| Literature DB >> 32226848 |
Myriam Rincón-Fontán1, Lorena Rodríguez-López1, Xanel Vecino2,3, Jose M Cruz1, Ana B Moldes1.
Abstract
The cosmetic industry provides a wide variety of shampoos to treat dandruff, containing insoluble ingredients such asEntities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 32226848 PMCID: PMC7097895 DOI: 10.1021/acsomega.9b03679
Source DB: PubMed Journal: ACS Omega ISSN: 2470-1343
Physicochemical Properties of the Biosurfactant Extract from Corn Stream
| physicochemical
properties | ||
|---|---|---|
| characteristic | description | reference |
| elemental analysis | 74% C; 11.3% H; 1.5% N | ( |
| surface tension | 41 mN/m | ( |
| CMC | 140 mg/L | ( |
| pH | 4.7 | ( |
| ionic charge | amphoteric | ( |
| rHLB | 12–13 | ( |
| wettability | good wetting agent in oil/water emulsions | ( |
| foaming capacity | similar foaming capacity to other surfactants such as Span 20 | ( |
| emulsifying activity | poor emulsifier, but good cosurfactant activity in nanoemulsions prepared with Tween 80 | ( |
| penetration into skin | enhances the penetration of hesperetin in cream formulations and nanocrystal nanoemulsions | ( |
rHLB, required HLB.
Figure 1FTIR spectrum of the biosurfactant extract from corn stream.
Operational Conditions Considered in the Box–Behnken Study in Terms of the Independent Variables (Coded): X1 (Tween 80), X2 (Biosurfactant Extract), and X3 (Oil/Water Ratio) and Dependent Variables: Y1 (Particle Size, μm), Y2 (Stability after 30 days, %), and Y3 (Zn Pyrithione Solubility, %)
| independent variable | dependent variable | |||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| formulation number | ||||||
| 1 | –1 | –1 | 0 | 14.8 | 0.0 | 1.2 |
| 2 | 1 | –1 | 0 | 54.4 | 52.9 | 1.7 |
| 3 | –1 | 1 | 0 | 68.7 | 90.0 | 8.7 |
| 4 | 1 | 1 | 0 | 70.2 | 78.4 | 12.6 |
| 5 | –1 | 0 | –1 | 60.6 | 69.3 | 7.5 |
| 6 | 1 | 0 | –1 | 40.5 | 91.0 | 59.0 |
| 7 | –1 | 0 | 1 | 33.9 | 70.7 | 33.6 |
| 8 | 1 | 0 | 1 | 53.3 | 93.2 | 11.6 |
| 9 | 0 | –1 | –1 | 69.6 | 76.3 | 1.4 |
| 10 | 0 | 1 | –1 | 93.7 | 84.7 | 6.7 |
| 11 | 0 | –1 | 1 | 84.8 | 58.1 | 5.2 |
| 12 | 0 | 1 | 1 | 47.0 | 59.8 | 9.9 |
| 13 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 70.9 | 72.9 | 5.6 |
| 14 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 71.8 | 76.8 | 6.5 |
| 15 | 0 | 0 | 0 | 77.7 | 68.7 | 6.1 |
Soluble Zn Pyrithione Concentration (mg/L) and Solubility Improvement Ratio Regarding Water for Each Formulation of the Box–Behnken Factorial Design
| formulation number | Zn pyrithione (mg/L) | solubility improvement (ratio) |
|---|---|---|
| 1 | 58 | 3 |
| 2 | 85 | 4 |
| 3 | 435 | 22 |
| 4 | 631 | 32 |
| 5 | 375 | 19 |
| 6 | 2948 | 147 |
| 7 | 1680 | 84 |
| 8 | 578 | 29 |
| 9 | 72 | 4 |
| 10 | 336 | 17 |
| 11 | 259 | 13 |
| 12 | 493 | 25 |
| 13 | 280 | 14 |
| 14 | 326 | 16 |
| 15 | 303 | 15 |
Figure 2Macroscopic images of the different formulations of the Box–Behnken study.
Figure 3Microscopic images at 40× of the emulsions from (A) formulation number 6 (5% Tween 80, 2.5% BS, and 0.01 tea tree oil/water ratio) and (B) formulation number 8 (5% Tween 80, 2.5% BS, and 0.1 tea tree oil/water ratio).
Regression Coefficients and Their Statistical Significance for Variables Y1, Y2, and Y3
| coefficient | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| β0 | 73.5 | 0.0008 | 73.0 | 0.0009 | 6.1 | 0.0018 |
| β1 | 5.1 | 0.0608 | 10.6 | 0.0172 | 4.2 | 0.0014 |
| β11 | –24.1 | 0.0063 | –3.3 | 0.2588 | 11.1 | 0.0004 |
| β2 | 7.0 | 0.0330 | 15.8 | 0.0079 | 3.6 | 0.0020 |
| β22 | 2.6 | 0.3048 | –14.5 | 0.0199 | –11.1 | 0.0004 |
| β3 | –5.7 | 0.0490 | –4.9 | 0.0748 | –1.8 | 0.0080 |
| β33 | –2.3 | 0.3507 | 11.3 | 0.0325 | 10.8 | 0.0004 |
| β12 | –9.5 | 0.0356 | –16.3 | 0.0148 | 0.9 | 0.0574 |
| β13 | 9.9 | 0.0332 | 0.0 | 1 | –18.4 | 0.0001 |
| β23 | –15.5 | 0.0139 | –1.8 | 0.4738 | –0.2 | 0.4686 |
Significant coefficients (p < 0.05).
Figure 4Three-dimensional (3D) surface graphics obtained for the fixed variable of oil/water ratio (X3) at 0.01 and 0.1, respectively: (A) and (B) for the particle size (Y1); (C) and (D) for the stability after 30 days (Y2), and (E) and (F) for the solubility of Zn pyrithione (Y3).