| Literature DB >> 36235286 |
Sirajul Haq1, Nadia Shahzad2, Muhammad Imran Shahzad3, Khaled Elmnasri4, Manel Ben Ali5, Alaa Baazeem5, Amor Hedfi5, Rimsha Ehsan1.
Abstract
Transmission electron microscopy (TEM), atomic force microscopy (AFM), X-ray diffraction (XRD), energy dispersive X-ray (EDX), scanning electron microscopy (SEM), diffuse reflectance spectroscopy (DRS), and Fourier transform infrared (FTIR) spectroscopy were applied to evaluate the tin dioxide nanoparticles (SnO2 NPs) amalgamated by the sol-gel process. XRD was used to examine the tetragonal-shaped crystallite with an average size of 26.95 (±1) nm, whereas the average particle size estimated from the TEM micrograph is 20.59 (±2) nm. A dose-dependent antifun3al activity was performed against two fungal species, and the activity was observed to be increased with an increase in the concentration of SnO2 NPs. The photocatalytic activity of SnO2 NPs in aqueous media was tested using Rhodamine 6G (Rh-6G) under solar light illumination. The Rh-6G was degraded at a rate of 0.96 × 10-2 min for a total of 94.18 percent in 350 min.Entities:
Keywords: antifungal activity; photocatalysis; sol-gel; solar-light; tetragonal; tin dioxide
Mesh:
Substances:
Year: 2022 PMID: 36235286 PMCID: PMC9571040 DOI: 10.3390/molecules27196750
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Molecules ISSN: 1420-3049 Impact factor: 4.927
Figure 1XRD pattern of SnO2 NPs.
Figure 2EDX pattern of SnO2 NPs.
Figure 3SEM micrographs of SnO2 NPs. (a) ×10,000; (b) ×60,000.
Figure 4TEM micrograph of SnO2 NPs.
Figure 5Selected area (a), histogram (b), 2-D (c), and 3-D (d) AFM micrographs of SnO2 NPs.
Figure 6Tauc plot (inset: DRS spectrum) of SnO2 NPs.
Figure 7FTIR spectrum of SnO2 NPs.
Figure 8Experimental photographs of antifungal activity of SnO2 NPs against selected fungi at different concentrations.
Antifungal activity of SnO2 NPs against the selected fungi and statistical analysis.
| Species | Concentration | Inhibition Zone | PS | NC | Variance (S2) | Standard Deviation (S) | Pearson Constant |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 40 | 0 | 6.1 | 0 | 1.72 | 1.3 | 0.0054 |
| 60 | 2 | ||||||
| 80 | 3.4 | ||||||
| 100 | 4.9 | ||||||
|
| 40 | 0 | 6.3 | 0 | 1.5 | 1.2 | 0.0055 |
| 60 | 2.2 | ||||||
| 80 | 3.1 | ||||||
| 100 | 4.6 |
Figure 9Photocatalytic parameters including, (a) = degradation profile, (b) = percentage degradation, (c) = kinetic plot and (d) = electron excitation and hole creation mechanism.