Table 1. Description of the Various SPIONs in DI Water.
| sample/size (nm) | functional group | TEM Size (nm) | DH(nm)a | PDIb | ⟨DH⟩ (nm)c | ζ potential (mV)d | nickname |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| no coatinge | OH | 5 ± 0.5 | bare | ||||
| single dextran coated | COOH | 15.2 ± 1.2 | 39.7 ± 0.1 | 0.169 | 48.6 ± 0.6 | –21.4 ± 0.4 | S-negative |
| plain | 74.0 ± 1.0 | 0.209 | 87.6 ± 4.5 | –9.1 ± 0.7 | S-plain | ||
| NH2 | 105.1 ± 6.2 | 0.248 | 92.0 ± 2.5 | +19.3 ± 0.5 | S-positive | ||
| double dextran coated | COOH | f | 64.6 ± 1.3 | 0.24 | 74.2 ± 4.0 | –17.8 ± 0.3 | L-negative |
| plain | 78.6 ± 0.81 | 0.223 | 93.8 ± 5.4 | –6.2 ± 0.9 | L-plain | ||
| NH2 | 179.5 ± 3.02 | 0.24 | 225.7 ± 11.2 | +9.3 ± 1.1 | L-positive |
z-Average hydrodynamic diameter extracted by cumulant analysis of the data from DLS measurements (see Figure S1).
Polydispersity index.
Average hydrodynamic diameter determined from CONTIN size distribution (see Figure S2).
Zeta potential measurements were determined in low ionic strength solutions to ensure electrophoretic mobility.
Confirmed by TEM images (see Figure 2).
Difficult to determine since the dextran layer is weakly scattering and there may be some agglomeration of particles during drying.