| Literature DB >> 33923713 |
Rodolpho Fagundes Correa1,2, Giovana Colucci1, Noureddine Halla3, João Alves Pinto1, Arantzazu Santamaria-Echart1, Silvia Priscila Blanco2, Isabel Patrícia Fernandes1, Maria Filomena Barreiro1.
Abstract
Microencapsulation procedures have recently focused attention on designing novel microspheres via green synthesis strategies. The use of class="Gene">chitosan (Entities:
Keywords: chitosan microspheres; dual crosslinking strategies; green crosslinker; tripolyphosphate; vanillin
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2021 PMID: 33923713 PMCID: PMC8073050 DOI: 10.3390/molecules26082325
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.411
Figure 1OM images of the microspheres obtained after the applied crosslinking steps at 200× magnifications (scale bar 50 µm). In the inset, the corresponding magnification is 400× (scale bar 25 µm).
Particle size of the produced microspheres after the two applied stages (ionic and covalent crosslinking) expressed as average ± SD.
| Sample | Ionic Crosslinking | Covalent Crosslinking |
|---|---|---|
| CS3 | 39.4 ± 13.6 | - |
| CS3Vain situ | 55.6 ± 19.9 | 54.2 ± 20.4 |
| CS3VApost | 45.7 ± 19.5 | 38.3 ± 13.8 |
| CS5 | 66.9 ± 26.5 | - |
| CS5VAin situ | 54.9 ± 18.6 | 42.2 ± 14.9 |
| CS5VApost | 47.8 ± 14.4 | 55.7 ± 34.7 |
| CS10 | 43.9 ± 23.4 | - |
| CS10VAin situ | 47.3 ± 28.2 | 45.2 ± 14.7 |
| CS10VApost | 51.0 ± 33.3 | 42.9 ± 15.0 |
Figure 2FTIR spectra of CS (black) and microspheres prepared by TPP physical crosslinking (blue), in situ (orange), and post-treatment (pink) methods. Series of (a) 3%, (b) 5%, and (c) 10% TPP. In the insets, the amide I and amide II regions are shown.
Figure 3TG and DTG curves of chitosan (black) and microspheres prepared by TPP physical crosslinking (blue), in situ (orange), and post-treatment (pink) methods. Series of (a) 3%, (b) 5%, and (c) 10% TPP.
Maximum degradation temperature (Tp) and weight loss (Wloss) of the degradation steps (1 and 2) and the residue of the samples.
| Sample | Degradation Step 1 | Degradation Step 2 | Residue (%) | ||
|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| Tp1 (°C) | Wloss1 (%) | Tp2 (°C) | Wloss2 (%) | ||
| CS | 58 | 8.2 | 302 | 46.2 | 32.0 |
| CS3 | 67 | 9.6 | 247 | 30.8 | 43.6 |
| CS3VAin situ | 64 | 11.1 | 246 | 30.8 | 37.2 |
| CS3VApost | 66 | 10.3 | 246 | 30.4 | 37.8 |
| CS5 | 65 | 10.6 | 248 | 30.5 | 40.1 |
| CS5VAin situ | 71 | 9.7 | 249 | 31.0 | 42.1 |
| CS5VApost | 71 | 9.8 | 248 | 30.7 | 41.0 |
| CS10 | 69 | 10.5 | 249 | 29.9 | 41.3 |
| CS10VAin situ | 65 | 12.8 | 251 | 29.6 | 37.6 |
| CS10VApost | 69 | 11.0 | 249 | 30.1 | 39.9 |
Figure 4OM images of microspheres in swelling tests after 1 h (t0) and 1 day (t1) at 100× magnification.
Figure 5SEM images of 5% TPP microspheres’ series at 320×, 500×, and 1000× magnifications. CS5, CS5VAin situ, and CS5VApost in the top, middle, and bottom rows, respectively.
Figure 6Schematic representation of the microsphere’s preparation process considering the two sequential steps, ionic crosslinking (first step) and chemical crosslinking (second step), following two strategies: in situ and post-treatment. The crosslinking mechanisms of CS with the crosslinking agents TPP and VA are also included.