4.4 Article

Ionic liquids as capping agents of silver nanoparticles. Part II: Antimicrobial and cytotoxic study

期刊

GREEN PROCESSING AND SYNTHESIS
卷 10, 期 1, 页码 585-593

出版社

WALTER DE GRUYTER GMBH
DOI: 10.1515/gps-2021-0054

关键词

silver nanoparticles; antimicrobial; alkyl chain; charge; surface modification

资金

  1. Shiraz University of Medical Sciences

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study validated the antimicrobial and cytotoxic effects of ionic liquid-coated silver nanoparticles (AgNPs). AgNPs with 12-carbon chains demonstrated higher antibacterial activity, including against bacterial biofilms. Overall, all tested NPs showed good cell viability at different antimicrobial concentrations.
This study was performed to validate the previous antimicrobial and cytotoxic data on the influence of ionic liquids as coatings of silver nanoparticles (AgNPs). The antibacterial and cytotoxicity assessments were carried out against different microorganisms and a cancerous cell line. AgNPs with two different ionic-liquid coatings and hydrocarbon chains were synthesized and characterized. We tested the antibacterial activity of these NPs against Salmonella typhi, Bacillus subtilis, Staphylococcus aureus, Escherichia coli, andCandida albicans in planktonic forms and against Enterococcus faecalis and Escherichia coli in biofilm forms. MTT (3-[4,5-dimethylthiazol-2-yl]-2,5 diphenyl tetrazolium bromide) assay was employed for toxicity evaluation. The antimicrobial activity ofNPs with 12 carbons was significantly higher than those with 18 carbons. Furthermore, NPs with 12 carbons were also effective against bacterial biofilms. All of the NPs tested had good cell viability at different antimicrobial concentrations. The length of the hydrocarbon chain is an essential factor in determining the antimicrobial activity of ionic-liquid-coated AgNPs. The variation in ionic-liquid coatings was not as effective as other influencing factors. Evaluation of AgNPs using other alkyl chain lengths to find the optimal size is recommended.

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

4.4
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