Introduction

H2O2 is commonly used as a bleaching agent, disinfectant, and preservative in the food industry, owing to its strong oxidation resistance, good antibacterial and bactericidal properties1. H2O2 is not only one of the by-products of many classical enzymatic reactions, such as glucose oxidation, uric acid oxidation, oxalic acid oxidation, amino acid oxidation, glutamic acid, lysine oxidation, etc.2, but also plays a significant role as the primary messenger molecule in the cellular and redox metabolism3. It is worth noting that H2O2 has strong oxidizability, ingesting residual H2O2 in food will consume antioxidant substances in the body, accelerate the aging process of the human body, and reduce the resistance after ingestion. Excessive H2O2 in the body will produce a large number of OH·, which participates electron transfer and hydroxylation reaction in biochemical process, damage cells, induce gene mutation and various diseases, even cause human cell canceration4. In 2017, the list of carcinogens was announced by International Agency for Research on Cancer of the World Health Organization, and H2O2 appeared in the list of Class III carcinogens5. At present, it has been detected in the market that excessive amounts of H2O2 residues exist in prepackaged milk, beverages, soy products, aquatic products, chicken feet, etc., posing a serious threat to human health. Therefore, the newly revised National Food Safety Standard in China (GB 2760-2014) stipulates that H2O2 can be used as a food processing aid in various food processing processes, and the residual amount does not need to be limited, but it needs to be removed from the finished product. The Food and Drug Administration (FDA) requires H2O2 to be used as an antimicrobial agent in milk, with a residual amount not exceeding 0.05 wt% in 21 CFR 184.1366. In addition, it is also stipulated that H2O2 solution should be used in the sterilization of food packaging materials, and the residual amount of H2O2 in distilled water after packaging should be less than 0.5 parts per million (testing should be conducted immediately after packaging) in 21 CFR 178.1005. Therefore, sensitive detection of H2O2 is crucial for monitoring the quality of food and for applications of clinical, and biomedical.

Nowadays, the methods used in the detection of H2O2 include titration, spectroscopy, chromatography, chemiluminescence and electrochemical methods6. The Chinese national standard GB 5009. 226-2016 stipulates that the determination methods for H2O2 in food residues are iodometry and titanium salt colorimetry. The quantitative limit of the above two methods is 3 mg kg−1. These two methods are cumbersome, time-consuming, poor selectivity, and low accuracy, making it difficult to achieve trace detection. However, electrochemical method has the advantages of rapid response, rapid response, high-cost efficiency, simple operation, high selectivity and high sensitivity7. The first generation electrochemical H2O2 detector relies on the reaction of enzyme with hydrogen peroxide. This enzyme-based technology has been mature and can now provide high sensitivity, high selectivity and low background noise8. Nevertheless, the complex process of immobilizing the enzyme on the electrode, strict conditions to maintain the enzyme activity, and the lack of long-term stability and reproducibility limit the application of this technology. More importantly, almost all enzymes are made of proteins, which will hinder the electrochemical reaction on the surface of electrode9. Therefore, non-enzymatic electrochemical H2O2 detection have been developed to eliminate these shortcomings due to its faster and more effective electron transport10.

Enzyme-free H2O2 sensors generally prepared by precious metal nanoparticles (NPs) include Au, Ag, Pt and Pd NPs11, As a precious metal, Ag NPs have large specific surface area, good stability, good biocompatibility, excellent conductivity and electrocatalytic activity12. It is reported that Tran et al. have successfully developed a series of electrochemical sensors based on AgNPs for sensitive detection for glucose and H2O213,14,15. But expensive cost, poor tolerance immensely limits their mercantile application. Consequently, it is urgent to develop low-cost, reliable and sensitive H2O2 electrochemical sensing materials. So far, Co3O4, Fe3O4, Cu2O, MnO2 have been successfully applied in H2O2 electrochemical sensors16. CuO and Cu2O have also been developed to prepare H2O2 sensors, which are inexpensive and strong stability, but with low sensitivity and narrow linear detection range. However, metal NPs have limited catalytic ability, because they are easily oxidized, and aggregative owing to the existence of van der Waals force between NPs17. In order to improve this problem, a suitable carrier is needed. At present, the substrates that have been widely studied are usually carbon materials, including ordered mesoporous carbon, carbon nanotubes, carbon nanofibers and graphene18. Among them, graphene has high specific surface area, good thermal stability, good conductivity, stability and high electron transfer ability, and its surface defects can anchor metal NPs, so it is an excellent carrier material19. Most of the existing related studies use graphene oxide prepared by Hummer’s method as carbon substrate to prepare metal nanoparticle composites. The preparation process is complex, and the distribution position and size of metal particles are uneven, which affects the sensing performance of the composites20. The liquid phase exfoliated method is low-cost, simple and controllable, green and environmentally friendly, and easy to large-scale production. It has been studied for use in Cd2+ and Pb2+ sensors, as well as flavomycin sensors20,21.

