic acid, morin, and quercetin. Isoflavone is one such phytoestrogen or secondary metabolite, particularly present in leguminous plants. Many constituents such as flavonoids, lignans, and coumestrans are fractions of phytoestrogens. These help plants to maintain resistance to diseases such as neurodegenerative disorders, cancer, Alzheimer’s disease, fungal attack, and hypertension. Carotenoids are the most abundant natural pigments and exert substantial pro-vitamin and antioxidant activities. Chlorophyll and its associated compounds have huge antioxidant potential, and thus inhibit lipid peroxidation and even protect mitochondria from oxidative damage [86]. The application of methods can be extended to mammalian tissues and organ domains. These have been further subdivided as follows.
Genomic and metabolomic study: metabolites can vary across a wide range of modifications, making them a complex system to accept as unique biomarkers. Using metabolic engineering could improve the situation by enhancing the synthesis of valuable therapeutic agents. Wang et al. presented a comparative review on plant miRNA biogenesis and degradation, encountering stability issues upon 3’ modifications and studied degradation upon translation [87]. Gao et al. developed a microRNA biosensor based on chemical ligation which involved the concept of electrochemistry for amplified detection [88]. They explained how Northern blots and cloning are the gold standard for microRNA validation; these assays are inappropriate because the consumption of RNA samples is a laborious phase. Subsequent high-throughput and sophisticated instrumentation with highly skilled technicians are necessary for quantification assays.
Electrochemical DNA interpretation involves the use of gold nanoparticles [89,90], the direct oxidation of guanine [91], DNA intercalations [92,93], DNA threading intercalators [94], etc., which were established in 1900 [11,95]. In addition, the sensitivity of metabolic studies alters with response to stress and toxicity investigations. The detection of nucleic acid by various means is an essential part of genomics studies. The use of electrochemical means to mark an effective biomarker involves the stepwise designing, synthesis, and characterization of probe molecules. Many reports have detailed the use of gold surfaces and nucleic acid motif functionalization in investigations of DNA bio-barcodes, DNA hairpins, aptamers, enzymes, etc. [96]. Functionalized sensors for nucleic acid targets focus on a diverse repertoire of chemical readout mechanisms. Commonly, modifications using chromophores, click chemistry reagents, biotin, etc., are vital components of probes. Approaches for the site-specific attachment of thiolated DNA probes are being developed independently.
Transcriptomics: various biological and chemical amplification strategies are being upgraded using enzyme-amplified assays with minute quantities, without the need for PCR [97], such as Au–NP bilayer electrode systems [98], although electrochemical amplification strategies with electro-catalytic redox moieties [94] yielded quite an enhanced sensitivity. There is an ever-increasing demand to develop rapid, sensitive, and selective bioassay methods for various molecular diagnoses and the detection of infectious agents. Methylene blue is one such example of an end-labeled oligonucleotide used as a fluorophore/quencher that relates ‘on’ and ‘off’ stage switches based on the conformational state of methylene blue. The signal is directly proportional to the distance between the quencher and the fluorophone. The use of MB has been accepted in applications in molecular and cellular biology, pathogen detection, and biomedical diagnostics [99].
The use of traditional expensive instrumentation poses a setback in the research field due to the unavailability of instrumentation. The analysis protocols are time-consuming with tedious pre-concentration steps before the investigation. Conventional systems require complex processing steps performed by highly skilled technicians.

4. Use of Electrochemistry

Electroanalysis reflects the fingerprints of pigments, plants, and cultural relics based on recordings of electrochemical signals [83,100]. The electrochemical detection of biological species requires reactions consisting of bio-recognition steps involving current or potential, impedance, redox kinetics, etc., or non-electrochemical properties involving van der Waal interactions, intercalation with matrix due to electrical fields, mass transportation beyond the Helmholtz’s double layer, conformational changes, etc., inducing fluctuations in electrical responses. Miniaturized biosensors, due to their compatibility the advanced use of semiconductors, are combinations of accurate and inexpensive platforms. These sensors offer electron transfer reactions without labelling for ultrasensitive DNA detection [101]. Domenech-Carbo et al. used squarewave voltammetry to characterize tomato plants based on six diverse varieties [102]. They placed a glassy carbon electrode directly into fresh tomato varieties and estimated the ratios of vitamin C to total phenolic compounds [103,104,105]. Many other such plant constituents have been analyzed, and are presented in Table 1. A plot for use of Differential pulse voltammetry as shown in Figure 4 has been highlighted to determine the relation between species.
Many methods have been proposed for the application of electrochemistry as a tool to understand plant feedback mechanisms to stress via assessments of the redox activity of phytocompounds. The initial condition for determining species involves replicating experimental procedures on the chosen species type, followed by studies of voltametric curves with increasing peak resolutions. Voltammograms display different values for different species based on the multiplication of current values (I) with potential (E), involving ‘i’ solvent extracts having ‘j’ electrolytes. Hence, the matrix dimension are I × (ij), referred to as PCA diagrams for wave voltammograms or dendrograms. We can distinguish and segregate species signatures in various phylogenetic classification based on electrochemical approaches; however, few similar species diverge from genetic similarities. However, overall, satisfactory correlations with phylogenetic trees at the level of taxonomical orders can be judged [53]. Fu et al. used a DPV technique for the electrochemical fingerprinting of Lycoris petal species of several varieties and confirmed the consistency of the PCA diagram with the dendrogram correlating the infragenic relationships between native Lycoris species [57]. As explained by Carbo et al., ramifications in the phylogenic tree concerning the Rosaceae family lead to complications related to voltammetric analysis. The authors explained that the differences might be attributed to evolutionary tendencies due to the diversification of polyphenolics in them. In addition, they also related the advent and disappearance of the signals as temporary sequences due to genetic changes that help us in acknowledging the modifications; hence, this corroborates other classifications of phylotaxonomy [106,107]. The concept can be further extended to the subcellular analysis of plants, with outstanding data enabling further manipulation of the essential constraints for improving health and product outcomes using plants. Leon et al. compared electrochemical and conventional techniques for the determination of antioxidants used in the monitoring of DPPH radical capture [108]. On comparison between spectrophotometric and chronoamperometry techniques, sample dilution and pretreatments steps were easily eliminated in cases of amperometry without any issues of concentration and absorbance uncertainty. Table 1 shows the culmination of various electrochemically based sensor systems and the scope of their applications.
The voltammetry of immobilized particles using solvent extraction (ethanolic and methanolic) approaches uses the preferred parts of plants [55]. Cyclic voltammetry (CV) enables non-faradaic contributions that result in non-steady signal outputs. Hence, constant potential with amperometry or chronoamperometry is one such technique that ensures a steady state response. Scanning electrochemical microscopic analysis involves the direct imaging of plant systems and their internal transformations/modifications based on the electroactivity of phytonutrients.

