ArticleAnalytical chemistry2020
Particle Size Distributions for Cellulose Nanocrystals Measured by Transmission Electron Microscopy: An Interlaboratory Comparison.
Article in Analytical chemistry, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
15 citing papers in PubMed.
- Nanocellulose as an Active Biointerface: Design Principles for Infection-Adaptive and Regenerative Biomaterials.Small (Weinheim an der Bergstrasse, Germany) · 2026Review
- Boron Nitride Nanotubes Assist the Self-Assembly of Spherical Cholesteric Liquid Crystal Shells of Cellulose Nanocrystals in Water.Langmuir : the ACS journal of surfaces and colloids · 2026Article
- Development of Oleic Acid Composite Vesicles as a Topical Delivery System: An Evaluation of Stability, Skin Permeability, and Antioxidant and Antibacterial Activities.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Effect of nanocellulose content in a polymer-based soil stabilizer on the wind erosion resistance of sandy soil under laboratory conditions.Scientific reports · 2025Article
- Innovative Method for Reliable Measurement of PEM Water Electrolyzer Component Resistances.Small methods · 2025Article
- Nanoscale reference and test materials for the validation of characterization methods for engineered nanomaterials - current state, limitations, and needs.Analytical and bioanalytical chemistry · 2025Review
- Dimensions of Cellulose Nanocrystals from Cotton and Bacterial Cellulose: Comparison of Microscopy and Scattering Techniques.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Structural Color from Cellulose Nanocrystals or Chitin Nanocrystals: Self-Assembly, Optics, and Applications.Chemical reviews · 2023Review
- Metrological Protocols for Reaching Reliable and SI-Traceable Size Results for Multi-Modal and Complexly Shaped Reference Nanoparticles.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Single-molecular insights into the breakpoint of cellulose nanofibers assembly during saccharification.Nature communications · 2023Article
- Review of Bacterial Nanocellulose-Based Electrochemical Biosensors: Functionalization, Challenges, and Future Perspectives.Biosensors · 2023Review
- Calculating small-angle scattering intensity functions from electron-microscopy images.RSC advances · 2022Article
- Major Factors Influencing the Size Distribution Analysis of Cellulose Nanocrystals Imaged in Transmission Electron Microscopy.Polymers · 2021Article
- Benchmarking the ACEnano Toolbox for Characterisation of Nanoparticle Size and Concentration by Interlaboratory Comparisons.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2021Article
- Workflow towards automated segmentation of agglomerated, non-spherical particles from electron microscopy images using artificial neural networks.Scientific reports · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
22 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Particle size is a key parameter that must be measured to ensure reproducible production of cellulose nanocrystals (CNCs) and to achieve reliable performance metrics for specific CNC applications. Nevertheless, size measurements for CNCs are challenging due to their broad size distribution, irregular rod-shaped particles, and propensity to aggregate and agglomerate. We report an interlaboratory comparison (ILC) that tests transmission electron microscopy (TEM) protocols for image acquisition and analysis. Samples of CNCs were prepared on TEM grids in a single laboratory, and detailed data acquisition and analysis protocols were provided to participants. CNCs were imaged and the size of individual particles was analyzed in 10 participating laboratories that represent a cross section of academic, industrial, and government laboratories with varying levels of experience with imaging CNCs. The data for each laboratory were fit to a skew normal distribution that accommodates the variability in central location and distribution width and asymmetries for the various datasets. Consensus values were obtained by modeling the variation between laboratories using a skew normal distribution. This approach gave consensus distributions with values for mean, standard deviation, and shape factor of 95.8, 38.2, and 6.3 nm for length and 7.7, 2.2, and 2.9 nm for width, respectively. Comparison of the degree of overlap between distributions for individual laboratories indicates that differences in imaging resolution contribute to the variation in measured widths. We conclude that the selection of individual CNCs for analysis and the variability in CNC agglomeration and staining are the main factors that lead to variations in measured length and width between laboratories.
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.