Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro

Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high inter...
Ausführliche Beschreibung

Gespeichert in:

Autor*in:	Hannah Boyd [verfasserIn] Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez [verfasserIn] Rebecca J. L. Welbourn [verfasserIn] Kun Ma [verfasserIn] Peixun Li [verfasserIn] Philipp Gutfreund [verfasserIn] Alexey Klechikov [verfasserIn] Thomas Arnebrant [verfasserIn] Robert Barker [verfasserIn] Javier Sotres [verfasserIn]

Format:	E-Artikel
Sprache:	Englisch

Erschienen:	2021

Übergeordnetes Werk:	In: Scientific Reports - Nature Portfolio, 2011, 11(2021), 1, Seite 12
Übergeordnetes Werk:	volume:11 ; year:2021 ; number:1 ; pages:12

Links:	Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Link aufrufen Journal toc

DOI / URN:	10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4

Katalog-ID:	DOAJ051389738

Internformat


LEADER	01000caa a22002652 4500
001	DOAJ051389738
003	DE-627
005	20230308161257.0
007	cr uuu---uuuuu
008	230227s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c
024	7		\|a 10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 \|2 doi
035			\|a (DE-627)DOAJ051389738
035			\|a (DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e
040			\|a DE-627 \|b ger \|c DE-627 \|e rakwb
041			\|a eng
100	0		\|a Hannah Boyd \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
245	1	0	\|a Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro
264		1	\|c 2021
336			\|a Text \|b txt \|2 rdacontent
337			\|a Computermedien \|b c \|2 rdamedia
338			\|a Online-Ressource \|b cr \|2 rdacarrier
520			\|a Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate.
653		0	\|a Medicine
653		0	\|a R
653		0	\|a Science
653		0	\|a Q
700	0		\|a Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Rebecca J. L. Welbourn \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Kun Ma \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Peixun Li \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Philipp Gutfreund \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Alexey Klechikov \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Thomas Arnebrant \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Robert Barker \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
700	0		\|a Javier Sotres \|e verfasserin \|4 aut
773	0	8	\|i In \|t Scientific Reports \|d Nature Portfolio, 2011 \|g 11(2021), 1, Seite 12 \|w (DE-627)663366712 \|w (DE-600)2615211-3 \|x 20452322 \|7 nnns
773	1	8	\|g volume:11 \|g year:2021 \|g number:1 \|g pages:12
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e \|z kostenfrei
856	4	0	\|u https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 \|z kostenfrei
856	4	2	\|u https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322 \|y Journal toc \|z kostenfrei
912			\|a GBV_USEFLAG_A
912			\|a SYSFLAG_A
912			\|a GBV_DOAJ
912			\|a GBV_ILN_11
912			\|a GBV_ILN_20
912			\|a GBV_ILN_22
912			\|a GBV_ILN_23
912			\|a GBV_ILN_24
912			\|a GBV_ILN_31
912			\|a GBV_ILN_39
912			\|a GBV_ILN_40
912			\|a GBV_ILN_60
912			\|a GBV_ILN_62
912			\|a GBV_ILN_63
912			\|a GBV_ILN_65
912			\|a GBV_ILN_69
912			\|a GBV_ILN_70
912			\|a GBV_ILN_73
912			\|a GBV_ILN_95
912			\|a GBV_ILN_105
912			\|a GBV_ILN_110
912			\|a GBV_ILN_151
912			\|a GBV_ILN_161
912			\|a GBV_ILN_170
912			\|a GBV_ILN_171
912			\|a GBV_ILN_206
912			\|a GBV_ILN_213
912			\|a GBV_ILN_230
912			\|a GBV_ILN_285
912			\|a GBV_ILN_293
912			\|a GBV_ILN_370
912			\|a GBV_ILN_381
912			\|a GBV_ILN_602
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2005
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2009
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2011
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2014
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2055
912			\|a GBV_ILN_2111
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4012
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4037
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4112
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4125
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4126
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4249
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4305
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4306
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4307
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4313
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4322
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4323
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4324
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4325
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4335
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4338
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4367
912			\|a GBV_ILN_4700
951			\|a AR
952			\|d 11 \|j 2021 \|e 1 \|h 12

Indexfelder

author_variant	h b hb j f g m jfgm r j l w rjlw k m km p l pl p g pg a k ak t a ta r b rb j s js
matchkey_str	article:20452322:2021----::fetfoincnapoeisratnsnaiayelc
hierarchy_sort_str	2021
publishDate	2021
allfields	10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051389738 (DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Hannah Boyd verfasserin aut Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate. Medicine R Science Q Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez verfasserin aut Rebecca J. L. Welbourn verfasserin aut Kun Ma verfasserin aut Peixun Li verfasserin aut Philipp Gutfreund verfasserin aut Alexey Klechikov verfasserin aut Thomas Arnebrant verfasserin aut Robert Barker verfasserin aut Javier Sotres verfasserin aut In Scientific Reports Nature Portfolio, 2011 11(2021), 1, Seite 12 (DE-627)663366712 (DE-600)2615211-3 20452322 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 pages:12 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_381 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12
spelling	10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051389738 (DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Hannah Boyd verfasserin aut Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate. Medicine R Science Q Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez verfasserin aut Rebecca J. L. Welbourn verfasserin aut Kun Ma verfasserin aut Peixun Li verfasserin aut Philipp Gutfreund verfasserin aut Alexey Klechikov verfasserin aut Thomas Arnebrant verfasserin aut Robert Barker verfasserin aut Javier Sotres verfasserin aut In Scientific Reports Nature Portfolio, 2011 11(2021), 1, Seite 12 (DE-627)663366712 (DE-600)2615211-3 20452322 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 pages:12 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_381 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12
allfields_unstemmed	10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051389738 (DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Hannah Boyd verfasserin aut Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate. Medicine R Science Q Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez verfasserin aut Rebecca J. L. Welbourn verfasserin aut Kun Ma verfasserin aut Peixun Li verfasserin aut Philipp Gutfreund verfasserin aut Alexey Klechikov verfasserin aut Thomas Arnebrant verfasserin aut Robert Barker verfasserin aut Javier Sotres verfasserin aut In Scientific Reports Nature Portfolio, 2011 11(2021), 1, Seite 12 (DE-627)663366712 (DE-600)2615211-3 20452322 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 pages:12 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_381 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12
allfieldsGer	10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051389738 (DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Hannah Boyd verfasserin aut Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate. Medicine R Science Q Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez verfasserin aut Rebecca J. L. Welbourn verfasserin aut Kun Ma verfasserin aut Peixun Li verfasserin aut Philipp Gutfreund verfasserin aut Alexey Klechikov verfasserin aut Thomas Arnebrant verfasserin aut Robert Barker verfasserin aut Javier Sotres verfasserin aut In Scientific Reports Nature Portfolio, 2011 11(2021), 1, Seite 12 (DE-627)663366712 (DE-600)2615211-3 20452322 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 pages:12 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_381 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12
allfieldsSound	10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 doi (DE-627)DOAJ051389738 (DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e DE-627 ger DE-627 rakwb eng Hannah Boyd verfasserin aut Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro 2021 Text txt rdacontent Computermedien c rdamedia Online-Ressource cr rdacarrier Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate. Medicine R Science Q Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez verfasserin aut Rebecca J. L. Welbourn verfasserin aut Kun Ma verfasserin aut Peixun Li verfasserin aut Philipp Gutfreund verfasserin aut Alexey Klechikov verfasserin aut Thomas Arnebrant verfasserin aut Robert Barker verfasserin aut Javier Sotres verfasserin aut In Scientific Reports Nature Portfolio, 2011 11(2021), 1, Seite 12 (DE-627)663366712 (DE-600)2615211-3 20452322 nnns volume:11 year:2021 number:1 pages:12 https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e kostenfrei https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 kostenfrei https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322 Journal toc kostenfrei GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_381 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700 AR 11 2021 1 12
language	English
source	In Scientific Reports 11(2021), 1, Seite 12 volume:11 year:2021 number:1 pages:12
sourceStr	In Scientific Reports 11(2021), 1, Seite 12 volume:11 year:2021 number:1 pages:12
format_phy_str_mv	Article
institution	findex.gbv.de
topic_facet	Medicine R Science Q
isfreeaccess_bool	true
container_title	Scientific Reports
authorswithroles_txt_mv	Hannah Boyd @@aut@@ Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez @@aut@@ Rebecca J. L. Welbourn @@aut@@ Kun Ma @@aut@@ Peixun Li @@aut@@ Philipp Gutfreund @@aut@@ Alexey Klechikov @@aut@@ Thomas Arnebrant @@aut@@ Robert Barker @@aut@@ Javier Sotres @@aut@@
publishDateDaySort_date	2021-01-01T00:00:00Z
hierarchy_top_id	663366712
id	DOAJ051389738
language_de	englisch
fullrecord	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ051389738</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308161257.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ051389738</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hannah Boyd</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Science</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Q</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rebecca J. L. Welbourn</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kun Ma</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Peixun Li</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Philipp Gutfreund</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Alexey Klechikov</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Thomas Arnebrant</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Robert Barker</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Javier Sotres</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Scientific Reports</subfield><subfield code="d">Nature Portfolio, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">11(2021), 1, Seite 12</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)663366712</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2615211-3</subfield><subfield code="x">20452322</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_381</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">12</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
author	Hannah Boyd
spellingShingle	Hannah Boyd misc Medicine misc R misc Science misc Q Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro
authorStr	Hannah Boyd
ppnlink_with_tag_str_mv	@@773@@(DE-627)663366712
format	electronic Article
delete_txt_mv	keep
author_role	aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut aut
collection	DOAJ
remote_str	true
illustrated	Not Illustrated
issn	20452322
topic_title	Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro
topic	misc Medicine misc R misc Science misc Q
topic_unstemmed	misc Medicine misc R misc Science misc Q
topic_browse	misc Medicine misc R misc Science misc Q
format_facet	Elektronische Aufsätze Aufsätze Elektronische Ressource
format_main_str_mv	Text Zeitschrift/Artikel
carriertype_str_mv	cr
hierarchy_parent_title	Scientific Reports
hierarchy_parent_id	663366712
hierarchy_top_title	Scientific Reports
isfreeaccess_txt	true
familylinks_str_mv	(DE-627)663366712 (DE-600)2615211-3
title	Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro
ctrlnum	(DE-627)DOAJ051389738 (DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e
title_full	Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro
author_sort	Hannah Boyd
journal	Scientific Reports
journalStr	Scientific Reports
lang_code	eng
isOA_bool	true
recordtype	marc
publishDateSort	2021
contenttype_str_mv	txt
container_start_page	12
author_browse	Hannah Boyd Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez Rebecca J. L. Welbourn Kun Ma Peixun Li Philipp Gutfreund Alexey Klechikov Thomas Arnebrant Robert Barker Javier Sotres
container_volume	11
format_se	Elektronische Aufsätze
author-letter	Hannah Boyd
doi_str_mv	10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4
author2-role	verfasserin
title_sort	effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro
title_auth	Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro
abstract	Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate.
abstractGer	Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate.
abstract_unstemmed	Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate.
collection_details	GBV_USEFLAG_A SYSFLAG_A GBV_DOAJ GBV_ILN_11 GBV_ILN_20 GBV_ILN_22 GBV_ILN_23 GBV_ILN_24 GBV_ILN_31 GBV_ILN_39 GBV_ILN_40 GBV_ILN_60 GBV_ILN_62 GBV_ILN_63 GBV_ILN_65 GBV_ILN_69 GBV_ILN_70 GBV_ILN_73 GBV_ILN_95 GBV_ILN_105 GBV_ILN_110 GBV_ILN_151 GBV_ILN_161 GBV_ILN_170 GBV_ILN_171 GBV_ILN_206 GBV_ILN_213 GBV_ILN_230 GBV_ILN_285 GBV_ILN_293 GBV_ILN_370 GBV_ILN_381 GBV_ILN_602 GBV_ILN_2005 GBV_ILN_2009 GBV_ILN_2011 GBV_ILN_2014 GBV_ILN_2055 GBV_ILN_2111 GBV_ILN_4012 GBV_ILN_4037 GBV_ILN_4112 GBV_ILN_4125 GBV_ILN_4126 GBV_ILN_4249 GBV_ILN_4305 GBV_ILN_4306 GBV_ILN_4307 GBV_ILN_4313 GBV_ILN_4322 GBV_ILN_4323 GBV_ILN_4324 GBV_ILN_4325 GBV_ILN_4335 GBV_ILN_4338 GBV_ILN_4367 GBV_ILN_4700
container_issue	1
title_short	Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro
url	https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4 https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322
remote_bool	true
author2	Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez Rebecca J. L. Welbourn Kun Ma Peixun Li Philipp Gutfreund Alexey Klechikov Thomas Arnebrant Robert Barker Javier Sotres
author2Str	Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez Rebecca J. L. Welbourn Kun Ma Peixun Li Philipp Gutfreund Alexey Klechikov Thomas Arnebrant Robert Barker Javier Sotres
ppnlink	663366712
mediatype_str_mv	c
isOA_txt	true
hochschulschrift_bool	false
doi_str	10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4
up_date	2024-07-03T20:04:45.420Z
_version_	1803589606889750528
fullrecord_marcxml	<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><collection xmlns="http://www.loc.gov/MARC21/slim"><record><leader>01000caa a22002652 4500</leader><controlfield tag="001">DOAJ051389738</controlfield><controlfield tag="003">DE-627</controlfield><controlfield tag="005">20230308161257.0</controlfield><controlfield tag="007">cr uuu---uuuuu</controlfield><controlfield tag="008">230227s2021 xx \|\|\|\|\|o 00\| \|\|eng c</controlfield><datafield tag="024" ind1="7" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4</subfield><subfield code="2">doi</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-627)DOAJ051389738</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="035" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">(DE-599)DOAJfd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="040" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="b">ger</subfield><subfield code="c">DE-627</subfield><subfield code="e">rakwb</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="041" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">eng</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="100" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Hannah Boyd</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="245" ind1="1" ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="264" ind1=" " ind2="1"><subfield code="c">2021</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="336" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Text</subfield><subfield code="b">txt</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacontent</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="337" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Computermedien</subfield><subfield code="b">c</subfield><subfield code="2">rdamedia</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="338" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Online-Ressource</subfield><subfield code="b">cr</subfield><subfield code="2">rdacarrier</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="520" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Abstract Surfactants are important components of oral care products. Sodium dodecyl sulfate (SDS) is the most common because of its foaming properties, taste and low cost. However, the use of ionic surfactants, especially SDS, is related to several oral mucosa conditions. Thus, there is a high interest in using non-ionic and amphoteric surfactants as they are less irritant. To better understand the performance of these surfactants in oral care products, we investigated their interaction with salivary pellicles i.e., the proteinaceous films that cover surfaces exposed to saliva. Specifically, we focused on pentaethylene glycol monododecyl ether (C12E5) and cocamidopropyl betaine (CAPB) as model nonionic and amphoteric surfactants respectively, and investigated their interaction with reconstituted salivary pellicles with various surface techniques: Quartz Crystal Microbalance with Dissipation, Ellipsometry, Force Spectroscopy and Neutron Reflectometry. Both C12E5 and CAPB were gentler on pellicles than SDS, removing a lower amount. However, their interaction with pellicles differed. Our work indicates that CAPB would mainly interact with the mucin components of pellicles, leading to collapse and dehydration. In contrast, exposure to C12E5 had a minimal effect on the pellicles, mainly resulting in the replacement/solubilisation of some of the components anchoring pellicles to their substrate.</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Medicine</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">R</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Science</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="653" ind1=" " ind2="0"><subfield code="a">Q</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Juan F. Gonzalez-Martinez</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Rebecca J. L. Welbourn</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Kun Ma</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Peixun Li</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Philipp Gutfreund</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Alexey Klechikov</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Thomas Arnebrant</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Robert Barker</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="700" ind1="0" ind2=" "><subfield code="a">Javier Sotres</subfield><subfield code="e">verfasserin</subfield><subfield code="4">aut</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="0" ind2="8"><subfield code="i">In</subfield><subfield code="t">Scientific Reports</subfield><subfield code="d">Nature Portfolio, 2011</subfield><subfield code="g">11(2021), 1, Seite 12</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-627)663366712</subfield><subfield code="w">(DE-600)2615211-3</subfield><subfield code="x">20452322</subfield><subfield code="7">nnns</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="773" ind1="1" ind2="8"><subfield code="g">volume:11</subfield><subfield code="g">year:2021</subfield><subfield code="g">number:1</subfield><subfield code="g">pages:12</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/article/fd0a45a099a5496fb630d34b8763aa4e</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="0"><subfield code="u">https://doi.org/10.1038/s41598-021-92505-4</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="856" ind1="4" ind2="2"><subfield code="u">https://doaj.org/toc/2045-2322</subfield><subfield code="y">Journal toc</subfield><subfield code="z">kostenfrei</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_USEFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">SYSFLAG_A</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_DOAJ</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_11</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_20</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_22</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_23</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_24</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_31</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_39</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_40</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_60</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_62</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_63</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_65</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_69</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_70</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_73</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_95</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_105</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_110</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_151</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_161</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_170</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_171</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_206</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_213</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_230</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_285</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_293</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_370</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_381</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_602</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2005</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2009</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2011</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2014</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2055</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_2111</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4012</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4037</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4112</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4125</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4126</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4249</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4305</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4306</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4307</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4313</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4322</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4323</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4324</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4325</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4335</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4338</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4367</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="912" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">GBV_ILN_4700</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="951" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="a">AR</subfield></datafield><datafield tag="952" ind1=" " ind2=" "><subfield code="d">11</subfield><subfield code="j">2021</subfield><subfield code="e">1</subfield><subfield code="h">12</subfield></datafield></record></collection>
score	7.4021244

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Schreiben Sie uns!

Effect of nonionic and amphoteric surfactants on salivary pellicles reconstituted in vitro

Nicht das Richtige dabei?

Zugang & Verfügbarkeit

Vorhandene Bände

Nicht das Richtige dabei?