5. Electrochemical Profiling of Biochemicals

Phenolic acids, flavonoids, and carotenoids are considered to be key compounds due to their electrochemical profiles [109]. The accessibility of techniques involving easy operation via portable in-field equipment with simple sampling protocols that ensure immediate analysis without prolonged maceration/extraction is highly beneficial. Most importantly, the intrinsic ability to select molecules such as sugars, cellulose, or carotenoids can be excluded because this refers to electrochemically silent moieties; only a limited number of components are active in a similar way to phenolic moieties. These non-conducting ingredients consume key parts of plant tissues, making it difficult to analyze the conducting counterpart ingredients. An embedding plant strategy has been designed to ensure selective and amplified responses using a matrix or polymers [25,110]. It is a relatively tedious job to summarize the protocols and resolve the varieties and species domains in the Plantae kingdom; hence, conventional systems are not applicable in real-world analysis. Considering electrochemical techniques, only voltammetric profiles did not exhibit any alterations in condition when studied. Differential pulse voltammetry is one such technique, which can be used to establish ‘p’ values for MANOVA tests: this helps in maintaining normalized wave signals of a particular species group. However, the ‘p’ values can be quite close to 0.5 for inter-species attributes; for the case of intra-species analyses, p >> 0.5 thus helps in establishing significant relationships [57]. This analysis can further be used for the detection of food and medicinal attributes exerted by phytonutrients [111,112,113]. The concept of correlating species with their successive voltammetric attributes has previously been studied [114].
Thin film cyclic voltammetry represents the optimal choice for the evaluation of P450 chromosome enzymes. This approach has momentum, especially in the field of deciphering electroactive constraints wherein specifically engineered enzymes are fused in conjunction with electroactive nucleotide chains. These fused molecules act as an interface component of electrodes modified with biomimetic systems; further techniques are employed for biosensing applications [115,116].
Nurmi et al. reported the profiling of phytoestrogens using hyphenated HPLC electro-array methods. These techniques have shown good sensitivity and reproducibility over various assays [117]. Similarly, Klejdus et al. initiated an electrochemical platform for isoflavone profiling by adsorptive transfer stripping voltammetry in soyabean plants at pH 9.2 [118]. Based on successive investigations, Gil et al. reviewed the use of electrochemistry for flavonoid profiling, with in-depth knowledge of electrode platforms and their buffer media [119].
An innovative approach for the identification of plant species based on the fingerprinting of petal tissue was reported by Fu et al.; the use of electrochemistry was emphasized, although the comparison of infragenic identification was based on a traditional botanist approach. Electrochemical fingerprints were analyzed after various solvent extractions and the contents of electroactive molecules were controlled by respective genes [57].

6. Conclusions and Future Prospects

This paper presents a culmination of all the different techniques and their probable outcomes for the profiling of plants. The basic comparison between other classical and electrochemical techniques shows that electrochemically based platforms are optimum pathways because they are relatively rapid and simple. The results for profiling are comparable with other techniques. The main conclusions and future scope of this study focus on the identification of molecules produced within plants, and obtaining/extracting them on an industrial scale with the scope of using them further as selective pesticides. Based on the electrochemical behavior of plants, a lower potential is more suitable, i.e., the possibility of establishing an ‘electrochemical taxonomy’ will be soon realistic. The report by Fu et al. can be extended to other plant varieties and compared with other techniques to develop the PCA diagrams. The electrochemolomic methodology is a potential set of analysis techniques for assessing different vegetal species in order to establish taxonomical groups; it can be used as a complementary technique to molecular phylogeny, in tandem with existing genetic and chemical assays. The apparent potential of this technique may be an assistive technology for phytogenic studies in many other fields of application. The importance of preserving biosphere diversity is highlighted through the correct development of science and technology. The use of a rapid practical and reliable methodology with good analytical performance and suitable selectivity indicates the contemporary need for profiling systems. Clinical applications of these sensors are still distant, because major selectivity/specificity and performance issues need to be addressed.

Author Contributions

M.G.: Conceptualization, methodology, formal analysis, investigation, resources, data curation, writing—original draft preparation, writing—review and editing, visualization, supervision, project administration. K.A.: Conceptualization, writing—review and editing, supervision, project administration. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research received no external funding.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Informed Consent Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

Mansi Gandhi would like to thank their mentor and research supervisor for providing guidance during her PhD journey. M.G. would also like to thank ICMR for supporting their senior research fellowship (2019-4952) during her PhD studies (2016–2021).

