These tools will no longer be maintained as of December 31, 2024. Archived website can be found here. PubMed4Hh GitHub repository can be found here. Contact NLM Customer Service if you have questions.


BIOMARKERS

Molecular Biopsy of Human Tumors

- a resource for Precision Medicine *

244 related articles for article (PubMed ID: 31103863)

  • 1. Transport potential of super-hydrophobic organic contaminants in anionic-nonionic surfactant mixture micelles.
    Schacht VJ; Grant SC; Haftka JJ; Gaus C; Hawker DW
    Chemosphere; 2019 Sep; 230():173-181. PubMed ID: 31103863
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 2. Solubility enhancement of dioxins and PCBs by surfactant monomers and micelles quantified with polymer depletion techniques.
    Schacht VJ; Grant SC; Escher BI; Hawker DW; Gaus C
    Chemosphere; 2016 Jun; 152():99-106. PubMed ID: 26966808
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 3. Simultaneous quantification of humic acid-water and silanized glass-water partition constants for PCBs, PCDDs and OCDF.
    Schacht VJ; Manning M; Grant SC; Gaus C; Hawker DW
    Chemosphere; 2020 Mar; 243():125338. PubMed ID: 31783185
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 4. Micellar partitioning and its effects on Henry's law constants of chlorinated solvents in anionic and nonionic surfactant solutions.
    Zhang C; Zheng G; Nichols CM
    Environ Sci Technol; 2006 Jan; 40(1):208-14. PubMed ID: 16433353
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 5. Experimental Solubility Approach to Determine PDMS-Water Partition Constants and PDMS Activity Coefficients.
    Grant S; Schacht VJ; Escher BI; Hawker DW; Gaus C
    Environ Sci Technol; 2016 Mar; 50(6):3047-54. PubMed ID: 26881312
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 6. Monte Carlo simulation of binary surfactant/contaminant/water systems.
    Khodadadi Z; Mousavi-Khoshdel SM; Gharibi H; Hashemianzadeh SM; Javadian S
    J Mol Graph Model; 2012 Jun; 36():20-9. PubMed ID: 22503859
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 7. Quantifying the hydrophobic effect. 2. A computer simulation-molecular-thermodynamic model for the micellization of nonionic surfactants in aqueous solution.
    Stephenson BC; Goldsipe A; Beers KJ; Blankschtein D
    J Phys Chem B; 2007 Feb; 111(5):1045-62. PubMed ID: 17266258
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 8. Solubilization of pyrene by anionic-nonionic mixed surfactants.
    Zhou W; Zhu L
    J Hazard Mater; 2004 Jun; 109(1-3):213-20. PubMed ID: 15177761
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 9. Surface Adsorption and Micelle Formation of Polyoxyethylene-type Nonionic Surfactants in Mixtures of Water and Hydrophilic Imidazolium-type Ionic Liquid.
    Misono T; Okada K; Sakai K; Abe M; Sakai H
    J Oleo Sci; 2016 Jun; 65(6):499-506. PubMed ID: 27181249
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 10. Nonionic and anionic surfactant-washing of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons in estuarine sediments around an industrial harbor in southern Taiwan.
    Shih YJ; Wu PC; Chen CW; Chen CF; Dong CD
    Chemosphere; 2020 Oct; 256():127044. PubMed ID: 32428741
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 11. Ecotoxicity and micellization behavior of anionic surfactant sodium dodecylbenzene sulfonate (SDBS) and its mixtures with nonionic surfactant fatty alcohol-polyoxyethylene ether (AEO).
    Han W; Tan J; Peng L; Liu L; Zhou X; Zhang W; Shi B
    Aquat Toxicol; 2019 Nov; 216():105313. PubMed ID: 31568897
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 12. Effects of linear alkylbenzene sulfonate on the sorption of Brij 30 and Brij 35 onto aquifer sand.
    Tripathi S; Brown DG
    Environ Sci Technol; 2008 Mar; 42(5):1492-8. PubMed ID: 18441793
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 13. Ion-association extraction of nitrophenolate ions with tetrabutylammonium ion into nonionic surfactant micelle.
    Takayanagi T; Motomizu S
    J Chromatogr A; 2006 Nov; 1133(1-2):353-60. PubMed ID: 16938302
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 14. Critical micelle concentration values for different surfactants measured with solid-phase microextraction fibers.
    Haftka JJ; Scherpenisse P; Oetter G; Hodges G; Eadsforth CV; Kotthoff M; Hermens JL
    Environ Toxicol Chem; 2016 Sep; 35(9):2173-81. PubMed ID: 26873883
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 15. Solubilization capabilities of mixtures of cationic Gemini surfactant with conventional cationic, nonionic and anionic surfactants towards polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons.
    Kabir-ud-Din ; Shafi M; Bhat PA; Dar AA
    J Hazard Mater; 2009 Aug; 167(1-3):575-81. PubMed ID: 19232468
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 16. The effect of surfactants on the distribution of organic compounds in the soil solid/water system.
    Lee JF; Hsu MH; Chao HP; Huang HC; Wang SP
    J Hazard Mater; 2004 Oct; 114(1-3):123-30. PubMed ID: 15511582
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 17. Capillary electrophoresis investigation on equilibrium between polymer-related and surfactant-related species in aqueous polymer-surfactant solutions.
    Wu Y; Chen M; Fang Y; Zhu M
    J Chromatogr A; 2017 Mar; 1489():134-142. PubMed ID: 28189259
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 18. Competitive solubilization of naphthalene and pyrene in various micellar systems.
    Masrat R; Maswal M; Dar AA
    J Hazard Mater; 2013 Jan; 244-245():662-70. PubMed ID: 23183342
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 19. Facilitated transport of dioxins in soil following unintentional release of pesticide-surfactant formulations.
    Grant S; Mortimer M; Stevenson G; Malcolm D; Gaus C
    Environ Sci Technol; 2011 Jan; 45(2):406-11. PubMed ID: 21142060
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

  • 20. Surfactant-soil interactions during surfactant-amended remediation of contaminated soils by hydrophobic organic compounds: a review.
    Laha S; Tansel B; Ussawarujikulchai A
    J Environ Manage; 2009 Jan; 90(1):95-100. PubMed ID: 18838206
    [TBL] [Abstract][Full Text] [Related]  

    [Next]    [New Search]
    of 13.