We examined light-triggered formation/dissociation of complexes between azobenzene-modified polymers (AMPs) and surfactants, and we found that the origin of their response to light clearly differs from that of self-assembling of micelles of photosurfactants. We studied a set of AMPs derived from polyacrylic acids with varying integration levels of azobenzene, mixed with (non-responsive) surfactants (TX 100, SDBS) that are representative of common polymer–surfactant formulae. In dilute solutions, light scattering measurements showed that surfactant–AMP association is reversibly affected by exposure to UV/visible light. Binding isotherms of the azobenzene chromophore (into micelle-like cores) and the surfactants (into AMP chains) were determined by spectrophotometry and capillary electrophoresis, respectively. Three regimes can be distinguished with increasing surfactant concentration: i) absence of binding below the CMC, ii) cooperative binding between CMC and ca. 3 × CMC, with the formation of a hydrophobic cluster containing a significant fraction (50–20 mol%) of bound azobenzene, and iii) anticooperative association in equilibrium with excess free micelles, and formation of hydrophobic clusters containing typically 8–18 mol% azobenzene. Reversible UV-triggered dissociation is achieved over the entire anticooperative regime, irrespective of AMP structure. Both too low (a few mol%) and too high (above 30 mol%) fractions of azobenzene in the mixed micelles appear deleterious to the magnitude of response to light. Altogether, our results indicate that micelle-like clusters containing about 10 mol% photoanchors can easily swing between attachment/detachment upon photo-isomerisation. A model is proposed to interpret the responsiveness of AMPs with low integration levels of azobenzene.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Ruchmann et al. (2008) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 4 closely related papers on similar clinical questions. Consider them for comparative context: