Non-covalent interactions between Co (en)2 Cl2+ and SDS micelles: A comparison between experimentally and EMSA-calculated free energies of binding

Chemical Physics Letters

Volumn 434, Issue 4-6, 2007, Pages 210-213

  Villa, I ^a   Prado Gotor, R ^a  

^a UNIVERSITY OF SEVILLE   (Spain)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

APPROXIMATION THEORY; CHEMICAL BONDS; COBALT COMPOUNDS; COMPLEXATION; CONCENTRATION (PROCESS); ELECTROSTATICS; FREE ENERGY; SURFACE ACTIVE AGENTS;

ELECTROSTATIC INTERACTIONS; EXPONENTIAL MEAN SPHERICAL APPROXIMATION (EMSA); SODIUM DODECYL SULPHATE (SDS);

MICELLES;

EID: 33846256228     PISSN: 00092614     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.cplett.2006.11.102     Document Type: Article

References (28)

1. Loftsson T., Hreinsdóttir D., and Másson M. Int. J. Pharm. 302 (2005) 18
2. Srinivasan S., Annaraj J., and Athappan P.R. J. Inorg. Biochem. 99 (2005) 876
3. Kamberi M., Chung P., De Vas R., Li L., Li Z., Xiaoyan M., Fields S., and Riley C.M. J. Chrom. B 810 (2004) 151
4. Chao T., Ying S., Ning G., Qiang X., and Zijian G. Inorg. Chem. 43 (2004) 4761
5. Zhao L., Orton E., and Vemuri N. J. Pharm. Sci. 91 (2002) 2301
6. Williams D.H., Stephens E., and Zhou M. J. Mol. Biol. 329 (2003) 389
7. Frey E., and Vilfam A. Chem. Phys. 284 (2002) 287 and references therein
8. Amendola V., Fabrizzi, Mangano C., and Pallavinici P. Acc. Chem. Res. 34 (2001) 488
9. Colin J.P., Jiménez-Molero M.C., and Sauvage J.P. Acc. Chem. Res. 34 (2001) 477
10. Harada A. Acc. Chem. Res. 34 (2001) 456
11. Aldakov D., and Azenbacher P. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 126 (2004) 4752
12. Berezovski M., and Krylov S.N. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 125 (2003) 13451
13. Laidler K.J. Chemical Kinetics (1965), McGraw-Hill, New York
14. See for example. Prado-Gotor R., et al. Prog. React. Kinet. 25 (2000) 371 and references therein
15. In: Luisa P., and Stranb B.E. (Eds). Reverse Micelles (1984), Plenum Press, New York
16. Deo P., Jockushc S., Ottaviani M.F., Moscatelli A., Turro J.N., and Somasundaran P. Langmuir 19 (2003) 10747
17. Muriel-Delgado F., Jiménez R., Gómez-Herrera C., and Sánchez F. Langmuir 15 (1999) 4334
18. Davies K., and Hussam A. Langmuir 9 (1993) 3270
19. In order to obtain Eq. (5) from Eqs. (3) and 4 an additional hypothesis is necessary on the equilibrium distribution described by Eq. (3): the concentration of the partitioned substrate must be low enough in order to avoid saturation of the dispersed pseudophase. Indeed, even in this case, it is implicit that the presence of a substrate molecule in the dispersed pseudophase neither encourages nor discourages the union of a second molecule of substrate: in other words, binding of the substrate to the dispersed pseudophase is non-cooperative in character. Moreover, to consider the binding constant and the rate constant characterizing reactivity in the dispersed phase as true constants, one must assume that some characteristics of this phase (for example the shape, size and charge of the micelles) are concentration independent parameters.
20. de la Vega R., Pérez-Tejeda P., Prado-Gotor R., López-Cornejo P., Jiménez R., Pérez F., and Sánchez F. Chem. Phys. Lett. 398 (2004) 82
21. Jiménez R., et al. Chem. Phys. Lett. 417 (2005) 509
22. Simonin J.P., and Hendrawan H. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 3 (2001) 4286
23. Molero M., Andreu R., Gonzalez D., Calvente J.J., and Lopez-Perez G. Langmuir 17 (2001) 314
24. Debye P., and Hückel E. Phys. Z. 24 (1923) 185 305
25. van Os N.M., Haak J.R., and Rupert L.A.M. Physico-chemical Properties of Selected Anionic, Cationic and Nonionic Surfactants (1993), Elsevier
26. Dutkiewicz E., and Jakubowska A. Colloid. Polym. Sci. 280 (2002) 1009
27. Fuoss R.M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1 (1954) 176
28. Bernas A., Grand D., Hautecloque S., and Giannotti C. J. Phys. Chem. 90 (1986) 6189