Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31737155›Full record

ArticleBiomicrofluidics2019

Electrostatic solvation and mobility in uniform and non-uniform electric fields: From simple ions to proteins.

Dmitry V Matyushov

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Biomicrofluidics, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 10 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
10citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

10 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Microdroplets can act as electrochemical cells.The Journal of chemical physics · 2022
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Absolute ion hydration free energy scale and the surface potential of water via quantum simulation.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2020
    Article
  8. Dielectrophoresis of proteins: experimental data and evolving theory.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2020
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

1 author.

Dmitry V MatyushovDepartment of Physics and School of Molecular Sciences, Arizona State University, PO Box 871504, Tempe, Arizona 85287-1504, USA.ORCID 0000-0002-9352-764X

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

A number of observations related to interfacial electrostatics of polar liquids question the traditional assumption of dielectric theories that bulk dielectric properties can be continuously extended to the dividing surface separating the solute from the solvent. The deficiency of this approximation can be remedied by introducing local interface susceptibilities and the interface dielectric constant. Asymmetries of ionic hydration thermodynamics and of the mobility between cations and anions can be related to different propensities of the water molecules to orient their dipole toward and outward from solutes of opposite charges. This electrostatic asymmetry is reflected in different interface dielectric constants for cations and anions. The interface of water with neutral solutes is spontaneously polarized due to preferential water orientations in the interface. This phenomenon is responsible for a nonzero cavity potential directly related to a nonzero surface charge. This connection predicts that particles allowing a nonzero cavity potential must show mobility in an external electric field even if the net charge of the particle is zero. The theory predicts that a positive cavity potential and a positive surface charge translate to an effectively negative solute charge reported by mobility measurements. Passing of the cavity potential through a minimum found in simulations might be the origin of the maximum of mobility vs the ionic size observed experimentally. Finally, mobility of proteins in the field gradient (dielectrophoresis) is many orders of magnitude greater than predicted by the traditionally used Clausius-Mossotti equation. Two reasons contribute to this disagreement: (i) a failure of Maxwell's electrostatics to describe the cavity-field susceptibility and (ii) the neglect of the protein permanent dipole by the Clausius-Mossotti equation. An analytical relation between the dielectrophoretic susceptibility and dielectric spectroscopy of solutions provides direct access to this parameter, confirming the failure of the Clausius-Mossotti equation in application to protein dielectrophresis.

Identifiers

PMID31737155
PMCPMC6837943

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.