1967
DOI: 10.1016/0021-9797(67)90280-9
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

The limiting thickness of protein films

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1
1

Citation Types

0
11
0

Year Published

1972
1972
2020
2020

Publication Types

Select...
6
2
1

Relationship

0
9

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 32 publications
(11 citation statements)
references
References 9 publications
0
11
0
Order By: Relevance
“…57 In contrast, the interactions can be hydrophobically driven for proteins at such small thicknesses, and the presence of monolayers or multilayers of proteins with very little or no solvent has been observed previously. 58 The coalescence time of a bubble at the air−solution interface corresponded to the viscoelasticity and stability of that interfacial mAb film and provided additional insight into the aggregation propensity of the mAbs in that film. The coalescence times for mAbs 1 and 2 at different film ages are represented in Figure 4.…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…57 In contrast, the interactions can be hydrophobically driven for proteins at such small thicknesses, and the presence of monolayers or multilayers of proteins with very little or no solvent has been observed previously. 58 The coalescence time of a bubble at the air−solution interface corresponded to the viscoelasticity and stability of that interfacial mAb film and provided additional insight into the aggregation propensity of the mAbs in that film. The coalescence times for mAbs 1 and 2 at different film ages are represented in Figure 4.…”
Section: ■ Results and Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…The presence of a black film in a surfactant solution is usually attributed to the effect of the electrostatic component of the disjoining pressure of the adsorbed film . In contrast, the interactions can be hydrophobically driven for proteins at such small thicknesses, and the presence of monolayers or multilayers of proteins with very little or no solvent has been observed previously …”
Section: Resultsmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…A spread film can be formed at the air/water interface of BSA solutions, even for solutions with an initial bulk concentration as low as 0.5 ppm. The tendency of BSA to form films is driven by the hydrophobic force, which originates from the uneven distribution of the functional groups on the outer surface of BSA, with consequence that some parts of the surface are less hydrophilic than others. Studies on the adsorbed films of BSA at the air/water interface were conducted decades ago, aiming to reveal the kinetics and structural information. It is generally accepted that the adsorption kinetics follow two steps: diffusion to the surface and conformational rearrangement within the interface. Evidence from dynamic surface properties shows that the different (E, F, N, B, etc.)…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Here we employ a thin-film balance (TFB) that is particularly suited for investigation of fluid/fluid interfaces. , With the TFB, the interaction force is described by a disjoining pressure Π, (force per film area) as a function of film thickness h . With few exceptions, , previous studies of protein-stabilized foam and emulsion films have been qualitative and have been limited to the analysis of drainage behavior, film lifetimes, or film thicknesses, without reported values of the corresponding disjoining pressure. It is, therefore, difficult to draw conclusions on the nature of possible thin-film stabilizing forces for aqueous protein solutions. Proteins exhibit a folded conformation in solution (tertiary structure) that is marginally stable, and thus their impetus to adsorb at interfaces and to alter conformation can be large .…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%