Polyelectrolyte complex containing antimicrobial guanidine-based polymer and its adsorption on cellulose fibers
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Abstract Polyelectrolyte (PE) complexes (PECs) are formed by the electronic interaction between cationic and anionic PEs, and a number of factors influence the forming pattern and characteristic of the PECs. In this work, a guanidine-based polymer with high cationic charge density (CD) and low molecular weight (MW) was applied for interacting with anionic carboxymethylcellulose (CMC) with low CD and high MW. To reveal the self-assembly pattern of the PEC, the turbidity of PEC and layer-by-layer (LBL) film, along with its adsorption on cellulose fibers, was characterized. The antimicrobial activity of the handsheet containing the PEC was also investigated. The charge ratio of anionic PE to cationic PE was found to be critical to the PEC stability. The roughness of the LBL film was increased and then decreased with more bilayers assembled. The isothermal adsorption indicated that the amount of adsorbed cationic PE on cellulose fibers was increased significantly by interacting with anionic CMC. The inhibition of the cationic PE on bacterial growth was not impaired by the formation of the complex. The CMC with high MW in the complex could maintain or even improve the antimicrobial efficiency of the guanidine-based polymer in handsheet.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".