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Lin, J.; Wang, M.; Zhang, M.; Zhang, Y.; Chen, L. Electrochemical Sensors for Soil Nutrient Detection: Oppurtunity and Challenge. Comput. Comput. Technol. Agric. 2008, 2, 1349–1353. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  2. Pujol, L.; Evrard, D.; Groenen-Serrano, K.; Freyssinier, M.; Ruffien-Cizsak, A.; Gros, P. Electrochemical Sensors and Devices for Heavy Metals Assay in Water: The French Groups’ Contribution. Front. Chem. 2014, 2, 1–24. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  3. Ludvík, J.; Riedl, F.; Liška, F.; Zuman, P. Electrochemical Reduction of Metribuzin. Electroanal. 1998, 10, 869–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Vafaee-Shahi, S.; Shishehbore, M.R.; Sheibani, A.; Tabatabaee, M. Electrochemical Sensing of Folic Acid in Presence of Ascorbic Acid Using Carbon Paste Nano Composite Modified Electrode. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. Res. 2021, 8, 261–274. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  5. Naik, G.P.; Poonia, A.K.; Chaudhari, P.K. Pretreatment of Lignocellulosic Agricultural Waste for Delignification, Rapid Hydrolysis, and Enhanced Biogas Production: A Review. J. Indian Chem. Soc. 2021, 98, 100147. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Chiavari, G.; Concialini, V.; Ciamician, C.G.; Bologna, U.; Selmi, V.; Galletti, G.C. Electrochemical Detection in the High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Analysis of Plant Phenolics. Analyst 1988, 113, 91–94. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  7. Baezzat, M.R.; Tavakkoli, N.; Zamani, H. Construction of a New Electrochemical Sensor Based on MoS 2 Nanosheets Modified Graphite Screen Printed Electrode for Simultaneous Determination of Diclofenac. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. Res. 2022, 9, 153–162. [Google Scholar]
  8. Amreen, K.; Sujatha, M. Nanomaterial Assisted Electrochemical Detection of Isolated Piperine: A. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. Res. 2021, 8, 209–217. [Google Scholar]
  9. Pandey, R.; Teig-Sussholz, O.; Schuster, S.; Avni, A.; Shacham-Diamand, Y. Integrated Electrochemical Chip-on-Plant Functional Sensor for Monitoring Gene Expression under Stress. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2018, 117, 493–500. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Kuriyama, S.; Rechnitz, G.A. Plant Tissue-Based Bioselective Membrane Electrode for Glutamate. Anal. Chim. Acta 1981, 131, 91–96. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Sidwell, J.S.; Rechnitz, G.A. Bananatrode- An Electrochemical Biosensor for Dopamine. Biotechnol. Lett. 1985, 7, 419–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Kuriyama, S.; Arnold, M.A.; Rechnitz, G.A. Improved Membrane Electrode Using Plant Tissue as Biocatalyst. J. Memb. Sci. 1983, 12, 269–278. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Chwatko, G.; Kuzniak, E.; Kubalczyk, P.; Borowczyk, K.; Rokiel, W.M.; Glowacki, R. Determination of Cysteine and Glutathione in Cucumber Leaves by HPLC with UV Detection. Anal. Methods. 2014, 6, 8039. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Stallings, N.R.; Hanley, N.A.; Majdic, G.; Zhao, L.; Bakke, M.; Parker, K.L.; Stallings, N.R.; Hanley, N.A.; Majdic, G.; Zhao, L.; et al. Development of a transgenic green fluorescent protein lineage marker for steroidogenic factor 1. Mol. Endocrinol. 2016, 16, 2360–2370. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  15. Dewick, P.M. Medicinal Natural Products: A Biosynthetic Approach, 3rd ed.; Wiley: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2009. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  16. Schneider, D.; Schneider, L.; Shulman, A.; Claussen, C.F.; Just, E.; Koltchev, C.; Kersebaum, M.; Dehler, R.; Goldstein, B.; Claussen, E. Gingko Biloba Therapy in Tinnitus Patients and Measurable Interactions between Tinnitus and Vestibular Disturbances. Int Tinnitus J. 2000, 6, 56–62. [Google Scholar]
  17. Nepal, K.K.; Yoo, J.C.; Sohng, J.K. Biosynthetic approach for the production of new aminoglycoside derivative. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2010, 110, 109–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  18. Schulz, V.; Hänsel, R.; Tyler, V.E.V. Rational Phytotherapy. A Physician’s Guide to Herbal Medicine, 4th ed.; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2001. [Google Scholar]
  19. Barros, L.; Cabrita, L.; Boas, M.V.; Carvalho, A.M.; Ferreira, I.C.F.R. Chemical, Biochemical and Electrochemical Assays to Evaluate Phytochemicals and Antioxidant Activity of Wild Plants. Food Chem. 2011, 127, 1600–1608. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Stobiecki, M.; Skirycz, A.; Kerhoas, L.; Kachlicki, P.; Muth, D.; Einhorn, J.; Mueller-Roeber, B. Profiling of Phenolic Glycosidic Conjugates in Leaves of Arabidopsis Thaliana Using LC/MS. Metabolomics 2006, 2, 197–219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Berkov, S.; Osorio, E.; Viladomat, F. Chemodiversity, Chemotaxonomy and Chemoecology of Amaryllidaceae Alkaloids, 1st ed.; Elsevier Inc.: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2020; Volume 83. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Shrivastava, S.; Trung, T.Q.; Lee, N.E. Recent Progress, Challenges, and Prospects of Fully Integrated Mobile and Wearable Point-of-Care Testing Systems for Self-Testing. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2020, 49, 1812–1866. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Nguyen, H.H.; Lee, S.H.; Lee, U.J.; Fermin, C.D.; Kim, M. Immobilized Enzymes in Biosensor Applications. Materials 2019, 12, 121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  24. Mehrotra, P. Biosensors and Their Applications—A Review. J. Oral Biol. Craniofacial Res. 2016, 6, 153–159. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  25. Bobrinetskiy, I.I.; Knezevic, N.Z. Graphene-Based Biosensors for on-Site Detection of Contaminants in Food. Anal. Methods 2018, 10, 5061–5070. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Gan, T.; Shi, Z.; Sun, J.; Liu, Y. Simple and Novel Electrochemical Sensor for the Determination of Tetracycline Based on Iron/zinc Cations-Exchanged Montmorillonite Catalyst. Talanta 2014, 121, 187–193. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  27. González-Fernández, E.; Avlonitis, N.; Murray, A.F.; Mount, A.R.; Bradley, M. Methylene Blue Not Ferrocene: Optimal Reporters for Electrochemical Detection of Protease Activity. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2016, 84, 82–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  28. Liu, X.; Lillehoj, P.B. Embroidered Electrochemical Sensors for Biomolecular Detection. Lab. Chip 2016, 16, 2093–2098. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Maduraiveeran, G.; Jin, W. Nanomaterials Based Electrochemical Sensor and Biosensor Platforms for Environmental Applications. Trends Environ. Anal. Chem. 2017, 13, 10–23. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Motia, S.; Tudor, I.A.; Ribeiro, P.A.; Raposo, M.; Bouchikhi, B.; El Bari, N. Electrochemical Sensor Based on Molecularly Imprinted Polymer for Sensitive Triclosan Detection in Wastewater and Mineral Water. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 664, 647–658. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Sánchez, A.; Villalonga, A.; Martínez-García, G.; Parrado, C.; Villalonga, R. Dendrimers as Soft Nanomaterials for Electrochemical Immunosensors. Nanomaterials 2019, 9, 1745. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  32. Bhat, V.S.; Supriya, S.; Hegde, G. Review—Biomass Derived Carbon Materials for Electrochemical Sensors. J. Electrochem. Soc. 2020, 167, 037526. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Cho, I.H.; Kim, D.H.; Park, S. Electrochemical Biosensors: Perspective on Functional Nanomaterials for on-Site Analysis. Biomater. Res. 2020, 24, 1–12. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  34. Cortés, E.; Etchegoin, P.G.; Le Ru, E.C.; Fainstein, A.; Vela, M.E.; Salvarezza, R.C. Electrochemical Modulation for Signal Discrimination in Surface Enhanced Raman Scattering (SERS). Anal. Chem. 2010, 82, 6919–6925. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Ong, W.; Grindstaff, J.; Sobransingh, D.; Toba, R.; Quintela, J.M.; Peinador, C.; Kaifer, A.E. Electrochemical and Guest Binding Properties of Fréchet- and Newkome-Type Dendrimers with a Single Viologen Unit Located at Their Apical Positions. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 3353–3361. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  36. Wang, F.; Hu, S. Electrochemical Sensors Based on Metal and Semiconductor Nanoparticles. Microchim. Acta 2009, 165, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. Cretescu, I.; Lutic, D.; Manea, L.R. Electrochemical Sensors for Monitoring of Indoor and Outdoor Air Pollution. In Electrochemical Sensors Technology; IntechOpen: London, UK, 2017. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Li, G.; Wen, D. Wearable Biochemical Sensors for Human Health Monitoring: Sensing Materials and Manufacturing Technologies. J. Mater. Chem. B 2020, 8, 3423–3436. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Chandrasekaran, A.R. DNA Nanobiosensors: An Outlook on Signal Readout Strategies. J. Nanomater. 2017, 2017, 2820619. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Liu, F.; Wei, L.; Chen, Y. Synthesis of Graphene Materials by Electrochemical Exfoliation: Recent Progress and Future Potential. Carbon Energy 2019, 1, 173–199. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  41. Begum, P.; Ikhtiari, R.; Fugetsu, B. Potential Impact of Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes Exposure to the Seedling Stage of Selected Plant Species. Nanomaterials 2014, 4, 203–221. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  42. Bartosova, Z.; Riman, D.; Jakubec, P.; Halouzka, V.; Hrbac, J.; Jirovsky, D. Electrochemically Pretreated Carbon Microfiber Electrodes as Sensitive HPLC-EC Detectors. Sci. World J. 2012, 2012, 295802. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  43. Vishnu, N.; Gandhi, M.; Badhulika, S.; Kumar, A.S. Tea Quality Testing Using 6B Pencil Lead as an Electrochemical Sensor. Anal. Methods 2018, 10, 2327–2336. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Gandhi, M.; Rajagopal, D.; Parthasarathy, S.; Raja, S.; Huang, S.; Kumar, A.S. In Situ Immobilized Sesamol-Quinone/Carbon Nanoblack-Based Electrochemical Redox Platform for E Ffi Cient Bioelectrocatalytic and Immunosensor Applications. ACS Omega 2018, 3, 10823–10835. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Subagio, A.; Sari, P.; Morita, N. Simultaneous Determination of (+)-Catechin and (−)-Epicatechin in Cacao and Its Products by High-Performance Liquid Chromatography with Electrochemical Detection. Phytochem. Anal. 2001, 12, 271–276. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  46. Rusling, J.F. Sensors for Toxicity of Chemicals and Oxidative Stress Based on Electrochemical Catalytic DNA Oxidation. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2004, 20, 1022–1028. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  47. Liang, M.; Liu, S.; Wei, M.; Guo, L.H. Photoelectrochemical Oxidation of DNA by Ruthenium Tris(bipyridine) on a Tin Oxide Nanoparticle Electrode. Anal. Chem. 2006, 78, 621–623. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  48. Cantalapiedra, A.; Gismera, M.J.; Sevilla, M.T.; Procopio, J.R. Sensitive and Selective Determination of Phenolic Compounds from Aromatic Plants Using an Electrochemical Detection Coupled with HPLC Method. Phytochem. Anal. 2014, 25, 247–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Sagandykova, G.N.; Szultka-Młyńska, M.; Walczak-Skierska, J.; Pomastowski, P.P.; Buszewski, B. Combination of Electrochemical Unit and ESI-MS in Fragmentation of Flavonoids. Phytochem. Anal. 2021, 32, 601–620. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Chu, Q.; Fu, L.; Cao, Y.; Ye, J. Electrochemical Profiles of Herba Saussureae Involucratae by Capillary Electrophoresis with Electrochemical Detection. Phytochem. Anal. 2006, 17, 176–183. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  51. Amidi, S.; Mojab, F.; Moghaddam, A.B.; Tabib, K.; Kobarfard, F. A Simple Electrochemical Method for the Rapid Estimation of Antioxidant Potentials of Some Selected Medicinal Plants. Iran. J. Pharm. Res. 2012, 11, 117–121. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  52. Cosio, M.S.; Buratti, S.; Mannino, S.; Benedetti, S. Use of an Electrochemical Method to Evaluate the Antioxidant Activity of Herb Extracts from the Labiatae Family. Food Chem. 2006, 97, 725–731. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  53. Doménech-Carbó, A.; Ibars, A.M.; Prieto-Mossi, J.; Estrelles, E.; Scholz, F.; Cebrián-Torrejón, G.; Martini, M. Electrochemistry-Based Chemotaxonomy in Plants Using the Voltammetry of Microparticles Methodology. New J. Chem. 2015, 39, 7421–7428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Konieczyński, P. Electrochemical Fingerprint Studies of Selected Medicinal Plants Rich in Flavonoids. Acta Pol. Pharm.—Drug Res. 2015, 72, 655–661. [Google Scholar]
