ars.els-cdn.com · web viewabsorption profile of orange ot in water-micellar solutions in the...
TRANSCRIPT
Supporting Information for
Nontoxic antimicrobial micellar systems based on mono- and di-cationic Dabco-surfactants
and furazolidone: structure-solubilization properties relationships
Tatiana N. Pashirovaa*, Evgeniya A. Burilovaa, Svetlana S. Lukashenkoa, Nail K. Gaysinb, Oleg I.
Gnezdilovc, Anastasia S. Sapunovaa, Ana R. Fernandesd,e, Aleksandra D. Voloshinaa, Eliana B.
Soutod,e, Elena P. Zhiltsovaa, Lucia Ya. Zakharovaa
aArbuzov Institute of Organic and Physical Chemistry, FRC Kazan Scientific Center, Russian
Academy of Sciences, Arbuzov St., 8, Kazan, 420088, Russia
bKazan National Research Technological University, Karl Marx St., 68, Kazan,420015 Russia
cKazan E. K. Zavoisky Physical-Technical Institute, FRC Kazan Scientific Center, Russian
Academy of Sciences, Sibirsky tract 10/7, Kazan, 420029, RussiadDepartment of Pharmaceutical Terchnology, Faculty of Pharmacy, University of Coimbra
(FFUC), Pólo das Ciências da Saúde, Azinhaga de Santa Comba, 3000-548 Coimbra, Portugal
eCEB - Centre of Biological Engineering, University of Minho, Campus de Gualtar 4710-057
Braga, Portugal
*Corresponding authors:
Tatiana N. Pashirova A.E. Arbuzov Institute of Organic and Physical Chemistry, Kazan Scientific Center, Russian Academy of Sciences, 8, ul. Arbuzov, 420088 Kazan, Russian Federation Telf.: +7(843) 2 73 22 93; Fax: +7(843) 2 73 22 53;E-mail: [email protected]
S1
Contents Figure S1. Dependence of observed self-diffusion coefficient of mono-CS-14 and hexamethyldisiloxane on concentration and inverse concentration of mono-CS-14 in D2O S3Figure S2. Dependence of observed self-diffusion coefficient of mono-CS-18 and hexamethyldisiloxane on concentration and inverse concentration of mono-CS-18 in D2O S4Figure S3. Dependence of observed self-diffusion coefficient of di-CS-18 and hexamethyldisiloxane on concentration and inverse concentration of di-CS-18 in D2O S5Figure S4. Absorption profile of Orange OT in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of the mono-CS-14 S6Figure S5. Absorption profile of Orange OT in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of the mono-CS-16 S7Figure S6. Absorption profile of Orange OT in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of the mono-CS-18 S8Figure S7. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of CTAB S9Figure S8. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of SDS S10Figure S9 Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of mono-CS-12 S11Figure S10. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of mono-CS-14 S12Figure S11. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of mono-CS-16 S13Figure S12. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of mono-CS-18 S14Figure S13. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of di-CS-14 S15Figure S14. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of di-CS-16 S16Figure S15. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of di-CS-18 S17Figure S16. The ratio of the molar concentrations of furazolidone in the micellar and aqueous phases vs. the concentration of di-CS-16 surfactant in the micelles S18
S2
Figure S1. Dependence of observed self-diffusion coefficient (Dobs) of mono-CS-14 (1), hexamethyldisiloxane (2) on concentration and inverse concentration of mono-CS-14 (3) in D2O at 30 °C
S3
Figure S2. Dependence of observed self-diffusion coefficient (Dobs) of mono-CS-18 (1) and hexamethyldisiloxane (2) on concentration (1,2) and inverse concentration (3) of mono-CS-18 in D2O at 30 °C
S4
Figure S3. Dependence of observed self-diffusion coefficient (Dobs) of di-CS-18 (1) and hexamethyldisiloxane (2) on concentration (1,2) and inverse concentration (3) of di-CS-18-Et (3) in D2O at 30 °C
S5
Figure S4. Absorption profile of Orange OT in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of the mono-CS-14, Cmono-CS-14 = 0.1; 0.2; 0.4; 0.6; 0.8; 1; 1.5; 2; 2.5; 3; 3.2; 3.6; 4; 4.2; 4.5; 5; 5.5, L = 1cm, 25ºC.
S6
Figure S5. Absorption profile of Orange OT in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of the mono-CS-16, Cmono-CS-16 = 0.02; 0.04; 0.06; 0.08; 0.1; 0.2; 0.4; 0.6; 0.7; 0.8; 1; 1.2; 1.4; 1.6; 1.8; 2; 2.2; 2.5; 3; 3.5, L = 1cm, 25ºC.
S7
Figure S6. Absorption profile of Orange OT in water-micellar solutions in the presence of increasing concentration of the mono-CS-18, Cmono-CS-18 = 0.002; 0.004; 0.006; 0.008; 0.01; 0.02; 0.04; 0.06; 0.08; 0.09; 0.1; 0.15; 0.2; 0.22; 0.25; 0.3; 0.35; 0.4; 0.6; 0.7; 0.8; 0.9; 1, L = 1cm, 25ºC.
S8
Figure S7. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of CTAB, CCTAB: 0.02, 0.04, 0.06, 0.08, 0.1, 0.2, 0.6, 0.8, 1.5, 1.8, 2, 2.5
mM, L = 1cm, λmax = 483 nm
S9
Figure S8. - Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of SDS, CSDS: 0.2, 0.6, 0.8, 1, 2, 4, 6, 8, 10, 15, 18, mM, L = 1cm, λmax =
488 nm
S10
Figure S9. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of mono-CS-12, Cmono-CS-12: 0.2, 0.4, 0.8, 1, 2, 4, 8, 10, 15, 18, 20 mM, L
= 1cm, λmax = 488 nm.
S11
Figure S10. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of mono-CS-14, Cmono-CS-14: 0.2, 0.4, 0.8, 1, 2, 3, 4, 4.5, 5, 6, mM, L =
1cm, λmax = 486 nm
S12
Figure S11. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of mono-CS-16, Cmono-CS-16: 0.02, 0.04, 0.06, 0.08, 0.1, 0.2, 0.6, 0.8, 1,
1.5, 1.8, 2.5, mM, L = 1cm, λmax = 486 nm.
S13
Figure S12. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of mono-CS-18, Cmono-CS-18: 0.004, 0.006, 0.008, 0.01, 0.02, 0.04, 0.06,
0.08, 0.1, 0.2, 0.3 mM, L = 1cm, λmax = 492 nm.
S14
Figure S13. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of di-CS-14, Cdi-CS-14: 0.2, 0.4, 0.6, 0.8, 1, 2, 4, 6, 7, 8.5, 9, 10, 12 mM, L
= 1cm, λmax = 485 nm.
S15
Figure S14. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of di-CS-16, Cdi-CS-16: 0.06, 0.08, 0.1, 0.2, 0.6, 0.8, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5, 4.0,
5.0 mM, L = 1см, λmax = 486 nm.
S16
Figure S15. Absorption profile of Sudan I in water-micellar solutions in the presence of
increasing concentration of di-CS-18, Cdi-CS-18: 0.02, 0.04, 0.06, 0.08, 0.1, 0.2, 0.4, 1, 1.2, 1.6, 1.8,
2 mM, L = 1см, λmax = 486 nm.
S17
Figure S16. The ratio of the molar concentrations of furazolidone in the micellar and aqueous phases vs. the concentration of di-CS-16 surfactant in the micelles.
S18