In this work, we have used water-in-oil emulsion as a stabilizing system to synthesis CuxO/Ag@FLG composite by a simple ultrasonic exfoliation method for the first time. After a series of characterization, the morphology and structure of the composite were studied and modified on a glassy carbon electrode (GCE) to explore the detection of H2O2 performance. Compared with the reported Ag, CuO or Cu2O NPs for H2O2 sensors, the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE H2O2 electrochemical sensor has the advantages of simple preparation, low cost and stable physicochemical properties. Our electrochemical experiments show the prepared sensor displays wide linear range, high sensitivity and selectivity toward the reduction of H2O2 with a low detection, and we also demonstrate it is successfully used to detect the concentration of H2O2 in milk. This study would offer a new routine for developing graphene-based electrochemical sensors for detecting H2O2.

Experimental

Materials

Graphite was purchased from Sinopharm Chemical Reagent Co.,Ltd (Shanghai, China), Tween 80, NH3·H2O purchased from Shanghai Yien Chemical Technology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China), cyclohexane were purchased from Guangzhou Chemical Reagent Factory (Guangzhou, China), Span 80 was purchased from Shanghai yuanye Bio-Technology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China), ethanol, CuSO4·5H2O, AgNO3, NaBH4, NaCl, FeCl3, glucose (Glu) and CaCl2 were purchased from Shanghai Aladdin Biochemical Technology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China), MgCl2 were purchased from Damao Chemical Reagent Factory (Tianjin, China), hydrogen peroxide(H2O2) was purchased from Jiangsu Qiangsheng functional Chemistry Co., Ltd (Jiangsu, China), Ltd (Beijing, China), glycine (Gly), lysine (Lys) were purchased from Nine-Dinn Chemistry Co., Ltd. (Shanghai, China), dopamine (DA), uric acid (UA), citric acid (CA), lactic acid (LA), arginine (Arg), valine(Val) were purchased from Shanghai McLean Biochemical Technology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China), polyvinylpyrrolidone k30 (PVP k30) was purchased from Shanghai bide Pharmaceutical Technology Co., Ltd (Shanghai, China).

Synthesis of CuxO/Ag@FLG composite

0.4 g graphite powder, 5 mL 3 wt% CuSO4 in 2 wt% PVP solution, 3 g Tween 80, 4 g Span 80, 5 mL anhydrous ethanol are added into 30 mL cyclohexane, stable emulsion can be formed through vortex mixing. Then, ultrasonic unit is used to exfoliate the above solution for 2 h, with 40 kHz ultrasonic power. After that, 0.057 g NaBH4 is added into the emulsion above and exfoliate the above solution for 2 h. Finally, the solid were carefully collected by filter to obtain CuxO@FLG.

0.4 g CuxO@FLG, 5 ml 3 wt% AgNO3 in 2 wt% PVP and 20% NH3·H2O mixing solution, 3 g Tween 80, 4 g Span 80, 5 mL anhydrous ethanol are added into 30 mL cyclohexane, stable emulsion can be formed through vortex mixing. Then, ultrasonic cleaner is used to exfoliate the above solution for 2 h. At the end, the solid were carefully collected by filter to obtain CuxO/Ag@FLG.

Fabrication of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE electrodes

Before modification, bare GCE was polished with 0.05 μm alumina powder and ultrasonically cleaned with ethanol and water for 5 min. 5 μL of 1 mg mL−1 of well-dispersed CuxO/Ag@FLG solution (include 0.05 wt% Chitosan and 0.5% acetic acid) was dropped to the washed GCE and dried under an infrared drying lamp for 10 min to prepare CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE. For comparison, we prepared CuxO@FLG/GCE and Ag@FLG/GCE using the same method.

Analytical procedure

JSM-7610F PLUS scanning electron microscope (SEM, JEOL, Tokyo, Japan), H-7650 transmission electron microscope (TEM, Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan), D/max-2200/PC X-ray diffractometer (XRD, Hitachi, Tokyo, Japan) and ESCALAB 250 X-ray Photoelectron Spectroscopy (XPS, Thermo Fisher Scientific, Massachusetts, America) were used to characterize the surface morphology and structure. Cyclic Voltammetry (CV), electrochemical impedance spectroscopy (EIS) and Chronoamperometry (i–t) were determined by the CHI660E electrochemical workstation (CH Instruments, Shanghai, China). Electrolyte was consisting of phosphoric acid buffer solution, the working electrode was modified GCE, the counter electrode was platinum sheet, the reference electrode was saturated calomel electrode (SCE). The i–t test was performed by adding H2O2 within a time interval of 40 s.

Results and discussion

Characterizations of morphology

The construction and detection principles of the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE sensor are summarized in Fig. 1a. Next, the morphology of the material was characterized. The SEM image depicted in Fig. 1b shown that FLG with distinct crumples surface and large size were obtained, and there are lots of Ag nanoparticles and flower-like CuxO nanosheet supported on the surface of crumble layers of exfoliated graphene. Furthermore, EDS images shown in Fig. 1c confirm the existence and homogenous distribution of C, O, Cu, Ag elements. Two-dimensional conductive network structure has been developed in CuxO/Ag@FLG, which is conducive to the rapid transfer and conduction of electrons, so as to detect target analytes sensitively.

Figure 1
figure 1

(a) preparation of CuxO/Ag@FLG and mechanism of detecting H2O2. (b)SEM images and (c) EDS images of CuxO/Ag@FLG.

Full size image

As a supplement, the micromorphologies and microstructures of synthetic CuxO/Ag@FLG investigated by TEM. As shown in Fig. 2a,b, the metal NPs were successfully loaded on the graphene sheet. The lattice spacing in Fig. 2c was 0.343 nm, belonging to the (002) crystal plane of graphene (JCPDS no. 41-1487). Interplanar distances of 0.249 nm and 0.247 nm indexed to the (002) crystal plane of CuO (JCPDS no. 45-0937), interplanar distance of 0.219 nm belongs to the (200) crystal plane of Cu2O (JCPDS no. 74-1230). The lattice spacing of 0.254 nm corresponds to the (111) crystal plane of Ag0 (JCPDS no. 04-0783) (Fig. 2d,e). In addition, the Raman spectrum compares the graphite powder raw material with the prepared material, as shown in Fig. 2f and Table 1. The peak position of the G peak and 2D peak move to the low frequency direction, and the half peak width of 2D peak decreases, and the I2D/IG increases, which indicate the successful preparation of FLG22. Besides, the same trend as TEM images could be observed in XRD pattern. As can be seen from Fig. 2g, the strong peak at 26.38° is the characteristic peak of graphene’s (002) plane (JCPDS no. 41-1487). The peaks at 38.08°, 44.26°, 64.4°, and 77.46° can be assigned to (111), (200), (220) and (311) planes of Ag0 (JCPDS no. 04-0783). Other peaks at 42.33° and 53.54° respectively arise from (200) plane of Cu2O and (020) plane of CuO (JCPDS no. 74-1230 and JCPDS no. 45-0937).

Figure 2
figure 2

(a,b) TEM images, (c–e) high resolution TEM (HRTEM) images and (f) Raman spectra (g) XRD pattern of CuxO/Ag@FLG.

Full size image
Table 1 The Raman fitting data of graphite powder and CuxO/Ag@FLG.
Full size table

Characterizations of element binding states

Furthermore, the element composition and valence states of elements CuxO/Ag@FLG nanocomposites were analyzed by XPS. The full scan XPS spectra of CuxO/Ag@FLG showed signals corresponding to C 1s, O 1s, Cu 2p and Ag 3d (Fig. 3a). As exhibited in Fig. 3b, the peaks at 284.3, 285.4, 286.65 and 289.5 eV are attributed to C–C/C=C, C–O, C=O and O–C=O species. Compared to graphene oxide, the above C 1s XPS spectrum is more similar to reduced graphene oxide, because the peak intensity for C–C are significantly stronger than C–O and C=O23. Figure 3c indicated that the characteristic peaks at 531.6 eV, 532.5 eV which belong to lattice oxygen of Cu2O and CuO24, respectively, and the peaks at 533.5 eV, 530.3 eV are usually attributed to O in adsorbed –OH groups or carbonates25. The Cu 2p spectrum (Fig. 3d) was deconvoluted into seven peaks. The peaks at the binding energy of 933.35 eV of Cu 2p3/2 and 953.6 eV of Cu 2p1/2 are consistent with the representative spin–orbit of Cu+. At the same time, the peaks at the binding energy of 934.8 eV of Cu 2p3/2 and 954.9 eV of Cu 2p1/2 are characteristic peaks for Cu2+26. The peaks at 942.2, 944.8 and 963.1 eV are correspond to satellite peaks of Cu 2p in CuO27. The Ag 3d spectrum (Fig. 3e) was deconvoluted into two peaks, the peak of Ag 3d5/2 at 368.6 eV and the peak of Ag 3d1/2 at 374.6 eV are attributed to Ag028.

Figure 3
figure 3

XPS spectra of CuxO/Ag@FLG: (a) full survey spectrum. High-resolution spectra of (b) C 1s, (c) O 1s, (d) Cu 2p, and (e) Ag 3d, respectively.

Full size image

Electrochemical characterizations of the modified electrodes

As depicted in Fig. 4, the interfacial characteristics of the modified electrodes were investigated by EIS. Generally, the diameter semicircle at high frequency represents the resistance to charge transfer (Rct)29. In Fig. 4a, compared with the Rct of bare GCE (5774 Ω), the Rct increases to 12,154 Ω after modified with CuxO@FLG by reason of weak conductivity of Cu2O and CuO. However, the Rct decreases to 2464 Ω when modified with Ag@FLG, which indicates that Ag@FLG can promote electron transfer greatly. Furthermore, It is worth noting that CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE has the smallest Rct (1605 Ω), which illustrates its excellent electron transport ability owing to the large surface area and the potential synergism of the nanocomposites. Figure 4b further confirms the above inference peak-to-peak separation (ΔEp) of GCE, CuxO@FLG/GCE, Ag@FLG/GCE and CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE are 265, 332, 429 and 221 mV respectively, indicating CuxO/Ag@FLG can promote the electron transfer on the electrode surface to the most extent. The peak current of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE is the largest, which is 3.98 times of GCE, 2.58 times of CuxO@FLG/GCE and 1.55 times of Ag@FLG/GCE. It is clear that Ag@FLG/GCE has a larger peak current of redox peaks of [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− couple, suggesting that the electrochemical probe of [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− has good electron transfer at Ag@FLG/GCE due to its excellent electronic conductivity. However, on CuxO@FLG/GCE, the redox peaks current of [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− are much smaller, suggesting that the material of CuxO@FLG is less effective for the electron transfer of the [Fe(CN)6]3−/4− because of its inferior conductivity. It is interesting that when the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE electrode was applied, the redox peak current was enhanced much more comparison with Ag@FLG, showing that the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE nanocomposite has better performance for electron transfer of electrochemical probe than the single-component of Ag@FLG or CuxO@FLG. Comparison histograms of Rct, ΔEp and peak current (Ip) of different electrodes are shown in Fig. 4c.

Figure 4
figure 4

(a) EIS of bare GCE, CuxO@FLG/GCE, Ag@FLG/GCE, CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in 1 mM K3[Fe (CN)6]/1 mM K4[Fe (CN)6]/100 mM KCl solution 10−1–105 Hz. The equivalent circuit is inserted; (b) CV of bare GCE, CuxO@FLG/GCE, Ag@FLG/GCE, CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in 1 mM K3[Fe (CN)6]/1 mM K4[Fe (CN)6]/100 mM KCl solution at a scanning speed of 50 mV·s−1; (c) the histogram of Rct, ΔEp and Ip of different electrodes.

Full size image

Electrochemical detection of H2O2

Electrochemical reduction of H2O2 by the synthesized composite was studied using CV method. Therefore, the CV curves are shown in Fig. 5 in N2-saturated 0.01 M PBS contained 4 mM H2O2 at a scan rate of 50 mV s–1. The reduction peak current enhancement of CuxO@FLG/GCE is extremely weak (Fig. 5a). In addition, Ag@FLG show higher current response thanks to exceptional electrocatalytic activity of Ag NPs. CV curve of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE has shown a lower reduction potential at − 0.65 V and higher current of 80 μA. Therefore, the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE is a prospective electrochemical sensor for H2O2 detection. With the increase of H2O2 addition, the cathodic current increases linearly in Fig. 5b. Subsequently, the CV curves of CuxO/Ag@FLG at varying scan rates (10–120 mV s−1) in 0.01 M PBS (pH 7.4) contained 4 mM H2O2 were investigated (Fig. 5c). Along with the square root of the scanning speed, the reduction peak current increases linearly, and correlation coefficients (R2) was fitted as 0.9803, which indicates that the diffusion-controlled electrochemical process (Fig. 5d,e)30.

Figure 5
figure 5

(a) CV of bare GCE, CuxO@FLG/GCE, Ag@FLG/GCE, CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in the presence of 4 mM H2O2; (b) CV curves of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in the presence of 0, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10 mM H2O2; (c) CV curves of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in the presence of 4 mM H2O2 at various scan rates; plots of cathodic peak current (Ip) vs. (d) root of scan rate or (E) square root of scan rate (v1/2).

Full size image

Mechanism for electrocatalytic reduction

The reaction mechanism of H2O2 electrocatalytic reduction of CuxO/Ag@FLG nanocomposites is illustrated in the following chemical formula reduction. Primarily, CuO reduced to Cu2O, and Cu2O of the composite and that be reduced reacted with H2O2 to form CuO and H2O. Equations (1) and (2) can convey the reduction of H2O2 by CuxO on CuxO/Ag@FLG composite. Besides, Ag0 of CuxO/Ag@FLG composite was oxidated to Ag2O with H2O2 was restored to H2O. Equations 3 can represent the reduction of H2O2 by Ag0 on CuxO/Ag@FLG composite.

$${\text{2CuO}} + {\text{H}}_{{2}} {\text{O}} + {\text{2e}}^{ - } \to {\text{Cu}}_{{2}} {\text{O}} + {\text{2OH}}^{ - }$$
(1)
$${\text{Cu}}_{{2}} {\text{O}} + {\text{H}}_{{2}} {\text{O}}_{{2}} \to {\text{2CuO}} + {\text{H}}_{{2}} {\text{O}}$$
(2)
$${\text{2Ag}}^{0} + {\text{H}}_{{2}} {\text{O}}_{{2}} \to {\text{Ag}}_{{2}} {\text{O}} + {\text{H}}_{{2}} {\text{O}}$$
(3)
$${\text{Ag}}_{{2}} {\text{O}} + {\text{H}}_{{2}} {\text{O}} + {\text{2e}}^{ - } \to {\text{2Ag}}^{0} + {\text{2OH}}^{ - }$$
(4)

Amperometric detection of H2O2 at CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE

Then, the parameters for detecting H2O2 were optimized which include volume of catalyst ink, pH of supporting electrolyte and applied potential. The response current is the largest when the volume of ink was 5 µL (Fig. 6a). Furthermore, volume of 5 µL CuxO/Ag@FLG composite on GCE is used for further studies. As shown in the Fig. 6b, CV curves was tested in PBS with different pH containing 4 mM H2O2, as a result, the maximum current response appears in PBS with pH 7.4. Therefore, PBS with pH 7.4 was selected as the electrolyte solution. The influence of different applied potentials on sensitivity was investigated by i–t method (Fig. 6c). The sensitivity was the highest at − 0.65 V. Hence, − 0.65 V is selected as the detection potential in the following studies.

Figure 6
figure 6

CVs at a scan rate of 0.05 V s−1 of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE (a) with different volume of CuxO/Ag@FLG in 0.01 M PBS (pH 7.4) containing 4.0 mM H2O2; (b)in PBS with different pH include 5.0, 6.0, 7.0, 7.4, 8.0, 9.0 containing 4 mM H2O2. (c) I–t curves of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE at applied potentials with successive addition of H2O2 into 0.01 M PBS.

Full size image

Under the best conditions (5 μL CuxO/Ag@FLG ink, 0.01 PBS with pH 7.4, − 0.65 V), i–t curve was plotted for CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE as H2O2 was added every 40 s (Fig. 7a). The response time of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE to H2O2 is about 5 s. Meanwhile, the linear relationship between concentration of H2O2 and current is fitted (Fig. 7b), the current increases linearly with increasing concentration in the range of 10–100, 000 μM, the linear equation is I (μA) = − 12.330 c (c is the concentration of H2O2, mM) − 13.963, R2 = 0.9978, the detection limit is 2.13 μM (S/N = 3), and the sensitivity is 174.5 μA mM−1 cm−2. These are attributed to the large specific surface area of graphene sheet and the synergistic effect of graphene, CuxO and Ag NPs in reducing H2O2 and amplifying signal.

Figure 7
figure 7

(a) I–t curve of the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE for consecutive additions of H2O2 at − 0.65 V. The illustration shows the enlarged i–t curve in the low concentration area; (b) corresponding fitting curve.

Full size image

Figure 8a demonstrates the i–t curve of the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE sensor after addition of 1 mM H2O2, 1 mM Val, DA, AA, UA, CA, LA, Gly, Arg, Lys, Glu, CaCl2, MgCl2, NaCl, FeCl3, and a second injection 1 mM H2O2. After adding interferent, the current response to H2O2 on CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE at the detection potential is very small, which indicates that the response of the sensor to H2O2 is almost not affected in the presence of other compounds, CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE shows high selectivity. Long-term stability and reproducibility are momentous factors which evaluate the performance of sensors. Five CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE electrodes were prepared respectively, and the relative standard deviation (RSD) of current response in the same concentration of H2O2 was 3.69%, which presents a good repeatability (Fig. 8b). After storing at room temperature for 1 month, the reaction of the prepared electrode to H2O2 decreased to about 95% (Fig. 8c), which illustrates that it has long-term stability. In a word, our research makes it clear that CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE is reliable as an electrochemical sensor of H2O2. At the same time, it has the potentiality to detect H2O2 in real samples in complex environment.

Figure 8
figure 8

(a) Amperometric response recorded at CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in 0.01 M PBS with the additions of H2O2 (1 mM), DA, AA, LA, Gly, UA, Arg, Lys, CA, Val, Glu, CaCl2, MgCl2, NaCl, FeCl3; (b) CV curves of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in 0.01 M PBS contained 4 mM H2O2 at five equally prepared CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE sensors; (c) CV curves of the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in PBS contained 4 mM H2O2 tested at 1st day and 30th day.

Full size image

The comparison of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE sensor with other H2O2 sensors containing CuO, Cu2O and Ag is listed in Table 2. Significantly, as-synthesized sensor in this study has a wider detection range and a lower detection limit. Compared with other reported electrochemical sensors for H2O2 detection, the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE electrode has a significant advantage in terms of reaction time and sensitivity. Furthermore, the production and application of the obtained CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE electrode are inexpensive, simple and easy to control, resulting in a potential perspective for convenient, fast, sensitive and cost-effective detection of H2O2.

Table 2 Comparison of H2O2 sensors related to CuO, Cu2O and Ag in different literature.
Full size table

Detection of H2O2 in milk sample

In addition, the H2O2 concentration in milk samples were determined to further evaluate the availability and practical application of the CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE. To reduce the sample matrix effect, milk from two different brands was centrifuged for 15 min at 7, 000 rpm, then diluted 10 times with deionized water and filtered with 0.22 μM microporous membrane filtration to obtain milk solution. Finally, the obtained recovery of H2O2 was calculated using the standard addition method. Amperometric curve was detected at − 0.65 V under successive adding the milk sample, which were displayed in Fig S1. As shown in Table 3, the recovery for H2O2 in the sample was 90.12–102.00%.

Table 3 Actual sample analysis of CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE in milk (n = 3).
Full size table

Conclusions

To summaries, CuxO/Ag@FLG sensor has been prepared successfully by ultrasonic exfoliation method. CuxO/Ag@FLG/GCE electrode has shown excellent catalytic reduction performance for H2O2, such as wide linearity range (10–100, 000 μM), low detection limit (2.13 μM), high sensitivity (174.5 μA mM−1 cm−2) and long-term stability. In addition, the prepared sensor can detect H2O2 in milk samples, which makes it possible for quality control in food industry, suggesting that as-synthetic CuxO/Ag@FLG has a broad application prospect in electrochemical sensors.