  55. Shen, Y.; Li, X.; Chen, W.; Cheng, F.; Song, F. Electrochemical Determination of Indole Butyric Acid by Differential Pulse Voltammetry on Hanging Mercury Drops Electrode. J. Plant Biochem. Biotechnol. 2013, 22, 319–323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Fang, Y.; Umasankar, Y.; Ramasamy, R.P. A Novel Bi-Enzyme Electrochemical Biosensor for Selective and Sensitive Determination of Methyl Salicylate. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2016, 81, 39–45. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  57. Fu, L.; Zheng, Y.; Zhang, P.; Zhang, H.; Wu, M.; Zhang, H.; Wang, A.; Su, W.; Chen, F.; Yu, J.; et al. An Electrochemical Method for Plant Species Determination and Classification Based on Fingerprinting Petal Tissue. Bioelectrochemistry 2019, 129, 199–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  58. Volkov, A.G. Green Plants: Electrochemical Interfaces. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2000, 483, 150–156. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Fang, Y.; Umasankar, Y.; Ramasamy, R.P. Electrochemical Detection of P-Ethylguaiacol, a Fungi Infected Fruit Volatile Using Metal Oxide Nanoparticles. Analyst 2014, 139, 3804–3810. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Noel Robledo, S.; Alicia Zón, M.; Daniel Ceballos, C.; Fernández, H. Qualitative and Quantitative Electroanalysis of Synthetic Phenolic Antioxidant Mixtures in Edible Oils Based on Their Acid-Base Properties. Food Chem. 2011, 127, 1361–1369. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Lu, Y.; Xu, Y.; Shi, H.; Zhang, P.; Zhang, H.; Fu, L. Feasibility of Electrochemical Fingerprinting for Plant Phylogeography Study: A Case of Chimonanthus Praecox. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 2020, 15, 758–764. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  62. Mwesigwa, J.; Collins, D.J.; Volkov, A.G. Electrochemical Signaling in Green Plants: Effects of 2,4-Dinitrophenol on Variation and Action Potentials in Soybean. Bioelectrochemistry 2000, 51, 201–205. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  63. Krystofova, O.; Trnkova, L.; Adam, V.; Zehnalek, J.; Hubalek, J.; Babula, P.; Kizek, R. Electrochemical Microsensors for the Detection of Cadmium(II) and Lead(II) Ions in Plants. Sensors 2010, 10, 5308–5328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  64. Rodrí, E. Electrochemical Quantification of the Antioxidant Capacity of Medicinal Plants Using Biosensors. Sensors 2014, 14, 14423–14439. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  65. Zitka, O.; Babula, P.; Sochor, J.; Kummerova, M.; Krystofova, O.; Adam, V. Determination of Eight Polycyclic Aromatic Hydrocarbons and in Pea Plants (Pisum sativum L.) Extracts by High Performance Liquid Chromatography with Electrochemical Detection. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 2012, 7, 908–927. [Google Scholar]
  66. Olkov, A.G.V.; Abady, A.L.; Homas, D.J.T.; Hvetsova, T.S. Green Plants as Environmental Biosensors: Electrochemical Effects of Carbonyl Cyanide 3-Chlorophenylhydrazone on Soybean. Anal. Chem. 2001, 17, 359–362. [Google Scholar]
  67. Barroso, M.F.; Delerue-Matos, C.; Oliveira, M.B.P.P. Electrochemical Evaluation of Total Antioxidant Capacity of Beverages Using a Purine-Biosensor. Food Chem. 2012, 132, 1055–1062. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  68. Ligaj, M.; Tichoniuk, M.; Filipiak, M. Detection of Bar Gene Encoding Phosphinothricin Herbicide Resistance in Plants by Electrochemical Biosensor. Bioelectrochemistry 2008, 74, 32–37. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  69. Kuznetsov, B.A.; Byzova, N.A.; Shumakovich, G.P.; Mazhorova, L.E.; Mutuskin, A.A. Electrochemical Investigation of Binding Sites of Plantacyanin: Blue, Copper-Containing Protein of Plants. Bioelectrochem. Bioenerg. 1996, 40, 249–255. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Mohiuddin, M.; Arbain, D.; Islam, A.K.M.S.; Ahmad, M.S.; Ahmad, M.N. Alpha-Glucosidase Enzyme Biosensor for the Electrochemical Measurement of Antidiabetic Potential of Medicinal Plants. Nanoscale Res. Lett. 2016, 11, 95. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  71. Weber, G.; Konieczyński, P. Speciation of Mg, Mn and Zn in Extracts of Medicinal Plants. Anal. Bioanal. Chem. 2003, 375, 1067–1073. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  72. Airado-Rodríguez, D.; Galeano-Díaz, T.; Durán-Merás, I. Determination of Trans-Resveratrol in Red Wine by Adsorptive Stripping Square-Wave Voltammetry with Medium Exchange. Food Chem. 2010, 122, 1320–1326. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  73. Piovesan, J.V.; Jost, C.L.; Spinelli, A. Electroanalytical Determination of Total Phenolic Compounds by Square-Wave Voltammetry Using a Poly(vinylpyrrolidone)-Modified Carbon-Paste Electrode. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2015, 216, 192–197. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  74. Yang, Y.; Zhou, J.; Zhang, H.; Gai, P.; Zhang, X.; Chen, J. Electrochemical Evaluation of Total Antioxidant Capacities in Fruit Juice Based on the Guanine/graphene Nanoribbon/glassy Carbon Electrode. Talanta 2013, 106, 206–211. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Jin, J.H.; Kwon, C.; Park, W.; Kim, S.; Jung, S. Electrochemical Characterization of a Glassy Carbon Electrode Modified with Microbial Succinoglycan Monomers and Multi-Wall Carbon Nanotubes for the Detection of Quercetin in an Aqueous Electrolyte. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2008, 623, 142–146. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Baldeón, E.O.; Alcañiz, M.; Masot, R.; Fuentes, E.M.; Barat, J.M.; Grau, R. Voltammetry Pulse Array Developed to Determine the Antioxidant Activity of Camu-Camu (Myrciaria Dubia (H.B.K.) McVaug) and Tumbo (Passiflora Mollisima (Kunth) L.H. Bailey) Juices Employing Voltammetric Electronic Tongues. Food Control 2015, 54, 181–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Ensafi, A.A.; Taei, M.; Khayamian, T. A Differential Pulse Voltammetric Method for Simultaneous Determination of Ascorbic Acid, Dopamine, and Uric Acid Using Poly (3-(5-Chloro-2-Hydroxyphenylazo)-4,5-Dihydroxynaphthalene-2,7-Disulfonic Acid) Film Modified Glassy Carbon Electrode. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2009, 633, 212–220. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Gandhi, M.; Rajagopal, D.; Kumar, A.S. Facile Electrochemical Demethylation of 2-Methoxyphenol to Surface-Con Fi Ned Catechol on the MWCNT and Its E Ffi Cient Electrocatalytic Hydrazine Oxidation and Sensing Applications. ACS Omega 2020, 5, 16208–16219. