| Literature DB >> 33262424 |
Nicoleta Preda1, Andreea Costas2, Mihaela Beregoi2, Nicoleta Apostol2, Andrei Kuncser2, Carmen Curutiu3, Florin Iordache4, Ionut Enculescu5.
Abstract
Biopolymers provide versatile platforms for designing naturally-derived wound care dressings through eco-friendly pathways. EgEntities:
Year: 2020 PMID: 33262424 PMCID: PMC7708484 DOI: 10.1038/s41598-020-78005-x
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Sci Rep ISSN: 2045-2322 Impact factor: 4.379
Figure 1Optical images of native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7).
Figure 2FESEM images of native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7). Insets: cross-sectional FESEM images of the corresponding samples.
Figure 3FESEM images at higher magnification of native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7).
Figure 4EDX mapping images of native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7). Insets: EDX spectra of the corresponding samples.
Figure 5XRD patterns of native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7).
Figure 6XPS spectra for the Ag 3d, Zn 2p, Cu 2p, O 1s and C 1s core levels in native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7). Artificial intensity offsets are introduced for clarity.
Figure 7Reflectance spectra of native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7).
Figure 8STEM images and EDX elemental mappings including the spatial distribution of the Zn and Cu elements in the functionalized ESMs (P6 and P7), HRTEM image and SAED pattern exhibiting the ZnO crystalline structure (inset) in P7 sample.
Figure 9Fluorescence microscopy images of cells cultured on the native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7).
Figure 10MTT (left) and GSH (right) analysis of the native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7). Statistical significance was assessed using two-tailed Studentʼs t-test; the results are represented as mean ± standard error, *P < 0.05 compared to control, n = 3.
Figure 11E. coli planktonic cells (left) and E. coli biofilm (right) inhibition growth analysis of the native ESM (P0) and functionalized ESMs (P1–P7). Statistical significance was assessed using two-tailed Studentʼs t-test; the results are represented as mean ± standard error, *P < 0.05 compared to control M + /M− = bacterial suspension/bacterial growth media, n = 3.
Antibacterial efficiency of functionalized ESMs (P2, P3, P6 and P7) against E. coli under exposure to visible light.
| Sample exposed to visible light | 3 h | 6 h | 9 h | ||||||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| CFU ml−1 | LR | R % | CFU ml−1 | LR | R % | CFU ml−1 | LR | R% | |
| P2 | 2 × 105 | 0.224 | 40.24 | 1 × 105 | 0.279 | 47.37 | 4 × 105 | 0.336 | 53.85 |
| P3 | 2 × 105 | 0.173 | 32.93 | 1 × 105 | 0.200 | 36.84 | 5 × 105 | 0.323 | 52.45 |
| P6 | 3 × 105 | 0.022 | 4.878 | 0.9 × 105 | 0.309 | 50.88 | 5 × 105 | 0.258 | 44.76 |
| P7 | 2 × 105 | 0.136 | 26.83 | 0.5 × 105 | 0.525 | 70.18 | 2 × 105 | 0.740 | 81.82 |
Figure 12Schematic representation of the enhancement of antibacterial performance under visible light in the CuO-ZnO p–n junction. The FESEM images of an E. coli on the native ESM (P0) and on the functionalized ESM (P7).