4.7 Article

Multiscale Experimental Evaluation of Agarose-Based Semi-Interpenetrating Polymer Network Hydrogels as Materials with Tunable Rheological and Transport Performance

期刊

POLYMERS
卷 12, 期 11, 页码 -

出版社

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/polym12112561

关键词

hydrogels; semi-interpenetrating polymer networks; controlled release systems; rheology; diffusion; cryo-scanning electron microscopy

资金

  1. Ministry of Education, Youth and Sports of the Czech Republic [REG LO1211, COST LD15047]
  2. Czech Science Foundation [GA17-15451S]
  3. Materials Research Centre at Faculty of Chemistry, Brno University of Technology

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study introduces an original concept in the development of hydrogel materials for controlled release of charged organic compounds based on semi-interpenetrating polymer networks composed by an inert gel-forming polymer component and interpenetrating linear polyelectrolyte with specific binding affinity towards the carried active compound. As it is experimentally illustrated on the prototype hydrogels prepared from agarose interpenetrated by poly(styrene sulfonate) (PSS) and alginate (ALG), respectively, the main benefit brought by this concept is represented by the ability to tune the mechanical and transport performance of the material independently via manipulating the relative content of the two structural components. A unique analytical methodology is proposed to provide complex insight into composition-structure-performance relationships in the hydrogel material combining methods of analysis on the macroscopic scale, but also in the specific microcosms of the gel network. Rheological analysis has confirmed that the complex modulus of the gels can be adjusted in a wide range by the gelling component (agarose) with negligible effect of the interpenetrating component (PSS or ALG). On the other hand, the content of PSS as low as 0.01 wt.% of the gel resulted in a more than 10-fold decrease of diffusivity of model-charged organic solute (Rhodamine 6G).

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

4.7
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