4.6 Article

Saccharide-Functionalized Alkanethiols for Fouling-Resistant Self-Assembled Monolayers: Synthesis, Monolayer Properties, and Antifouling Behavior

期刊

LANGMUIR
卷 27, 期 24, 页码 15034-15047

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/la202774e

关键词

-

资金

  1. AMBIO [NMP-CT-2005-011827]
  2. European Commission

向作者/读者索取更多资源

We describe the synthesis of a series of mono-, di-, and trisaccharide-functionalized alkanethiols as well as the formation of fouling-resistant self-assembled monolayers (SAMs) from these. The SAls,,Is were characterized using ellipsometry, wetting measurements, and infrared reflection absorption spectroscopy (WAS). We show that the structure of the carbohydrate moiety affects the packing density and that this also alters the alkane chain organization. Upon increasing the size of the sugar moieties (from mono- to di- and trisaccharides), the structural qualities of the monolayers deteriorated with increasing disorder, and for the trisaccharide, slow reorganization dynamics in response to changes in the environmental polarity were observed. The antifouling properties of these SAMs were investigated through protein adsorption experiments from buffer solutions as well as settlement (attachment) tests using two common marine fouling species, zoospores of the green macroalga Ulva linza and cypris larvae of the barnacle Balanus amphitrite. The SAMs showed overall good resistance to fouling by both the proteins and the tested marine organisms. To improve the packing density of the SAMs with bulky headgroups, we employed mixed SAMs where the saccharide-thiols are diluted with a filler molecule having a small 2-hydroxyethyl headgroup. This method also provides a means by which the steric availability of sugar moieties can be varied, which is of interest for specific interaction studies with surface-bound sugars. The results of the surface dilution study and the low nonspecific adsorption onto the SAMs both indicate the feasibility of this approach.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据