4.7 Review

Application of atomic force microscopy in microscopic analysis of polysaccharide

期刊

TRENDS IN FOOD SCIENCE & TECHNOLOGY
卷 87, 期 -, 页码 35-46

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE LONDON
DOI: 10.1016/j.tifs.2018.02.005

关键词

Atomic force microscopy (AFM); Polysaccharide; Nanostructure; Morphology; Conformation

资金

  1. National Key Research and Development Program of China [2017YFD0400203]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China for Excellent Young Scholars [31422042]
  3. Outstanding Science and Technology Innovation Team Project in Jiangxi Province [20165BCB19001]
  4. Project of Academic Leaders of the Major Disciplines in Jiangxi Province [20162BCB22008]
  5. Collaborative Project in Agriculture and Food Field between China and Canada [2017ZJGH0102001]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Background: Polysaccharides are one of the major group of bioactive macromolecular derived from plants, bacteria, fungi and seaweeds. Atomic force microscopy (AFM), a type of scanning probe microscopy, is a powerful technology to visualize biopolymers, such as polysaccharides and proteins, up to a single molecular level in near-native conditions. Scope and approach: This review gives a brief description of AFM technology involved in polysaccharide research in addition to discussion of factors that might influence polysaccharide imaging. More importantly, its contribution to research progress of a variety of well characterized polysaccharides, including pectin, xanthan, carrageenan, curdlan, scleroglucan, xyloglucan, arabinoxylan, starch, etc., and the detailed nanostructure information was summarized. Key findings and conclusions: AFM provides a unique insight into polysaccharide studies in terms of morphological features and molecular characteristics, such as heights (diameters), width, contour length, end-to-end distance, polydispersity, etc. Besides, other promising aspects included probing molecular motion and assemblies, as well as visualizing conformation behavior under different conditions.

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