Journal of Chemical Physics
Feedback | Help | Exit
The Journal of Chemical Physics
Search:
   
 
 
 
Previous Article
Diffusion behavior in a liquid-liquid interfacial crystallization by molecular dynamics simulations
Interfacial crystallization, such as surface crystallization in solution (solid-liquid) and liquid-liquid crystallization, gives us an asymmetric reaction field and is a technique for morphology contr...
Next Article
Hard repulsive barrier in hot adatom motion during dissociative adsorption of oxygen on Ag(100)
Random pairing simulation and low temperature scanning tunneling microscopy (STM) are used to investigate the detailed O2 dissociative adsorption processes at 200 K for various coverages. The distribu...

Do the interfacial fluidities of cationic reverse micelles enhance with an increase in the water content?

J. Chem. Phys. 131, 174708 (2009); doi:10.1063/1.3257964

Published 6 November 2009

You are not logged in to this journal. Log in

K. S. Mali and G. B. Dutt
Radiation and Photochemistry Division, Bhabha Atomic Research Centre, Trombay, Mumbai 400 085, India
The role of cosurfactant and water on the interfacial fluidities of reverse micelles formed with the cationic surfactant, cetyltrimethylammonium bromide (CTAB) has been examined by measuring the fluorescence anisotropies of two structurally similar ionic solutes, rhodamine 110 and fluorescein. For this purpose, reverse micellar systems with (CTAB/1-pentanol/cyclohexane/water) and without a cosurfactant (CTAB/chloroform–isooctane/water) have been chosen. In this study, the mole ratio of water to surfactant W has been varied in the region of 4–25. Experimental results indicate that the average reorientation time of the probe, which is a measure of the fluidity near the interfacial region, decreases by a factor of 1.5 and 1.4 for rhodamine 110 and fluorescein, respectively, as W goes up from 5 to 25 in CTAB/1-pentanol/cyclohexane/water reverse micellar system. In contrast, the average reorientation time, remains invariant for both the probe molecules in CTAB/chloroform–isooctane/water reverse micellar system despite an increase in W from 4 to 24. In case of CTAB/1-pentanol/cyclohexane/water reverse micellar system, the added water binds to bromide counter ions and also the hydroxyl groups of the cosurfactant, 1-pentanol, which results in an increase in the effective head group area. Such an increase in the effective head group area leads to a decrease in the packing parameter, and hence an increase in the interfacial fluidity. On the other hand, in CTAB/chloroform–isooctane/water system, the added water merely hydrates the bromide ions, thereby leaving the effective head group area unchanged. Thus, the interfacial fluidities remain invariant upon the addition of water in the absence of a cosurfactant. ©2009 American Institute of Physics
History: Received 24 July 2009; accepted 11 October 2009; published 6 November 2009
Permalink: http://link.aip.org/link/?JCPSA6/131/174708/1
BUY THIS ARTICLE   (US$24)
Download HTML Download Sectioned HTML Download PDF (462 kB) View Cart

KEYWORDS and PACS

Keywords
PACS

PUBLICATION DATA

ISSN:
0021-9606 (print)   1089-7690 (online)
Publisher:
AIP is a member of CrossRef AIP

