MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4408431962 · doi:10.5194/egusphere-egu25-12697

Hydrophobic Interactions Drive the Attachment of a Model Nanoplastic on Hydrophobic Collector Surfaces

2025· preprint· en· W4408431962 on OpenAlexaff
Youssra Rahham, Marios A. Ioannidis

Bibliographic record

Venuenot available
Typepreprint
Languageen
FieldMaterials Science
TopicSurface Modification and Superhydrophobicity
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Waterloo
Fundersnot available
KeywordsMaterials science

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Predicting the transport and fate of nanoparticles in the subsurface requires understanding of their interactions with collector surfaces. We report here on the effect of the less-studied hydrophobic interactions, which are relevant to the fate of hydrophobic nano-colloids (i.e., nanoplastics) and their attachment onto solid-water (SWI) and air-water interfaces (AWI) in groundwater. Using a model nanoplastic (charge-stabilized, ethyl cellulose nanoparticles) and a model porous medium (regular array of collectors in a pore network etched on glass), we demonstrate the dominance of hydrophobic attraction over electrostatic repulsion when an otherwise hydrophilic glass surface is rendered hydrophobic via coating with octadecyltrichlorosilane (OTS). An empirical model of hydrophobic interactions between dissimilar surfaces (Yoon et al., 1997), informed by contact angle measurements, explains the irreversible attachment of ethyl cellulose nanoparticles on OTS-coated glass surfaces, which is confirmed by atomic force microscopy. The same model explains the irreversible attachment of the model nanoplastic on AWIs, which is revealed by fluorescence microscopy. Transport experiments in microfluidic pore networks etched on glass further demonstrate the irreversible attachment of ethyl cellulose nanoparticles on hydrophobic collector surfaces (SWI or AWI) even in the absence of salt. These findings provide novel insights into the mechanisms affecting the transport and fate of nano-colloids in subsurface aquatic environments and lend further support to the conclusion that contact angle can serve to quantify the magnitude of hydrophobic interactions between nanoparticles and collector surfaces.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesMeta-epidemiology (narrow), Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.030
Threshold uncertainty score1.000

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.001
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.040
GPT teacher head0.307
Teacher spread0.268 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations0
Published2025
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same topicSurface Modification and SuperhydrophobicityFrench-language works237,207