Investigating interfacial interactions highlights how polysaccharides impact selenium nanoparticles in food, implying tailored stabilizer selection can enhance shelf life.
The rational selection of stabilizers for selenium nanoparticles (SeNPs) is hindered by a lack of mechanistic understanding. Accordingly, this study investigated the deeper polysaccharide-based stabilization mechanism by comparing the effects of linear pullulan polysaccharide (PP), branched amylopectin starch (AS), and network-soluble β-cyclodextrin polymer (SP) on the growth of SeNPs. Growth kinetics showed that bare-SeNPs and SP-SeNPs followed a reaction-limited growth pathway, yielding larger particles due to weak diffusion restriction. In contrast, PP and AS induced a diffusion-limited growth regime, effectively inhibiting Se nucleus diffusion and collision, thus forming small, uniform SeNPs. FT-IR, XPS, TGA and ITC confirmed the interaction strength between the three polysaccharides and SeNPs was AS > PP > SP, correlating with their stabilization capability. AS-SeNPs displayed the smallest size and the highest stability, maintaining high stability even under low-pH and alcohol conditions, likely due to steric hindrance. It is predicted that the shelf life of selenium-enriched Huangjiu supplemented with AS-SeNPs could reach two years. In summary, polysaccharides govern SeNPs growth primarily by restricting nucleus diffusion, supported by interfacial interactions. Steric-hindrance-based stabilizers, such as AS, are particularly suitable for complex food systems, providing a theoretical basis for rational stabilizer selection in selenium-enriched foods. • Stabilizing effect on selenium nanoparticles (SeNPs) varies significantly with polysaccharide structure. • Polysaccharides inhibit the growth of SeNPs by restricting the diffusion of selenium nuclei. • Interaction force between polysaccharide and SeNPs ensures their stabilizing effect on SeNPs. • Steric hindrance stabilization mechanism is well-suited for stabilizing SeNPs in food matrices.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Dong et al. (2026) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: