2010
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2010.01.011
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Development of reactive thin film polymer brush membranes to prevent biofouling

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
37
0

Year Published

2012
2012
2019
2019

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 69 publications
(37 citation statements)
references
References 51 publications
0
37
0
Order By: Relevance
“…To prevent bacterial growth and biofilm formation, antibacterial materials, such as silver, chitosan, quaternary ammonium groups, photocatalytic TiO 2 , and ethylene glycol oligomer, have been incorporated into or onto membrane surfaces following different routes [9][10][11][12]. Among these, silver based materials were frequently used due to their high antimicrobial activity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…To prevent bacterial growth and biofilm formation, antibacterial materials, such as silver, chitosan, quaternary ammonium groups, photocatalytic TiO 2 , and ethylene glycol oligomer, have been incorporated into or onto membrane surfaces following different routes [9][10][11][12]. Among these, silver based materials were frequently used due to their high antimicrobial activity.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…By theory, the contact angle of hydrophilic UF membrane should be less in comparison with hydrophobic UF membrane when the membrane morphologies are similar (48). As shown in Table 1, it could be seen that the contact angle of the blended membranes decreased, which indicated the enhanced hydrophilicity due to the addition of PEG and FeON to PES.…”
Section: Characterization Of Pure and Composite Membranesmentioning
confidence: 89%
“…This is due to the antibacterial property of the QA groups grafted onto the membrane surface. The bacteria were killed by a contact killing mechanism [35][36][37][38] when the bacteria were adsorbed on the membrane surface due to the attractive electrostatic force, because the E. coli has a negative charge and the PES-g-DMAEMAq membrane has a positive charge. From zeta potential measurements, the surface charge of the PES-g-DMAEMAq membrane was +35 mV (data not shown here).…”
Section: Observation Of Bacteria Attachmentmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…These positive charges could provide a bactericidal effect by a contact killing mechanism [20,21,[34][35][36][37][38][39][40][41].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%