Effect of Counterion Choice on the Stability of Cellulose Nanocrystal Pickering Emulsions
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) with three different counterions (H+, Na+, K+) were used to prepare oil-in-water Pickering emulsions with and without salt; their stability to coalescence and resistance to creaming were tested using two oil types (high-polarity corn oil and superlow polarity hexadecane). Without salt, only acid-form CNCs could stabilize corn oil emulsions, whereas the salt-form Na+-CNCs and K+-CNCs failed. None of the CNCs could stabilize hexadecane/water emulsions due to the lack of oil-CNC interactions and strong repulsion between CNCs. However, adding salt masked the differences between the CNC types, and all CNCs could stabilize both corn oil and hexadecane emulsions. Unfortunately, when salt was added, extensive creaming occurred owing to the water-phase density increase and droplet aggregation. The effect of salt concentration and neutralization of CNCs by different methods was also investigated. This work highlights the complex nature of CNC interactions with salts, oils, acids/bases, and other additives, which is relevant for envisioned formulated products for food, cosmetic, and pharmaceutical applications and reveals that the choice of CNC counterion does influence emulsion performance.
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 distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.004 | 0.012 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| 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 teacher head, 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".