The DOI matches its Crossref record; 3 of the 3 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Antimicrobial Properties of Graphene Oxide Nanosheets: Why Size Matters
Abstract
Graphene oxide (GO) is a promising material for the development of antimicrobial surfaces due to its contact-based antimicrobial activity. However, the relationship between GO physicochemical properties and its antimicrobial activity has yet to be elucidated. In this study, we investigated the size-dependency of GO antimicrobial activity using the Gram-negative bacteria Escherichia coli. GO suspensions of average sheet area ranging from 0.01 to 0.65 μm(2) were produced and their antimicrobial activity evaluated in cell suspensions or as a model GO surface coating. The antimicrobial activity of GO surface coatings increased 4-fold when GO sheet area decreased from 0.65 to 0.01 μm(2). The higher antimicrobial effect of smaller GO sheets is attributed to oxidative mechanisms associated with the higher defect density of smaller sheets. In contrast, in suspension assays, GO interacted with bacteria in a cell entrapment mechanism; in this case, the antimicrobial effect of GO increased with increasing sheet area, with apparent complete inactivation observed for the 0.65 μm(2) sheets after a 3 h exposure. However, cell inactivation by GO entrapment was reversible and all initially viable cells could be recovered when separated from GO sheets by sonication. These findings provide useful guidelines for future development of graphene-based antimicrobial surface coatings, where smaller sheet sizes can increase the antimicrobial activity of the material. Our study further emphasizes the importance of an accurate assessment of the antimicrobial effect of nanomaterials when used for antimicrobial surface design.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Electric Field Effect in Atomically Thin Carbon Films
Novoselov, K. S., Geim, A. K., Morozov, S. V., Jiang, D., Zhang, Y., Dubonos, S. V., Grigorieva, I. V., & Firsov, A. A. (2004) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.1102896 · Cited by 66,834
Geim, A. K., & Novoselov, K. S. (2007) · Nature Materials · doi:10.1038/nmat1849 · Cited by 39,979
The chemistry of graphene oxide
Dreyer, D. R., Park, S., Bielawski, C. W., & Ruoff, R. S. (2010) · Chem. Soc. Rev. · doi:10.1039/b917103g · Cited by 11,653
Cited by
Antibacterial Activity of Ti3C2Tx MXene
Rasool, K., Helal, M., Ali, A., Ren, C. E., Gogotsi, Y., & Mahmoud, K. A. (2016) · ACS Nano · doi:10.1021/acsnano.6b00181 · Cited by 1,449
Antifouling membranes for sustainable water purification: strategies and mechanisms
Zhang, R., Liu, Y., He, M., Su, Y., Zhao, X., Elimelech, M., & Jiang, Z. (2016) · Chemical Society Reviews · doi:10.1039/c5cs00579e · Cited by 1,365
Self-citationFouling in membrane bioreactors: An updated review
Meng, F., Zhang, S., Oh, Y., Zhou, Z., Shin, H.-S., & Chae, S.-R. (2017) · Water Research · doi:10.1016/j.watres.2017.02.006 · Cited by 1,078
Mechanisms of the Antimicrobial Activities of Graphene Materials
Zou, X., Zhang, L., Wang, Z., & Luo, Y. (2016) · Journal of the American Chemical Society · doi:10.1021/jacs.5b11411 · Cited by 934
Antimicrobial Activity of Metal and Metal‐Oxide Based Nanoparticles
Gold, K., Slay, B., Knackstedt, M., & Gaharwar, A. K. (2018) · Advanced Therapeutics · doi:10.1002/adtp.201700033 · Cited by 758
Metadata
- Authors
- Perreault, F., de Faria, A. F., Nejati, S., & Elimelech, M.
- Venue
- ACS Nano
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2015-06-25
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 7
- Pages
- 7226-7236
- ISSN
- 1936-0851 (ISSN-L)
- 1936-086X
- OpenAlex
- W1141969290
- Cited by
- 972
- References
- 3
- FWCI
- 39.00
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.