uu.seUppsala University Publications
Change search
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link
Remarkable Viscoelasticity in Mixtures of Cyclodextrins and Nonionic Surfactants
Uppsala University, Disciplinary Domain of Science and Technology, Chemistry, Department of Chemistry - BMC, Analytical Chemistry.
Show others and affiliations
2014 (English)In: Langmuir, ISSN 0743-7463, E-ISSN 1520-5827, Vol. 30, no 39, 11552-11562 p.Article in journal (Refereed) Published
Abstract [en]

We report the effect of native cyclodextrins (alpha, beta, and gamma) and selected derivatives in modulating the self-assembly of the nonionic surfactant polyoxyethylene cholesteryl ether (ChEO(10)) and its mixtures with triethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12EO3), which form wormlike micelles. Cyclodextrins (CDs) generally induce micellar breakup through a host-guest interaction with surfactants; instead, we show that a constructive effect, leading to gel formation, is obtained with specific CDs and that the widely invoked host-guest interaction may not be the only key to the association. When added to wormlike micelles of ChEO(10) and C12EO3, native beta-CD, 2-hydroxyethyl-beta-CD (HEBCD), and a sulfated sodium salt of beta-CD (SULFBCD) induce a substantial increase of the viscoelasticity, while methylated CDs rupture the micelles, leading to a loss of the viscosity, and the other CDs studied (native alpha- and gamma- and hydroxypropylated CDs) show a weak interaction. Most remarkably, the addition of HEBCD or SULFBCD to pure ChEO(10) solutions (which are low-viscosity, Newtonian fluids of small, ellipsoidal micelles) induces the formation of transparent gels. The combination of small-angle neutron scattering, dynamic light scattering, and cryo-TEM reveals that both CDs drive the elongation of ChEO(10) aggregates into an entangled network of wormlike micelles. H-1 NMR and fluorescence spectroscopy demonstrate the formation of inclusion complexes between ChEO(10) and methylated CDs, consistent with the demicellization observed. Instead, HEBCD forms a weak complex with ChEO(10), while no complex is detected with SULFBCD. This shows that inclusion complex formation is not the determinant event leading to micellar growth. HEBCD:ChEO(10) complex, which coexists with the aggregated surfactant, could act as a cosurfactant with a different headgroup area. For SULFBCD, intermolecular interactions via the external surface of the CD may be more relevant.

Place, publisher, year, edition, pages
2014. Vol. 30, no 39, 11552-11562 p.
National Category
Chemical Sciences
URN: urn:nbn:se:uu:diva-236539DOI: 10.1021/la503000zISI: 000343017600008PubMedID: 25201697OAI: oai:DiVA.org:uu-236539DiVA: diva2:766349
Available from: 2014-11-26 Created: 2014-11-19 Last updated: 2014-11-26Bibliographically approved

Open Access in DiVA

No full text

Other links

Publisher's full textPubMed

Search in DiVA

By author/editor
da Silva, Marcelo A.Eriksson, JonnyGonzalez-Gaitano, Gustavo
By organisation
Analytical Chemistry
In the same journal
Chemical Sciences

Search outside of DiVA

GoogleGoogle Scholar
The number of downloads is the sum of all downloads of full texts. It may include eg previous versions that are now no longer available

Altmetric score

Total: 443 hits
ReferencesLink to record
Permanent link

Direct link