REFERENCES (56)
View in Separate Window/Tab
For access to fully linked references, you need to log in. For access to fully linked references, you need to Log in.
  1. S. Park, D. Moilanen, and M. D. Fayer, J. Phys. Chem. B 112, 5279 (2008).
  2. H. -S. Tan, I. R. Piletic, R. E. Riter, N. E. Levinger, and M. D. Fayer, Phys. Rev. Lett. 94, 057405 (2005).
  3. I. R. Piletic, D. E. Moilanen, D. B. Spry, N. E. Levinger, and M. D. Fayer, J. Phys. Chem. A 110, 4985 (2006).
  4. D. E. Moilanen, N. E. Levinger, D. B. Spry, and M. D. Fayer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 129, 14311 (2007).
  5. A. M. Dokter, S. Woutersen, and H. J. Bakker, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 103, 15355 (2006).
  6. A. M. Dokter, S. Woutersen, and H. J. Bakker, J. Chem. Phys. 126, 124507 (2007).
  7. D. M. Willard, R. E. Riter, and N. E. Levinger, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 120, 4151 (1998).
  8. R. E. Riter, E. P. Undiks, and N. E. Levinger, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 120, 6062 (1998).
  9. R. E. Riter, D. M. Willard, and N. E. Levinger, J. Phys. Chem. B 102, 2705 (1998).
  10. E. M. Corbeil and N. E. Levinger, Langmuir 19, 7264 (2003).
  11. N. M. Correa and N. E. Levinger, J. Phys. Chem. B 110, 13050 (2006).
  12. P. Hazra, D. Chakrabarty, A. Chakrabarty, and N. Sarkar, Chem. Phys. Lett. 71, 382 (2003).
  13. R. K. Mitra, S. S. Sinha, and S. K. Pal, Langmuir 24, 49 (2008).
  14. A. J. W. G. Visser, K. Vos, A. V. Hoek, and J. S. Santems, J. Phys. Chem. 92, 759 (1988).
  15. M. Hasegawa, T. Sugimura, Y. Suzaki, Y. Shindo, and A. Kitahara, J. Phys. Chem. 98, 2120 (1994).
  16. N. Wittouck, R. M. Negri, M. Ameloot, and F. C. De Schryver, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 116, 10601 (1994).
  17. C. A. T. Laia and S. M. B. Costa, Langmuir 18, 1494 (2002).
  18. G. B. Dutt, J. Phys. Chem. B 108, 805 (2004).
  19. G. B. Dutt, J. Phys. Chem. B 108, 7944 (2004).
  20. D. B. Spry, A. Goun, K. Glusac, D. E. Moilanen, and M. D. Fayer, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 129, 8122 (2007).
  21. G. B. Dutt, J. Phys. Chem. B 112, 7220 (2008).
  22. G. B. Dutt, J. Chem. Phys. 129, 014501 (2008).
  23. N. E. Levinger, Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 5, 118 (2000).
  24. N. Nandi, K. Bhattacharyya, and B. Bagchi, Chem. Rev. 100, 2013 (2000).
  25. K. Bhattacharyya, Acc. Chem. Res. 36, 95 (2003).
  26. S. K. Pal and A. H. Zewail, Chem. Rev. 104, 2099 (2004).
  27. J. N. Israelachvili, D. J. Mitchell, and B. W. Nimham, J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2 72, 1525 (1976).
  28. D. J. Mitchell and B. W. Nimham, J. Chem. Soc., Faraday Trans. 2 77, 601 (1981).
  29. E. Rodenas and E. Perez-Benito, J. Phys. Chem. 95, 4552 (1991).
  30. S. S. Atik and J. K. Thomas, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 103, 4367 (1981).
  31. M. Giustini, G. Palazzo, G. Colafemmina, M. D. Monica, M. Giomini, and A. Ceglie, J. Phys. Chem. 100, 3190 (1996).
  32. P. K. Das, A. Chaudhuri, S. Saha, and A. Samanta, Langmuir 15, 4765 (1999).
  33. J. Lang, G. Mascolo, R. Zana, and P. Luisi, J. Phys. Chem. 94, 3069 (1990).
  34. D. V. O'Connor and D. Phillips, Time-Correlated Single Photon Counting (Academic, London, 1984).
  35. G. B. Dutt, V. J. P. Srivatsavoy, and A. V. Sapre, J. Chem. Phys. 111, 9705 (1999).
  36. A. J. Cross and G. R. Fleming, Biophys. J. 46, 45 (1984).
  37. J. R. Knutson, J. M. Beechem, and L. Brand, Chem. Phys. Lett. 102, 501 (1983).
  38. G. B. Dutt, J. Phys. Chem. B 106, 7398 (2002).
  39. J. M. Alvarez-Pez, L. Ballesteros, E. Talavera, and J. Yguerabide, J. Phys. Chem. A 105, 6320 (2001).
  40. J. R. Lackowicz, Principles of Fluorescence Spectroscopy, 3rd ed. (Springer, Singapore, 2006).
  41. H. Cang, D. D. Brace, and M. D. Fayer, J. Phys. Chem. B 105, 10007 (2001).
  42. M. Kumbhakar, S. Nath, H. Pal, A. V. Sapre, and T. Mukherjee, J. Chem. Phys. 119, 388 (2003).
  43. G. B. Dutt, Langmuir 21, 10391 (2005).
  44. J. Kinosita, Jr., S. Kawato, and A. Ikegami, Biophys. J. 20, 289 (1977).
  45. G. Lipari and A. Szabo, Biophys. J. 30, 489 (1980).
  46. G. Lipari and A. Szabo, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 104, 4546 (1982).
  47. C. C. Wang and R. Pecora, J. Chem. Phys. 72, 5333 (1980).
  48. E. L. Quitevis, A. H. Marcus, and M. D. Fayer, J. Phys. Chem. 97, 5762 (1993).
  49. N. C. Maiti, M. M. G. Krishna, P. J. Britto, and N. Periasamy, J. Phys. Chem. B 101, 11051 (1997).
  50. S. Sen, D. Sukul, P. Dutta, and K. Bhattacharyya, J. Phys. Chem. A 105, 7495 (2001).
  51. L. Kelepouris and G. J. Blanchard, J. Phys. Chem. B 107, 1079 (2003).
  52. T. J. V. Prazeres, A. Fedorov, and J. M. G. Martinho, J. Phys. Chem. B 108, 9032 (2004).
  53. G. B. Dutt, J. Phys. Chem. B 109, 4923 (2005).
  54. K. S. Mali, G. B. Dutt, and T. Mukherjee, J. Phys. Chem. B 111, 5878 (2007).
  55. A. Maitra, J. Phys. Chem. 88, 5122 (1984).
  56. T. K. Jain, M. Varshney, and A. Maitra, J. Phys. Chem. 93, 7409 (1989).

CITING ARTICLES
For access to citing articles, you need to log in.
For access to citing articles, you need to Log in.


Copyright © American Institute of Physics