4.7 Article

On the external morphology of native cellulose microfibrils

期刊

CARBOHYDRATE POLYMERS
卷 84, 期 1, 页码 524-532

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.carbpol.2010.12.016

关键词

Cellulose; External morphology; Surface; Exposure; Roughness; Surface energy

资金

  1. Agence Nationale de la Recherche [ANR-08-BLAN-0009-03]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study is based on the working hypothesis that the external morphology of the cellulose microfibrils is correctly represented by a combination of eight surfaces issued from four lateral cleavage planes of the I-alpha and I-beta allomorphs. Models of these surfaces have been generated and investigated before and after relaxation, thus allowing one to predict, for each of these, their roughness, the accessibility of the hydrophilic and hydrophobic groups as well as their surface and attachment energies. Results showed that the ensemble of eight surfaces could be divided into three families. The first family contains four hydrophilic and moderately rough surfaces, which dominate the external morphology of the microfibrils and are thus responsible for their macroscopic properties. Surfaces of the two other families are of minor importance in the external morphology as they are located at the corners of the cellulosic macrocrystals. They are either flat and hydrophobic or rough and hydrophilic. The flat surfaces are of high biological and technical significance as they are specifically recognized by hydrophobic substances, including the cellulose binding modules of cellulases. Relaxation resulted in a significant disorganization of the rough surfaces whereas the other surfaces remain close to their original organisation. The interpretation of the surface and attachment energies of the surfaces, evidences the major influence of the biosynthetic process in the design of the external morphology of the cellulose microfibrils, as opposed to the classical kinetic and thermodynamic crystal growth mechanism. (C) 2010 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

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