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Głód, B.K.; Kiersztyn, I.; Piszcz, P. Total Antioxidant Potential Assay with Cyclic Voltammetry And/or Differential Pulse Voltammetry Measurements. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2014, 719, 24–29. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Lino, F.M.A.; de Sá, L.Z.; Torres, I.M.S.; Rocha, M.L.; Dinis, T.C.P.; Ghedini, P.C.; Somerset, V.S.; Gil, E.S. Voltammetric and Spectrometric Determination of Antioxidant Capacity of Selected Wines. Electrochim. Acta 2014, 128, 25–31. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Oliveira-Neto, J.R.; Rezende, S.G.; de Fátima Reis, C.; Benjamin, S.R.; Rocha, M.L.; de Souza Gil, E. Electrochemical Behavior and Determination of Major Phenolic Antioxidants in Selected Coffee Samples. Food Chem. 2016, 190, 506–512. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  82. Aguirre, M.J.; Chen, Y.Y.; Isaacs, M.; Matsuhiro, B.; Mendoza, L.; Torres, S. Electrochemical Behaviour and Antioxidant Capacity of Anthocyanins from Chilean Red Wine, Grape and Raspberry. Food Chem. 2010, 121, 44–48. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Domønech-carbó, A.; Ibars, A.M.; Prieto-mossi, J.; Estrelles, E. Access to Phylogeny from Voltammetric Fingerprints of Seeds: The Asparagus Case. Electroanalysis 2017, 29, 643–650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Umoh, O.T. Chemotaxonomy: The Role of Phytochemicals in Chemotaxonomic Delineation of Taxa. Asian Plant Res. J. 2020, 5, 43–52. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  85. Pawlus, D. Natural Stilbenoids: Distribution in the Plant Kingdom and Chemotaxonomic Interest in Vitaceae. Nat. Prod. Rep. 2012, 29, 1317–1333. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Lanfer-marquez, U.M.; Barros, R.M.C.; Sinnecker, P. Antioxidant Activity of Chlorophylls and Their Derivatives. Food Res. Int. 2005, 38, 38–885. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Wang, J.; Mei, J.; Ren, G. Plant microRNAs: Biogenesis, Homeostasis, and Degradation. Front. Plant Sci. 2019, 10, 360. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  88. Gao, Z.; Yu, Y.H. A microRNA Biosensor Based on Direct Chemical Ligation and Electrochemically Amplified Detection. Sens. Actuators B Chem. 2007, 121, 552–559. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Rasheed, P.A.; Sandhyarani, N. Electrochemical DNA Sensors Based on the Use of Gold Nanoparticles: A Review on Recent Developments. Microchim. Acta 2017, 184, 981–1000. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Mohammed, A.M.; Rahim, R.A.; Ibraheem, I.J.; Loong, F.K.; Hisham, H.; Hashim, U.; Al-douri, Y. Application of Gold Nanoparticles for Electrochemical DNA Biosensor. J. Nanomater. 2014, 2014, 13. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  91. Li, Q.; Batchelor-mcauley, C.; Compton, R.G. Electrochemical Oxidation of Guanine: Electrode Reaction Mechanism and Tailoring Carbon Electrode Surfaces to Switch between Adsorptive and Diffusional Responses. J. Phys. Chem. B 2010, 114, 7423–7428. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  92. Jambrec, D.; Haddad, R.; Lauks, A.; Gebala, M. DNA Intercalators for Detection of DNA Hybridisation: SCS(MI)–MP2 Calculations and Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy. ChemPlusChem 2016, 81, 604–612. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Gherghi, I.C.; Girousi, S.T.; Pantazaki, A.A. Electrochemical DNA Biosensors Applicable to the Study of Interactions Between DNA and DNA Intercalators. Int. J. Environ. Anal. Chem. 2010, 83, 693–700. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Tansil, N.C.; Xie, H.; Xie, F.; Gao, Z. Direct Detection of DNA with an Electrocatalytic Threading Intercalator. Anal. Chem. 2005, 77, 126–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  95. Mucelli, S.P.; Zamuner, M.; Tormen, M.; Stanta, G.; Ugo, P. Nanoelectrode Ensembles as Recognition Platform for Electrochemical Immunosensors. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2008, 23, 1900–1903. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  96. Sierra, H.; Cordova, M.; Chen, C.J.; Rajadhyaksha, M. Confocal imaging-guided laser ablation of basal cell carcinomas: An ex vivo study. J. Invest. Dermatol. 2015, 2, 612–615. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  97. Zhang, Y.; Kim, H.H.; Heller, A. Enzyme-Amplified Amperometric Detection of 3000 Copies of DNA in a 10-μL Droplet at 0.5 fM Concentration. Anal. Chem. 2003, 75, 3267–3269. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  98. Xie, H.; Zhang, C.; Gao, Z. Amperometric Detection of Nucleic Acid at Femtomolar Levels with a Nucleic Acid/Electrochemical Activator Bilayer on Gold Electrode. Anal. Chem. 2004, 76, 1611–1617. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  99. Wang, K.; Tang, Z.; Yang, C.J.; Kim, Y.; Fang, X.; Li, W.; Wu, Y.; Medley, C.D.; Cao, Z.; Li, J.; et al. Molecular Engineering of DNA: Molecular Beacons. Angew. Chemie—Int. Ed. 2009, 48, 856–870. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  100. Scholz, F. Electrochemical Age Determinations of Metallic Specimens—Utilization of the Corrosion Clock. Acc. Chem. Res. 2018, 52, 400–406. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Xu, Q.; Wei, F.; Wang, Z.; Yang, Q.; di Zhao, Y.; Chen, H. In Vivo Monitor Oxidative Burst Induced by Cd2+ Stress for the Oilseed Rape (Brassica Napus L.) Based on Electrochemical Microbiosensor. Phytochem. Anal. 2010, 21, 192–196. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Doménech-Carbó, A.; Domínguez, I.; Hernández-Muñoz, P.; Gavara, R. Electrochemical Tomato (Solanum Lycopersicum L.) Characterisation Using Contact Probe in Situ Voltammetry. Food Chem. 2015, 172, 318–325. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Camborde, L.; Jauneau, A.; Brière, C.; Deslandes, L.; Dumas, B.; Gaulin, E. Detection of Nucleic Acid—Protein Interactions in Plant Leaves Using Fluorescence Lifetime Imaging Microscopy. Nat. Protoc. 2017, 12, 1933–1950. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  104. Schwarzacher, T. Chapter 14. Fluorescent in situ hybridization to detect transgene integration into plant genomes. In Transgenic Wheat, Barley and Oats; Methods in Molecular Biology 478; Humana Press: Totowa, NJ, USA, 2009; pp. 227–246. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Hardinge, P.; Murray, J.A.H. Reduced False Positives and Improved Reporting of Loop-Mediated Isothermal Amplification Using Quenched Fluorescent Primers. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 7400. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Sytsma, K.J.; Morawetz, J.; Chris Pires, J.; Nepokroeff, M.; Conti, E.; Zjhra, M.; Hall, J.C.; Chase, M.W. Urticalean Rosids: Circumscription, Rosid Ancestry, and Phylogenetics Based on rbcL, trnL-F, and ndhF Sequences. Am. J. Bot. 2002, 89, 1531–1546. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  107. Chase, M.W.; Christenhusz, M.J.M.; Fay, M.F.; Byng, J.W.; Judd, W.S.; Soltis, D.E.; Mabberley, D.J.; Sennikov, A.N.; Soltis, P.S.; Stevens, P.F.; et al. An Update of the Angiosperm Phylogeny Group Classification for the Orders and Families of Flowering Plants: APG IV. Bot. J. Linn. Soc. 2016, 181, 1–20. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  108. Rodríguez Cid de León, G.I.; Gómez Hernández, M.; Domínguez y Ramírez, A.M.; Medina López, J.R.; Alarcón-Ángeles, G.; Morales Pérez, A. Adaptation of DPPH Method for Antioxidant Determination. ECS Trans. 2011, 36, 401–411. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Wei, F.; Lillehoj, P.B.; Ho, C. DNA Diagnostics: Nanotechnology-Enhanced Electrochemical. Pediatric Res. 2010, 67, 458–468. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  110. Ferdosian, F.; Ebadi, M.; Mehrabian, R.Z.; Golsefid, M.A.; Moradi, A.V. Application of Electrochemical Techniques for Determining and Extracting Natural Product (EgCg) by the Synthesized Conductive Polymer Electrode (Ppy/Pan/rGO) Impregnated with Nano-Particles of TiO2. Sci. Rep. 2019, 9, 3940. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  111. Samoticha, J.; Jara, M.J.; José, P.; Hernández, M.; Francisco, H.; Aneta, J.H. Phenolic Compounds and Antioxidant Activity of Twelve Grape Cultivars Measured by Chemical and Electrochemical Methods. Eur. Food Res. Technol. 2018, 244, 1933–1943. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  112. Calculations, A.I.; Arroyo-Currás, N.; Rosas-García, V.M.; Videa, M. Substituent Inductive Effects on the Electrochemical Oxidation of Flavonoids Studied by Square Wave. Molecules 2016, 21, 1422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Šeruga, M.; Tomac, I. Influence of Chemical Structure of Some Flavonols on Their Electrochemical Behaviour. Int. J. Electrochem. Sci. 2017, 12, 7616–7637. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Mateo, E.M.; Vicente, J.; Montoya, N.; Mateo-castro, R.; Gimeno-adelantado, J.V.; Jiménez, M.; Doménech-carbó, A. Electrochemical Identification of Toxigenic Fungal Species Using Solid-State Voltammetry Strategies. Food Chem. 2018, 267, 91–100. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Bavishi, K.; Laursen, T.; Martinez, K.L.; Møller, B.L.; Della Pia, E.A. Application of Nanodisc Technology for Direct Electrochemical Investigation of Plant Cytochrome P450s and Their NADPH P450 Oxidoreductase. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 29459. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Udit, A.K.; Hill, M.G.; Gray, H.B. Electrochemistry of Cytochrome P450 BM3 in Sodium Dodecyl Sulfate Films. Langmuir 2006, 22, 10854–10857. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  117. Nurmi, T.; Adlercreutz, H. Sensitive High-Performance Liquid Chromatographic Method for Profiling Phytoestrogens Using Coulometric Electrode Array Detection: Application to Plasma Analysis. Anal. Biochem. 1999, 274, 110–117. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  118. Klejdus, B.; Vacek, J.; Adam, V.; Zehnálek, J.; Kizek, R.; Trnková, L.; Kubáň, V. Determination of Isoflavones in Soybean Food and Human Urine Using Liquid Chromatography with Electrochemical Detection. J. Chromatogr. B Anal. Technol. Biomed. Life Sci. 2004, 806, 101–111. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  119. Gil, E.S.; Couto, R.O. Flavonoid Electrochemistry: A Review on the Electroanalytical Applications. Rev. Bras. Farmacogn.–Braz. J. Pharm. 2013, 23, 542–558. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
Figure 1. A typical illustration of the presence of phytochemicals in plants and the right key choice for electrochemical studies.
Figure 1. A typical illustration of the presence of phytochemicals in plants and the right key choice for electrochemical studies.
Electrochem 03 00030 g001
Figure 2. Mind map of the techniques used for the analysis of phyto-constituents using the Electrochemical Workstation and their graphic output images. (af) These include the techniques such as Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy, Flow Injection Analysis, Amperometric i-t technique, Cyclic Voltammetry, Stripping Voltammetry and Differential Pulse Volatmmetry. Each technique has its own characteristics, laws and theoretical relationships that helps in decoding the various aspects. Electrochemistry is a subject concerning the interlinking of chemical concepts based on the flow of electrons governing the product outcome. The field is generally based on green and environmentally friendly concepts, with the minimal use of reagents and organic solvents in the nano-scale operation of reaction protocols.
Figure 2. Mind map of the techniques used for the analysis of phyto-constituents using the Electrochemical Workstation and their graphic output images. (af) These include the techniques such as Electrochemical Impedance Spectroscopy, Flow Injection Analysis, Amperometric i-t technique, Cyclic Voltammetry, Stripping Voltammetry and Differential Pulse Volatmmetry. Each technique has its own characteristics, laws and theoretical relationships that helps in decoding the various aspects. Electrochemistry is a subject concerning the interlinking of chemical concepts based on the flow of electrons governing the product outcome. The field is generally based on green and environmentally friendly concepts, with the minimal use of reagents and organic solvents in the nano-scale operation of reaction protocols.
Electrochem 03 00030 g002
Figure 3. (A) Digital photographs of 14 flowers species of Lycoris and (B) its schematic diagram for fingerprinting recording using its petals for species determination. Reprinted with permission from reference [57], Elsevier, 2019.
Figure 3. (A) Digital photographs of 14 flowers species of Lycoris and (B) its schematic diagram for fingerprinting recording using its petals for species determination. Reprinted with permission from reference [57], Elsevier, 2019.
Electrochem 03 00030 g003
Figure 4. The normalized current values of differential pulse voltammetry responses on screen-printed electrodes using digital photos of 14 flowers of Lycoris species vs. Ag/AgCl after ethanol extraction. Reprinted with permission from reference [57], Elsevier, 2019.
Figure 4. The normalized current values of differential pulse voltammetry responses on screen-printed electrodes using digital photos of 14 flowers of Lycoris species vs. Ag/AgCl after ethanol extraction. Reprinted with permission from reference [57], Elsevier, 2019.
Electrochem 03 00030 g004
Table 1. Tabulation of distinct types of electrochemical sensors and the scope of their applications reported by researchers in since 2000.
Table 1. Tabulation of distinct types of electrochemical sensors and the scope of their applications reported by researchers in since 2000.
Chemically Modified ElectrodepHProfile ConstituentTechniqueReal SampleCommentRef No.
GCE (acetone/chloroform extracts)7, PBSQuercetin, rutin, morin SWV; −0.25 V to +1.25 VRosid varietiesTaxonomical studies; repeatability with 3 different harvests[53]
Au (electrochemical chip fabrication)5.8 and 7.1, PBSβ-glucuronidase monitoringCV, −1 V to 1 V; chronoamperometry at 0.7 V and −0.4 VTobacco and tomato varietiesGene expression monitoring[9]
Boron-doped diamond electrode
(BDDE)
7, PBSFlavone peaksSEC–HPLC–ELC detector; 0.8 V to 0.4 VProfiling of Betula verrucosa, Equisetum arvense, Polygonum aviculare, etc.Relationships between Cu and Fe species and with flavonoids[54]
GCE7, PBSAntioxidant power determination CV; −0.4 V to +0.8 VBuxus hyrcana, Rumex crispus, Archillea millefolium, Zateria Multiflora, Ginkobiloba, Lippa citriodora, etc.The lower the potential, better the antioxidant power [51]
Hanging Hg drop electrode3.5, B-RIndole butyric acidStripping voltammetry; N2 atmDirect bio-chemicalPlant hormone monitoring[55]
GCE/CNT/AO-HRP7.6, PBSMethyl salicylateAmperometry; 0.45 VWintergreen oilVolatile organic compounds[56]
GCE/GO-Fe2O3-CSMethanolic 0.1 M NaClO4Gallic acid; ascorbic acidCV, DPV, −0.5 V to +1.5 VInflorescences varietyAntioxidant activity[19]
SPE7, PBS-DPV; −0.3 V to 1.0 V14 Lycoris flowersFingerprinting petal tissues[57]
Ag/AgClpH 2–7H2SO4, HNO3 Potential differenceSoyabean seedlingEffects of uncoupler (FCCP) and acid rain are studied[58]
SP/TiO2 or SiO24, KPHp-ethylene guaiacolCV; −0.1 V to +0.4 VPhytophthora catorumPlant disease biomarkers[59]
CF-UMEBz + EtOH: H2SO4-SWV; 0.05 VEdible oilsAntioxidant activity[60]
GCE9, Tris bufferScatter Pattern studyDPV; −0.2 V to 1.4 VChimonanthus praecoxEvolutionary studies[61]
Ag/AgClIn situ studyDNP Potential DifferenceGlycine Maxx MerrillInterfacial ion transport[62]
Hg drop electrode5, acetate bufferCd(ll) and PbDPV; −0.2 V to 1.2 VMaize and sunflower seedlingTrace element contamination determination[63]
SPE/Tyr/GA4.5; acetate buffercatecholDPV; 0.2 V to 0.6 VMushroom tryosinaseAntioxidant capacity[64]
--PAH’sElectrochemical detectorsPisum SatviumOxidative stress agent determination[65]
Ag/AgCl-CCCPAction potentialsSoyabeanEnvironmental biosensors[66]
GCE/guanine, GCE/adenine, 4.8; PBSAA, GA, coumaric acid, resveratrolSWV; Mayonnaise and margarineAntioxidant capacity[67]
CPE/stearic acid/DNA7.4; PBSherbicide resistanceSWVPhosphinothricin
Resistance
Barcode gene[68]
Au wire/TGA7; PBSBinding site of plant proteinCV;0.0 to 0.8 VPlanthacyanin (Blue Cu-protein)Binding site of proteins[69]
SPE/MWCNT-NH2/AG/PNPG-PVA7; PBSInhibition of AG enzyme represents the potential for the plant to inhibit glucose productionCV; Amp i-tEhretis laevis; Micromelum pubescens; Spondias dulcisAnti-diabetic potential of medicinal plants[70]
Au13; NaOHMg, Zn, and MnElectrochemical detectorFolium betulae; Folium menthae; Folium salviae; radix Valerianae; radix TaraxaciSpeciation of Mg, Zn, and Mn in plants[71]
GCEHClO4Trans-resveratrolAdsorptive stripping SWV21 Rioja red winesPhytoalexin determination[72]
GCE/MWCNT7; PBSSesamolDPVSesame seeds and oilsPhytonutrient content analysis[44]
GCE/CPE/PVP3; B-R bufferKaempferolCV; SWVSpinach, cabbage, broccoli, and chicoryTotal phenolic compounds[73]
GCE/GNR/guanine7.4; PBSOH scavenging by AASWVFruit juicesTotal antioxidant capacity[74]
GCE/carbohydrate0.1 M KClQuercetinCV; SWVChemical compoundsFlavonoid determination[75]
Ir, Rh, Pt, Au, Ag, Cu, Co, Ni4.8; K3PO4
Fruit juice characterizationPulse voltammetryElectronic tonguePassiflora mollisima, Myrciaria dubia [76]
GCE/Poly-CDDA4; PBSAA, dopamine, and UADPV; Chemical compoundsAntioxidant capacity[77]
GCE/MWCNT7; PBSGuaiacolDPVWhisky and brandyNutritive content[78]
GCENaClO4Standard reduction potential of OH.CVMelissa officinalis L, Fragaria L, Origanum majorana L, Salvia officinalis L, Equistum arvensis L, Calendula L, Alcea rosea L, Melilotus officinalis LTotal antioxidant potential[79]
CPE5; PBSElectrochemical indexDPVRed, white, and sparkling wine, and grape juiceCorrelating DDPH with the electrochemical index[80]
6B pencil graphite electrode7; PBS2,3;2,4;2,3,5 hydroxy benzoic acidDPVCommercial tea availableTea quality testing[43]
CPE5; PBSElectrochemical index; antioxidant powerCV; SWV; DPVCoffee extractsTotal phenolic content[81]
GCE3.6; acetate bufferdelphinidin glucoside; cyanidin glucosideDPVCabernet Sauvignon wine, raspberryAntioxidant capacity[82]
GCE4.7;7; potassium phosphateNormalized current plotsSWVPotentilla
Argentea; Sarcopoterium spinosum; Agrimonia eupatoria; Salvia valentina; Lavandula multifida
Fingerprinting of seeds[83]
AO, alcohol oxidase; HRP, horseradish peroxidase; SP screen-printed; CF-UME, carbon fiber ultra-microelectrode; FCCP, carbonyl cyanide p-trifluromethoxypenylhydrazone; DNP, 2,4 dinitrophenol; Tyr, enzyme tyrosinase; GA, glutaraldehyde; Pah, polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon; CCCP, carbonyl cyanide 3-chlorophenyl hydrazone; AG, α-glycosidase; PNPG, p-nitropenyl-α-D-glucopyranosidase; PVA, polyvinyl alcohol; CPE/PVP, carbon paste electrode with poly(vinylpyrrolidone); GNR, graphene nanoribbon; CDDA, 3-(5-chloro-2-hydroxyphenylazo)-4,5-dihydroxynaphthalene-2,7-disulfonic acid.
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Gandhi, M.; Amreen, K. Electrochemical Profiling of Plants. Electrochem 2022, 3, 434-450. https://doi.org/10.3390/electrochem3030030

AMA Style

Gandhi M, Amreen K. Electrochemical Profiling of Plants. Electrochem. 2022; 3(3):434-450. https://doi.org/10.3390/electrochem3030030

Chicago/Turabian Style

Gandhi, Mansi, and Khairunnisa Amreen. 2022. "Electrochemical Profiling of Plants" Electrochem 3, no. 3: 434-450. https://doi.org/10.3390/electrochem3030030

APA Style

Gandhi, M., & Amreen, K. (2022). Electrochemical Profiling of Plants. Electrochem, 3(3), 434-450. https://doi.org/10.3390/electrochem3030030

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop