Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
Chitosan (CS) grafted poly[(acrylic acid)‐co‐(2‐hydroxyethyl methacrylate)] (CS‐g‐poly(AA‐co‐HEMA)) at different molar ratios of AA and HEMA, and the associated nanocomposite hydrogels of CS‐g‐poly(AA‐co‐HEMA)/mica were synthesized by radical copolymerization. The grafting positions at the amino or hydroxyl groups in the CS were identified by Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy. CS‐g‐poly(AA‐co‐HEMA) hydrogels were intercalated in the mica and the amount of hydrogel insertion did not affect the spacing of the silicate layers in mica. The higher mica loadings produced a rougher surface of the nanocomposite hydrogel. The water absorbency of the CS‐g‐poly(AA‐co‐HEMA)/mica nanocomposite hydrogels decreased with increasing levels of mica loading to a lower level than those of the CS‐g‐poly(AA‐co‐HEMA) hydrogels. Both CS‐g‐poly(AA) and CS‐g‐poly(AA‐co‐HEMA)/mica nanocomposite hydrogels exhibited a higher antiproliferative activity against Staphylococcus aureus than did the neat CS hydrogel with CS‐g‐poly(AA) revealing a very pronounced minimum inhibition concentration (MIC) of 1.56 mg mL−1. The extent of mica loading in the CS‐g‐poly(AA‐co‐HEMA) nanocomposite hydrogels did not affect the MIC (12.5 mg mL−1).
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Noppakundilograt et al. (2012) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: