CONCENTRATIVE PROPERTIES OF AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS DENSITY,REFRACTIVE INDEX,FREEZING POINT DEPRESSION,AND

合集下载

Properties of Pure Substances

1
M. Bahrami ENSC 388 (F09) Properties of Pure Substances
3. Sub‐cooled or compressed liquid (means it is not about to vaporize) 4. Wet vapor or saturated liquid‐vapor mixture, the temperature will stop rising until the liquid is completely vaporized. 5. Superheated vapor (a vapor that is not about to condense).
Phase‐Change Processes of Pure Substances
Consider a process where a pure substance starts as a solid and is heated up at constant pressure until it all becomes gas. Depending on the prevailing pressure, the matter will pass through various phase transformations. At P0: 1. Solid 2. Mixed phase of liquid and solid
Phases of a Pure Substance
A pure substance may exist in different phases. There are three principal phases solid, liquid, and gas. A phase: is defined as having a distinct molecular arrangement that is homogenous throughout and separated from others (if any) by easily identifiable boundary surfaces. A substance may have several phases within a principal phase, each with a different molecular structure. For example, carbon may exist as graphite or diamond in the solid phase, and ice may exist in seven different phases at high pressure. Molecular bonds are the strongest in solids and the weakest in gases. Solid: the molecules are arranged in a three‐dimensional pattern (lattice) throughout the solid. The molecules cannot move relative to each other; however, they continually oscillate about their equilibrium position. Liquid: the molecular spacing in liquid phase is not much different from that of the solid phase (generally slightly higher), except the molecules are no longer at fixed positions relative to each other. Gas: the molecules are far apart from each other, and a molecular order does not exist. Gas molecules move randomly, and continually collide with each other and the walls of the container they are in. Molecules in the gas phase are at a considerably higher energy level than they are in liquids or solid phases.

360教育集团托福考试中常用的名词词汇详解

文章中小编针对托福考试常用名词词汇进行了详细的解析，为了能够帮助大家更好的了解这方面信息，具体的相关详情，为大家解析如下，希望能够给大家的考试带来些许帮助。

abyss hole so deep as to appear bottomlessacquiesce agree, accept without protestaffable polite and friendly, easy to talk toaffliction distress, sufferingaffluent wealthy, abundantagitate move, shake, stir upambiguousshavingsmore then one meaningannex take possession ofaqueous of or like waterarduous demanding great effort, strenuousaroma quality or surrounding atmosphere considered typicalatone make repaymentavarice greedbellicose inclined to fightingcalisthenics exercises to develop strong bodiescaptor person who takes smb captiveconcoct invent, prepare by mixing togetherdangle hand or swing looselydeprive take away from, prevent from usingdiligent hard-workingdisrobe undressdocile easily trained or controlleddoleful dismal, mourfuldrought a long period of dry weatherdubious feeling doubtdumbfound astonishefface rub or wipe out, obliterateelucidate to make understandableenchant charm, delightendeavor to make an effort, to try very hard endorse approve, support a claim or statement enthral take the whole attention, enslave exploit to use for selfish advantage or profit extensive far-reachingextol to praise highlyflimsy lacking solidarity, strengthfraud a fault, a deceptiongaudy too bright and showyghastly death-like, pale and illgrumble to complainharass worry, troubleheretic very busy; activeimpediment smth that hinders (esp in speech) indigenous nativeinsatiate never satisfiedintrepid fearlessirate angryjeopardy dangerleash controlloafer an idle, lazy personlucrative profitablelustrous bright; shiningmalign to slandermeddle to interfere, to intrudemend to repairmirth being merry and happynausea feeling of sicknessneglect pay no attention tonocturnal of or in the nightobese very fatobsolete no longer useful, outdatedperch take up a high positionpervade spread through every part ofpetulant unreasonably impatient or irritable pillage plunder (esp in war)presumptuous too bold or self-confident quashed annuledquenching satisfy, put an end to, put out refurbished make clean, as if like new rejoicing happiness, joyreticent in the habit of saying little reverberate be sent back, again and againrigor sternness, strictness, severe conditions rotundity state of being roundsalvage the saving of property from loss scattered not situated togethershatter to breaksintosmany piecesshunned avoided, kept away fromsketchy shortly, roughly, quicklysporadic happening from time to timestifled suppressed, kept backstrive to make great efforts, to struggle subsequent followingsuccumb yield, dietaciturn unspoken, silenttantalize raise hopes that cannot be realized tentative uncertain, probabletorpid dull and slowtreacherous not to be trusted, perfidious tremor thrilltyro a beginneruproar noise and excitementvanity a foolish pridevehemence forcefulness; intensity; conviction vigilance watchfulnessvindicate prove the truthvoluptuous arousing sensual pleasureswan looking ill, not brightwile a trickwrinkle make small lines (eg forehead)abyss hole so deep as to appear bottomless acquiesce agree, accept without protest affable polite and friendly, easy to talk toaffliction distress, sufferingaffluent wealthy, abundantagitate move, shake, stir upambiguousshavingsmore then one meaningannex take possession ofaqueous of or like waterarduous demanding great effort, strenuousaroma quality or surrounding atmosphere considered typicalatone make repaymentavarice greedbellicose inclined to fightingcalisthenics exercises to develop strong bodiescaptor person who takes smb captiveconcoct invent, prepare by mixing togetherdangle hand or swing looselydeprive take away from, prevent from usingdiligent hard-workingdisrobe undressdocile easily trained or controlled以上就是关于托福考试常用名词词汇的详细说明，有兴趣的考生可以通过查阅相关网站进行更详细的了解。

03溶液中的离子平衡

D. Relative strength of conjugate acid-base pairs
* If an acid is strong, its conjugate base has no measurable strength.
HCl(aq) + H2O (l) Cl-(aq) + H3O+ (aq) * H3O+ is the strongest acid that can exist in aqueous solution. HF (aq) + H2O (l) H3O+ (aq) + F- (aq)
Acid: A substance that accepts electron pair. Base: A substance that donates electron pair.
* Hard and soft acid and base theory
Acid: Hard, soft, borderline Base: Hard, soft, borderline
conjugate acid1 OH-
conjugate base2
Conjugate acid-base pair
3.1.1 Brø nsted acids and bases (ii)
* In non-aqueous solution
NH3 CO32+ + NH3 H2O NH4+ HCO3+ NH2+ OH-
Some salts displays acidity and alkalinity.
Development in concepts of acid and base (iv)

chemical reviews 纳滤

CONTENTS
1. Introduction 2. Membranes and Membrane Characterization 2.1. Membrane Functional Characterization 2.2. Membrane Materials and Preparation 2.3. Polymeric Membranes 2.3.1. Integrally Skinned Asymmetric (ISA) Membranes 2.3.2. Thin Film Composite (TFC) Membranes 2.4. Mixed Matrix Membranes (MMM) 2.4.1. Research Work on ISA Mixed Matrix Membranes for OSN 2.4.2. Research Work on TFC Mixed Matrix Membranes for OSN 2.5. Ceramic Membranes 2.5.1. Research Work on Ceramic Membranes for OSN 2.6. Commercial OSN Membranes 2.6.1. Commercial Polymeric Membranes 2.6.2. Commercial Ceramic Membranes 2.7. Summary of Membrane Performance 2.8. Membrane Physicochemical and Structural Characterization 2.8.1. Physicochemical Characterization 2.8.2. Microscopy 2.8.3. Positron Annihilation Spectroscopy 2.9. Membrane Conﬁgurations and Modules 2.10. Future Perspectives 3. Transport Models and Process Design 3.1. Classiﬁcation of Membrane-Scale Transport Models 3.1.1. Irreversible Thermodynamics Models 3.1.2. Models Based on Concentration and Pressure Gradients in the Membrane 3.1.3. Solution-Diﬀusion Models

天然低共熔溶剂提取黄酮类化合物的研究进展

于德涵，黎莉，苏适. 天然低共熔溶剂提取黄酮类化合物的研究进展[J]. 食品工业科技，2023，44（24）：367−375. doi:10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023020204YU Dehan, LI Li, SU Shi. Research Progress on Extraction of Flavonoids Using Natural Deep Eutectic Solvents[J]. Science and Technology of Food Industry, 2023, 44(24): 367−375. (in Chinese with English abstract). doi: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023020204· 专题综述 ·天然低共熔溶剂提取黄酮类化合物的研究进展于德涵*，黎　莉，苏　适（绥化学院食品与制药工程学院，黑龙江绥化 152061）摘　要：天然低共熔溶剂是一种新型绿色溶剂，有望替代传统有机溶剂实现对黄酮等天然产物的高效提取。

为了阐明天然低共熔溶剂在黄酮化合物萃取方面的应用，本文对近5年发表的相关研究论文进行了整理和分析，综述了天然低共熔溶剂提取黄酮的研究现状，并详细讨论了影响提取率的各种因素。

天然低共熔溶剂在黄酮、黄酮醇、二氢黄酮、花色素、异黄酮等多类天然黄酮产物的提取方面表现良好，其萃取率普遍优于甲醇、乙醇等传统溶剂，且萃取产物活性更高；低共熔溶剂的组成、摩尔比、含水量和温度等条件会显著影响其对黄酮化合物的萃取。

文章还对天然低共熔溶剂在未来的发展趋势作出展望，希望能为黄酮化合物的高效、绿色提取提供有益参考。

关键词：低共熔溶剂，黄酮类化合物，绿色溶剂，提取本文网刊: 中图分类号：TQ28、TS201 文献标识码：A 文章编号：1002−0306（2023）24−0367−09DOI: 10.13386/j.issn1002-0306.2023020204Research Progress on Extraction of Flavonoids Using Natural DeepEutectic SolventsYU Dehan *，LI Li ，SU Shi（Food and Pharmaceutical Engineering Department, Suihua University, Suihua 152061, China ）Abstract ：The natural deep eutectic solvent is a new type of green solvent that is expected to replace traditional organic solv-ents for efficient extraction of natural products such as flavonoids. In order to clarify the application of natural deep eutectic solvents in the extraction of flavonoids, the author summarizes and analyzes relevant research papers published in the past 5years. This article provides a review of the current research status of natural deep eutectic solvents for extracting flavonoids,and discuss in detail the various factors that affect the extraction rate. The natural deep eutectic solvents perform well in the extraction of various natural flavonoid products such as flavonoids, flavonols, flavonones, anthocyans, and isoflavones.Their extraction rates are generally better than traditional solvents such as methanol and ethanol, and the extracted products have higher activity. The composition, molar ratio, water content, and temperature of deep eutectic solvents signi-ficantly affect their extraction of flavonoids. Finally, the development trend of natural eutectic solvents in the future is prospected. This paper aims to provide reference for the efficient and green extraction of flavonoids.Key words ：deep eutectic solvents ；flavonoids ；green solvent ；extraction黄酮是植物细胞中一种重要的次级代谢产物，能够消除人体内自由基，有较强抗氧化、抗衰老的功能[1]，在抗菌、抗病毒、抗炎、降血糖、降血脂等方面也颇有功效[2]。

一种计算水溶解度的经验加合模型的适用范围与局限

一种计算水溶解度的经验加合模型的适用范围与局限段宝根李嫣李婕程铁军王任小*(中国科学院上海有机化学研究所,生命有机化学国家重点实验室,上海200032)摘要:我们发展了一种用于预测有机小分子化合物水溶解度(log S )的经验方法XLOGS.它本质上是一种加合模型,采用83种原子/基团类型和3个校正因子作为模型的描述符.该方法还可以根据一个合适的参照分子的log S 实验值来计算未知化合物的log S 值.我们将XLOGS 模型在由4171个化合物组成的训练集上进行了参数化,多元线性回归获得的相关系数(R 2)和标准偏差(SD)分别为0.82和0.96单位.将该训练集进一步分为仅含液体化合物和仅含固体化合物的两个子集.XLOGS 模型在这两个子集上的回归结果显示前者优于后者(标准偏差分别为0.65单位和0.94单位).还利用log1/S 和log P (脂水分配系数)之间的差值来研究XLOGS 方法在液体和固体化合物数据集上的表现.研究结果表明:XLOGS 等加合法模型更适合应用于这两者差值接近于0的化合物.还将XLOGS 和其它三种流行的log S 计算模型(包括Qikprop,MOE-log S 和ALOGPS)在一个含有132个类药化合物的独立测试集上进行了比较.总体而言,我们的研究结果为加合法模型在水溶解度预测方面的合理应用提供了指导.关键词:水溶解度;加合法模型;XLOGS中图分类号:O645An Empirical Additive Model for Aqueous Solubility Computation:Success and LimitationsDUAN Bao-GenLI YanLI JieCHENG Tie-JunWANG Ren-Xiao *(State Key Laboratory of Bioorganic Chemistry,Shanghai Institute of Organic Chemistry,Chinese Academy of Sciences,Shanghai 200032,P .R.China )Abstract:We have developed a new empirical model,namely XLOGS,for computing aqueous solubility (log S )of organic compounds.This model is essentially an additive model,which employs a total of 83atom/group types and three correction factors as descriptors.Furthermore,it computes the log S value of a query compound by using the known log S value of an appropriate reference molecule as a starting point.XLOGS was calibrated on a training set of 4171compounds with known log S values.The squared correlation coefficient (R 2)and standard deviation (SD)in regression were 0.82and 0.96log units,respectively.The entire training set was further split into one subset containing liquid compounds only and another subset containing solid compounds only.Regression results of XLOGS were obviously better on the former subset (SD=0.65vs 0.94log units).The difference between log1/S and log P (partition coefficient,the ratio of concentrations of a compound in a mixture of water and n -octanol at equilibrium)was used as an indicator to investigate the performance of XLOGS on liquid compounds and solid compounds.Our results suggested that an additive model like XLOGS performed most satisfactorily when this difference was close to zero.Three other log S models,including Qikprop,MOE-log S ,and ALOGPS,were also compared with XLOGS on an independent test set of 132drug-like compounds.Put together,our study provides some[Article]doi:10.3866/PKU.WHXB201209171物理化学学报(Wuli Huaxue Xuebao )Acta Phys.-Chim.Sin .2012,28(10),2249-2257October Received:July 16,2012;Revised:September 12,2012;Published on Web:September 17,2012.∗Corresponding author.Email:wangrx@;Tel:+86-21-54925128.The project was supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (81172984,21072213,21002117,21102168,21102165)and National High-Tech Research and Development Program of China (863)(2012AA020308).国家自然科学基金(81172984,21072213,21002117,21102168,21102165)和国家高技术研究发展计划(863)(2012AA020308)资助项目ⒸEditorial office of Acta Physico-Chimica Sinica2249Acta Phys.-Chim.Sin.2012Vol.28 general guidance for applying additive models to computation of aqueous solubility.Key Words:Aqueous solubility;Additive model;XLOGS1IntroductionAqueous solubility is perhaps the most important physico-chemical property for orally available drugs since it affects ab-sorption,distribution,metabolism,and elimination processes.1,2 Poor solubility is often associated with poor druggability.Tra-ditionally,solubility of a compound is measured experimental-ly through an equilibrium approach.However,this approach re-quires a fair amount of sample(1-2mg)and is time-consum-ing(tens of hours to complete properly).3Besides,compound stability could be a serious issue in such measurement.Other approaches,such as nephelometry,4provide a kinetic solubility measurement with a low amount of sample,but they require a reliable dimethyl sulfoxide(DMSO)stock solution and multi-ple repeats to achieve accuracy.3Since experimental measurement of solubility is often diffi-cult to carry out,especially in a high-throughput scenario,theo-retical methods serve as an alternative approach to predict solu-bility.Many methods have been proposed for this purpose.So far the most popular methods are empirical methods.Such methods can be classified roughly into two categories.(i) Quantitative structure-property relationships(QSPR)models. Aqueous solubility is either correlated with other experimental properties,5-7such as partition coefficient,melting point and so on,or molecular descriptors,8-12such as topological indices,sol-vent accessible surface area,and the numbers of donor and ac-ceptor of hydrogen bonds and so on,through all sorts of data mining approaches.(ii)Atom/group additive models.13-16These models are based on the basic assumption that the physico-chemical properties of a molecule can be described as a sum of the contributions from its parts,i.e.,chemical fragments.In oth-er words,structural building blocks are directly used in such methods as descriptors to correlate with solubility or other properties.In addition,some“correction factors”are intro-duced to compensate any derivations from pure addition in or-der to improve accuracy further.Empirical methods are convenient to use in practice.Never-theless,a potential disadvantage of these methods is that their application may be limited by their training sets.If a query molecule is outside the training set of an empirical method, then the prediction made by this method is often less reason-able.Furthermore,these methods,especially QSPR models, cannot provide physical insights into the solvation process.A more fundamental approach to solubility computation is based on free energy calculations and thermodynamics relations.17 There have been many studies in this field during the past20 years.For example,Lindfors et al.18-21developed a model for estimating the amorphous solubility of drugs in water.They firstly computed the free energy of solvation in pure melt at 673.17K using Monte Carlo simulations.Secondly,melting drug crystals and then rapidly cooled the melt to obtain the amorphous phase.The free energy associated with this process was computed.Then,the free energy change in bringing a drug molecule from the vapor into a pure drug amorphous phase was obtained,plus the hydration free energy allowed the solu-bility of amorphous drugs to be determined in water.Mitchell et al.22reported methods to predict the intrinsic solubility of crystalline organic molecules with two different thermodynam-ic cycles.They found that a mixed model of direct computa-tions and informatics,which relied on the calculated thermody-namic properties and a few more key descriptors,yielded good results.On an external test set containing drug molecules,their model yielded R2=0.77and RMSE=0.71log units between ex-perimental and calculated data.Here,R2is coefficient of deter-mination,which reflects the goodness of curve fitting.The val-ue closer to1means better fitting between the regression equa-tion and the input data.RMSE is the abbreviation for root-mean-square-error,which is used to measure the deviations be-tween the fitted value and the experimental data.The smaller RMSE indicates better fitting effect.Chebil and co-workers23 used experimental data and all-atom molecular dynamics simu-lation to predict quercetin solubility in different solvents.If the experimental solubility of quercetin in one solvent is known, plus the hydration free energy computed from all-atom molecu-lar dynamics simulation,its solubility in other solvent can be determined.Compared to empirical models,methods based on thermody-namic energy computation can explain the solvation mechanics from a physical point of view.However,they are computation-ally much more expensive and thus not suitable for high-throughput tasks.Moreover,lattice energy,which needs to be compensated in the solvation of a solid compound,is still diffi-cult to be computed accurately.These problems certainly limit the application of such methods in a wider range.Thus,empiri-cal methods and first principles-based methods will co-exist in this field in the foreseeable future.In this study,we aimed at improving the accuracy of addi-tive model.Here,we describe a new model for log S computa-tion,i.e.,XLOGS,by combining a knowledge-based approach with a conventional additive model.This approach is based on the assumption that compounds with similar chemical struc-tures are associated with similar properties,a strategy that has been successfully applied in some research.24-27By this ap-proach,the log S value of a given compound is computed based on the known log S value of an appropriate reference molecule.2Methods2250DUAN Bao-Gen et al.:An Empirical Additive Model for Aqueous Solubility Computation:Success and Limitations No.102.1Data set preparationA set of organic molecules with experimental aqueous solu-bility data was necessary for calibrating our empirical model. This training set was selected from the PHYSPROP database (/esc/physdemo.htm),which is probably the largest compilation of such data available to the public.Accept-ed molecules were selected with the following criteria.Firstly, only the molecules with experimental aqueous solubility data were considered since not every molecule included in the PHYSPROP database has this information.Secondly,only sol-ubility data measured at room temperature,i.e.,20-25°C,were considered.Thirdly,each qualified molecule must not contain atoms other than hydrogen,carbon,oxygen,nitrogen,sulfur, phosphorus,and halogen atoms.As a result,a total of4544 molecules were selected.The chemical structures of these mol-ecules provided by the PHYSPROP database were then manu-ally examined.Gas molecules,salts,or mixtures at room tem-perature were excluded.False molecular structures were cor-rected.Finally,a total of4217molecules were included in our training set.An independent test set was also employed to verify the pre-dictive power of our model.It was cited from the“solubility challenge”launched by Llinas et al.28,29recently.This set con-tains132drug-like compounds(Table1),which are generally more complex than those in the training set.Molecular structur-al files of this set of molecules were downloaded directly from PubChem(/).30Note that a to-tal of46molecules in this test set overlapped with our training set described above.Thus,these molecules were removed from the training set,leaving the total number of molecules in our training set to be4171.This final training set will be referred to as“Set I”throughout this article.Set I was further classified according to the state informa-tion(liquid or solid)of each compound.State information is available in the PHYSPROP database for3569molecules in Set I.Among them,989molecules that are liquid at room tem-perature were assembled as“Set II”.Among the compounds that are solid at room temperature,experimentally measured melting point data were available for2357of them.They will be referred to as“Set III”throughout this article.In our study, Set II and Set III were also employed for deriving additive models specifically applicable to liquid and solid compounds, respectively.Some basic features of the training sets and the test set used in this study are listed in Table1.2.2The pure addictive model:XLOGS-AAThe additive model described in this study,i.e.XLOGS,is based essentially on the use of some atom types rather than chemical fragments.The advantage of an atom-based model is that a molecular structure can always be dissected into atoms without any ambiguity.Such a model is also much more straightforward to implement and is in principle free of the missing-fragment problem.In XLOGS method,83basic atom/group types are defined according to the rules set by the XLOGP3method25for Sets I and III,and73atom/group types for Set II.Details of atom types are given in Table S1in Supporting Information.In addi-tion,three correction factors are introduced in XLOGS.The first correction factor(“HB”)accounts for intramolecular hy-drogen bonds,which weaken the interactions between solute and water.The second correction factor(“AA”)is used on or-ganic compounds withα-amino acid moieties.Such com-pounds usually exist in a zwitterionic form at the neutral pH condition,which is certainly very different from the corre-sponding neutral form in solvation.The third correction factor (“HDHA”)is the product of the number of hydrogen bond do-nors and the number of hydrogen bond acceptors on the solute molecule.It is an indication of the favorable polar interactions between solute and water.The additive model described above will be referred to as XLOGS-AA throughout the rest of the ar-ticle for the convenience.2.3The knowledge-based modelThe key idea of XLOGS is to calculate the log S value of a given compound from the known log S of a molecule with simi-lar structure.A conventional additive model computes log S aslog S=∑i=1M a i A i+∑j=1N c j C j(1) Here,a i and A i are the contribution and occurrence of the i th at-om/group type in the given compound,respectively.c j and C j are the contribution and the occurrence of the j th correction fac-tor.M is the total number of defined atom/group types and N is the total number of defined correction factors.The XLOGS method is to compute the log S of a given compound from the known log S of a structural analog,i.e.,the reference molecule. log S of the reference molecule is computed by an additive mod-el as;log S0=∑i=1M a i A0i+∑j=1N c j C0j(2) By subtracting Eq.(2)from Eq.(1),one getslog S=log S0+∑i=1M a i()A i-A0i+∑j=1N c j()C j-C0j(3) Here,S0means the log S value of the reference molecule mea-sured by experiment.A0and C0are calculated contributions ofSet I(N=4171) Set II(N=989) Set III(N=2357) test set(N=132)Molecular weight220.6(±78.4)a154.5(±60.0)247.3(±74.3)300.1(±72.2)Average number of heavy atoms14.3(±5.1)9.8(±3.8)16.1(±4.6)20.6(±5.1)Average number of oxygen and nitrogen atoms3.3(±2.0)1.6(±1.3)3.7(±1.9)4.5(±1.9)Experimental log S-2.80(±1.76)-1.99(±1.59)-3.30(±1.89)-3.34(±1.17)a The data outside brackets are mean values;the data inside brackets are standard deviations.Table1Some basic properties of the data sets considered in this study2251Acta Phys.-Chim.Sin.2012Vol.28log S for the reference molecule by atom/group types and cor-rection factors,respectively.Then,the log S value of a given compound can be computed by Eq.(3)based on the known log S value of a reference molecule.This model is called XLOGS-full in our paper.This concept is illustrated in Fig.1with an example.In principle,the reference molecule should be found among a large set of organic compounds with known log S values.For the sake of convenience,in our study the training set used for calibrating XLOGS-AA was also employed as the knowledge set for finding the appropriate reference molecule.Obviously,the reference molecule should resemble the query compound as much as possible in terms of chemical structure.In our study,the structural similarity between any two molecules was computed with an algorithm based on topological torsion de-scriptors described previously.25,31For a given query molecule,a similarity threshold of 50%was applied to search the entire knowledge set.The molecule with the highest similarity score was selected to be the reference.If no molecule in the knowl-edge set met the similarity threshold of 50%,the pure additive model,i.e.,XLOGS-AA,was applied for instead to compute the log S value of the query.2.4Analysis of the relationship between solubilityand partition coefficientPartition coefficient (log P )is the ratio of concentrations of a compound between n -octanol and water phases.Conventional additive models work well for calculating log P .But this is not the case for solubility,where the effects like electron donating/accepting contributions of substituents,and intramolecular hy-drogen bonding can play an important role.Such complex ef-fects cannot be properly described solely by fragment contribu-tions.32If these complex effects on solubility are dominating,the prediction accuracy of an additive model may be poor.Some studies have attempted to correlate log S with log P .5,33-36In these studies,the log P value came from either experiment or the computational methods.It was also found that the main fac-tor in solubility was due to its lipophilicity for a particular scaf-fold of compounds.37In brief,the relationship between log S and log P can reflect the predictive power of an additive model of solubility to some extents.For example,a simple parameter called ΔSL was used to define the threshold of lipophilicity on solubility in Faller ʹs study:32ΔSL =log 1/S -log P (4)Here,log1/S is the reciprocal solubility value in molar terms.This parameter was introduced to separate lipophilicity from other contributions to solubility.If the ΔSL value is close to ze-ro,it indicates that solubility is dominated by lipophilicity.Then,additive models have their advantages in solubility pre-diction.When the ΔSL value deviates from zero,it indicates that some nonlinear effects on solubility become more impor-tant,and thus additive models may not be appropriate in this case.In addition,a variable (ΔRMSE)was defined in our study to measure the change in the accuracy of an additive model with the change in the contents of data set:ΔRMSE =RMSE new -RMSE oldN new -N old(5)Here,RMSE old and RMSE new are the RMSE values of a given ad-ditive model before and after some molecules with large ΔSL values are added to the data set,respectively;N old and N new are the size of the original data set and the new data set,respective-ly.2.5Other log S methods under evaluationIn order to make a comparison,three popular models for sol-ubility calculation were applied to the same data sets for test-ing XLOGS,including the function in the molecular descriptor module in MOE software (version 2010),Qikprop in Schro-dinger software (version 2011),and ALOGPS (version 2.1)available online at /lab/alogps/start.html.3Results and discussion3.1Regression results and model validationFig.1Illustration of the basic computational procedure ofXLOGS2252DUAN Bao-Gen et al .:An Empirical Additive Model for Aqueous Solubility Computation:Success and Limitations No.10A total of 86descriptors were used in XLOGS-AA for Set I,including 83basic atom/group types and three correction fac-tors.Contributions of all descriptors were obtained by multivar-iate linear regression analysis on the 4171compounds in Set I (Table S1(Supporting Information)).The R 2between experi-mental and calculated values is 0.82,and the RMSE is 0.96log units (Fig.2).A standard leave-one-out cross-validation was conducted to test the predictive power of this model,producing a Q 2(cross validation coefficient,which indicates the predic-tion power of the model)value of 0.81,and a RMSE value of 0.98log units.The results of leave-one-out cross-validation test are very close to the ones obtained from regression analy-sis,indicating that XLOGS-AA is not an over-fitted model.Moreover,the XLOGS method (Eq.(3))was also applied to the entire Set I.A threshold of 50%was adopted in similarity comparison.Among all of the 4171compounds in Set I,quali-fied reference molecules were found for 2386compounds,ac-counting for 57.2%of the entire data set.Other compounds were still computed with the pure additive XLOGS-AA model.The final regression results of the XLOGS model are:R 2=0.83,RMSE=0.94log pared to the results produced by XLOGS-AA,the improvement is rather limited.The reason is that many compounds in this data set cannot find the appropri-ate reference molecule,and thus the power of XLOGS is not fully verified.To make a comparison,three log S models in popular commer-cial software,including MOE-log S ,Qikprop,and ALOGPS,were also applied to Set I.The statistical results are summa-rized in Table 2.One can see that the performance of both XLOGS and XLOGS-AA are marginally better than the other three models.As described in the Methods section,the “solubility chal-lenge ”data set 28,29were adopted as an independent test set to test XLOGS.Among the 132compounds in this data set,elev-en compounds were excluded in our study because their aque-ous solubility values were not accurate.28,29The XLOGS model was applied to the remaining 121compounds,producing a R 2value between experimental and calculated values of 0.47,and a RMSE value of 1.08log units (Fig.3).Correlations between the experimental values and the calculated values by MOE-log S ,Qikprop,and ALOGPS are not high either (Table 3).Nev-ertheless,the statistical results produced by these three models are marginally better than XLOGS on this test set.This could be a coincidence since this test set is relatively small.It should be mentioned that XLOGS was actually applied to only 28mol-ecules in this test set while the remaining molecules were pro-cessed by XLOGS-AA due to lack of appropriate reference molecules in Set I.Thus,there is no significant difference be-tween the statistical results produced by XLOGS and XLOGS-AA.3.2Performance of additive model on Set II and Set III Dissolution of a compound in water is controlled by two types of interactions:3one is solute -solvent interaction,and the other is the internal interactions between solute molecules.Basically,solute -solvent interactions need to be strong enough to compensate solute -solute interactions in order to make a molecule soluble in water.As for liquid compounds,their solu-bility is mainly affected by the first type of interaction.As forFig.2Experimental log S values versus calculated values byXLOGS-AA on the entire training setN =4171,R 2=0.82,SD=0.96logunitsTable 2Results of different log S methods on three training setsSD:standard deviation in regression;AUE:average unsigned error between calculated and experimental dataModel XLOGS-full XLOGS-AA ALOGPS MOE-log S QikpropSet I (N =4171)R20.830.820.800.780.75SD 0.940.961.001.071.14AUE 0.690.710.700.770.84Set II (N =989)R20.890.890.860.840.83SD 0.650.650.760.810.82AUE 0.470.470.520.610.57Set III (N =2357)R 20.850.840.800.790.75SD 0.930.941.071.091.18AUE 0.690.700.750.790.90Table 3Comparison of the performance of several log S modelsFig.3Experimental log S values versus calculated values byXLOGS on the test setN =121,R 2=0.47,RMSE=1.08log units2253Acta Phys.-Chim.Sin.2012Vol.28solid compounds,the entire solvation process can be dissected into two steps in a thermodynamic point of view:first,crystal melts into pure liquid phase,and then liquid phase is parti-tioned into water.The first step is dominated by solute-solute interactions whereas the second step is the same as solvation of liquid compounds.Therefore,the performance of additive mod-els on liquid and solid compounds is different.In our study,both liquid and solid compounds were included in Set I.We attempted to treat compounds separately according to their states as follows.Set I was filtered further to extract liq-uid compounds(Set II)and solid compounds(Set III),respec-tively.For understandable reasons,Set II consists of compounds with relatively simple structures.Thus,some atom types in our general atom typing scheme(Table S1)were absent or had very low occurrence on this data set.Such atom types were re-moved to obtain a valid regression model.Finally,73atom/ group types and one correction factor,i.e.,intermolecular hy-drogen bonds,were included in the regression model.The con-tribution of each descriptor was obtained through multivariate regression(Table S1).Regression results(R2=0.89,SD=0.65 log units)indicated that the fitted log S values have a good rela-tionship with the experimental data(Fig.4).Results of leave-one-out cross-validation(Q2=0.87,RMSE=0.73log units)indi-cate that this regression model is not over-fitted.As a compari-son,three other log S methods were also applied to Set II.The results indicated that our XLOGS model was superior to others (Table2).Similarly,a regression model of86descriptors was obtained on Set III,i.e.,solid compounds with known log S values.Sta-tistical results of regression were:R2=0.84,SD=0.94log units (Fig.5).Statistical results of leave-one-out cross-validation were:Q2=0.83,RMSE=1.00log units,which indicated that this regression model was also not parison of the performance of XLOGS and three other log S methods on Set III are summarized in Table2.One can see that the perfor-mance of XLOGS is also better on this data set.Nevertheless, its performance on this data set is not as good as that on Set II.This difference was actually expected by us due to the more complicated solvation process of solid compounds.One way to estimate the penalty of crystal energy to log S of solid compounds is to use melting points.Yalkowsky et al.33,38 estimated solubility of solid non-electrolytes with an empirical equation including melting point and obtained reasonable re-sults:log S=0.5-0.01(MP-25)-log P(6) In the above equation,MP is the experimental value of melting point.In our study,we tested this method on Set III.In our cal-culation,log P values were all calculated using the XLOGP3 method25although the experimental log P values of many com-pounds in this data set are known.The statistical results are: R2=0.76,RMSE=1.17log units.One can see that this method does not produce better results than our additive model XLOGS.Moreover,this method is not very practical since melting point and log P values are needed to carry out computa-tion.Although computed melting points and log P values can be used for instead,it will introduce additional uncertainty into the final estimations of log S values by doing so.In particular, reliable estimation of melting points is as challenging as esti-mation of log S itself.3.3Relationship betweenΔSL and accuracy ofadditive modelIt has been demonstrated in the above discussion that an ad-ditive model like XLOGS is less successful in estimating log S values of solid compounds,primarily due to the inadequate consideration of crystal energy.TheΔSL parameter(Eq.(4))re-flects the deviation between water solubility and octanol-water partition coefficient.The rationale is that partition of a solute between octanol phase and water phase does not involve crys-tal break and there is a“pure”process.It was used in our study to investigate the performance of additive model in log S com-putation.The relationships between log1/S exp and log P cal for liquid compounds(Fig.6(a))and solid compounds(Fig.6(b))were are firstly studied.Note that calculated log P values by XLOGP3 were used here because the experimental log P values of someFig.4Experimental log S values versus calculated values by XLOGS-AA on the liquid compounds in Set IIN=989,R2=0.89,SD=0.65log units Fig.5Experimental log S values versus calculated values by XLOGS-AA on the solid compounds in Set IIIN=2357,R2=0.84,SD=0.94logunits 2254DUAN Bao-Gen et al .:An Empirical Additive Model for Aqueous Solubility Computation:Success and Limitations No.10compounds in our data are not available.One can see in Fig.6that the correlation between log1/S exp and log P cal for liquid com-pounds is closer to unity than the corresponding scenario re-garding solid compounds.Distribution of ΔSL values (Fig.7)also shows that ΔSL values have a larger fluctuation zone around zero for solid compounds.Based on the above analysis,aqueous solubility of liquid compounds is more relevant to lipophilicity than other factors.In fact,the so-called general solubility equation (GSE)37devel-oped for liquid compounds previously only correlates solubili-ty with partition coefficient.But it is not the case for solid com-pounds.For solid compounds,some other factors other than li-pophilicity,such as crystal energy,are not described adequate-ly by additive models.But it also needs to be pointed out that solute -solute interactions are not completely ignored by addi-tive models.Such interactions are also reflected in fragment contributions implicitly to some extents.That is why our XLOGS model still produced acceptable results on solid com-pounds.In our study,the ΔSL parameter was used as an indicator to judge whether an additive model is suitable for computing aqueous solubility.Although solid compounds have larger ΔSL distributions than liquid compounds in our data set,there aresome solid compounds whose ΔSL values are close to zero.We further studied the performance of additive model on a data set consisting of molecules with smaller ΔSL values extracted from Set III.These molecules were selected in a stepwise pro-cedure as follows.Firstly,the molecules with ΔSL values rang-ing from 0to 1were extracted from Set III to form an initial da-ta set.Then,the molecules with ΔSL value lower than 2in the remaining part of Set III were added into the current data set to form a new one.Then,some molecules with even larger ΔSL values were added to extend the range of ΔSL values.At each step,leave-one-out cross-validation was applied to analyze the predictive power of the additive model on the new data set.Sta-tistical results obtained in different ΔSL spaces during this step-wise procedure are summarized in Table 4.As for the mole-cules with negative ΔSL values,the same strategy for data set compilation was employed.Leave-one-out cross-validation re-sults on each version of data set are summarized in Table 5.As one can see in Table 4and Table 5,the performance of an additive model is less satisfactory on solid compounds with larger absolute values of ΔSL.Nevertheless,it still produces very acceptable results on solid compounds with ΔSL valuesFig.6Scatter plot of log1/S exp and log P cal values for (a)the liquid compounds in Set II (N =989),and (b)the solid compounds in Set III (N =2357)The diagonal line is colored in blue;while the linear fitting line is colored inred.Fig.7Distributions of the ΔSL parameter for the liquid compounds in Set II (N =989)and the solid compoundsin Set III (N=2357)Table 5Leave-one-out cross-validation results of XLOGS-AA on different subsets of solid compounds (ΔSL<0)Table 4Leave-one-out cross-validation results of XLOGS-AA on 2255。

AC7114-1 Rev D

1.0SCOPEThese Audit Criteria define the requirements for suppliers seeking Nadcap accreditation in Penetrant and are to be used as supplement to PRI AC7114. These criteria and the applicable User Prime Supplemental Checklists will ensure that NDT suppliers meet the requirements for Nadcap accreditation in Penetrant.2.0 GENERAL INFORMATIONIn completing this assessment, auditors are instructed to respond with a "Yes” or “No" to address compliance with each statement of requirement. For any negative responses, the auditor must clearly indicate in the NCR if the“No" reflects noncompliance with respect to existence, adequacy, and/or compliance. Existence relates toevidence of a documented procedure or policy, adequacy relates to the completeness of the procedure or policy, and compliance relates to evidence of effective implementation. This checklist includes the use of the word “shall”which indicates a clear requirement that must be met at all times. The word, “may” indicates a possible resolution to a requirement or one recommended method to achieve a given requirement, but does not represent the only way to meet that requirement. In addition the checklist includes the term “Compliance Assessment Guidance”.This term is used to reflect the Task Groups expectation when answering the checklist question as YES or N/A.The auditor must verify the list of procedures provided by the supplier at the time of the audit. Any corrections or updates to the list must be identified using notes inserted at the applicable criterion.All negative responses require a Nonconformance Report (NCR). Not Applicable (N/A) responses do not require an explanation unless otherwise noted. There is only one plausible reason for an N/A, which is, that a particular operation or issue is not being used at the supplier. There are no N/A’s simply for a lack of a customerrequirement. If a system is in use, then all questions pertaining to that system are applicable. If verification ofresults require documentation it shall be so noted in this checklist.The audit results shall not include any customer proprietary information. Technical information on parts which have been designated “Export Controlled – License Required” (EC-LR) cannot be input into eAuditNet. If auditors have any questions about this, they should contact the Staff Engineer for directions.GO FORWARD PLAN – Any new or revised procedure made after 4 December 2006 requires compliance to the following requirements. Procedures written prior to this date shall be acceptable; however a system needs to be in place to ensure that changes reflect the current Nadcap requirements.PRI operating procedures provide that "This report is published by PRI to advance the state of technical, engineering, and quality sciences. The use of this report is entirely voluntary, and its applicability and suitability for any particular use, including any patent infringement arising therefrom, is the sole responsibility of the user."2.1 ReferencesSAE Publications: Available from SAE, 400 Commonwealth Drive, Warrendale, PA 15086-0001AS7003 Nadcap Program RequirementsAMS 2644 Inspection Material, PenetrantQPL-SAE-AMS-2644 Qualified Products List, Inspection Material, PenetrantASTM Publications: Available from ASTM, 100 Bar Harbor, Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959ASTM-E-1417 Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant ExaminationASTM-E-1135 Test Method for Comparing the Brightness of Fluorescent PenetrantASTM-D 95 Test Method for Water in Petroleum Products and Bituminous Materials by Distillation3.0 MATERIALS AND EQUIPMENT3.1 Materials, Equipment Listing and InformationAttachment T he supplier shall complete and the auditor shall review, the supplier's provided materials andequipment listing, for adequacy, content and correctness. Attachments are for information onlybut shall be completed fully. NCR’s shall not be written against attachments. (AttachmentAC7114/1-A).3.2 Material CertificationYES NO3.2.1 Is the manufacturer’s certification available for each batch of penetrant, emulsifier anddeveloper in use, and is there evidence that they conform to the applicable AMS?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The last batch added to the tank defines the batchfor the tank.3.3 Material IdentificationYES NO3.3.1 Are the contents of all containers (tanks/drums/bulbs) labeled with, or is theretraceability to, the material and batch number(s)?3.4 Equipment Arrangement3.4.1 Are all tanks in a system arranged or covered to prevent mixing of materials? YES NO4.0 PROCEDURES4.1 NDT Facility Written ProceduresYES NO4.1.1 Is there a procedure, general or specific, for processing and inspection using the liquidpenetrant method?4.2 Approval4.2.1 Does the procedure(s) indicate approval by the applicable Level 3?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance: The applicable Level 3 may be the Nadcap User,Nadcap User qualified or approved Level 3, internal Level 3 and/or external Level 3.minimum?Compliance Assessment Guidance:•The term, “procedure” may be synonymous with a traveler or a route card, etc.•All non-technical requirements that have been flowed down solely by thebaseline will only be required to be met if that in-use technique or process hasbeen revised since the inception of the baseline on December 4, 2006.YES NO 4.3.1 Traceability to the name and address of the facility performing the inspection?Compliance Assessment Guidance:In some cases it may not be necessary for theactual address as long as the facility is traceable to a unique identifier.4.3.2 Procedure identification number and the date the procedure was approved? YES NOYES NO 4.3.3 A requirement that all personnel are qualified and certified to the required level for theactivity undertaken and the applicable contract requirements?4.3.4 Part number and/or material to be examined? YES NO 4.3.5 Complete processing parameters for the penetrant inspection materials includingYES NO dwell times, application methods, drying times, concentration of emulsifiers,temperatures and controls to prevent excessive drying or overheating, as appropriate?YES NO4.3.5.1 A requirement that components, penetrant, and ambient temperatures shallbe maintained within the range of 50 °F (10 °C) to 125 °F (52 °C)?4.3.5.2 A requirement that rinse water temperatures are controlled within the rangeYES NO N/A of 50°F (10°C) to 100 °F (38°C)? NOTE: N/A only if Method C is used4.3.6 Method, Type and Sensitivity Level of Penetrant, Emulsifier, and Developer Form inYES NO accordance with AMS 2644?YES NO N/A 4.3.7 How hydrophilic emulsifier concentrations are established?What is the established concentration range as defined by the procedure?________________________________________4.3.8 Identification of the components or areas within a component to be inspected? YES NO 4.3.9 Address or provide traceability to customer acceptance criteria? YES NOYES NO N/A 4.3.10 Special equipment required including type and intensity of light if different fromstandard processing?4.3.11 Complete pre-cleaning and post-cleaning instructions, including cleaning materials,YES NO sequencing, times, concentrations and temperatures in accordance with customerrequirements or reference to procedures containing such instructions?Compliance Assessment Guidance:Procedure may make reference to anotherprocedure or to an outside source.4.3.12 Description for the method of identifying inspection status? YES NOequipment as applicable?“Compliance Assessment Guidance”:This would include software used to controlautomated systems.4.3.14 All required process control tests and checks called out in section 5 of this checklist? YES NO5.0 PENETRANT PROCESS CONTROLSCompliance Assessment Guidance:•The following tests marked “re-used” are required when, and if, the materials are used from a tank, container or are sprayed and recovered. If materials are not recovered in any way, tests marked as “re-used” are not applicable and shall be noted as such.•If a particular system is not used by the supplier, (i.e., Post Emulsified, Lipophilic) then questions pertaining to that system are N/A and no explanation is required. Where equipment is not used for aperiod in excess of the check frequency, the check shall be performed immediately prior to use.•If the following process control checks are performed at the supplier, adequate procedural coverage is expected to be evident and is to be reviewed by the auditor. If the tests are performed by an externalsource, the auditor is expected to review evidence of flow-down (i.e., a Purchase Order) with theappropriate information to include at a minimum; traceability to the required test and the standard used. Inaddition an adequate certification or other document is required to document the results of the tests.5.1 Penetrant Brightness Test (reused) N/A5.1.1 Is the fluorescent brightness of penetrant being tested at least quarterly? YES NO5.1.2 Is ASTM-E-1135 the standard test method used? YES NO5.1.3 Is the acceptable limit within 90 -110% of the unused standard? YES NOYES NO5.1.4 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The test results may indicate the exactpercentage or simply state “acceptable” or some other term that denotes acceptance.5.2 Water Content of Water-Washable Penetrant (reused) N/AYES NO5.2.1 Is the water content of water penetrant being tested at leastmonthly?5.2.2 Is ASTM-D-95 or Karl Fischer the test method used? YES NO5.2.3 Is the maximum acceptable limit 5%? YES NOYES NO5.2.4 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The test results may indicate the exactpercentage or simply state “acceptable” or some other term that denotes acceptance.5.3 Water Content of Water-Based Penetrant (reused) N/AWhat is the current concentration percent? _______________YES NO5.3.4 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The test results may indicate the exactpercentage or simply state “acceptable” or some other term that denotes acceptance.5.4 Water Content of Lipophilic Emulsifiers (reused)N/A5.4.1 Is the water content of in-use lipophilic (Method B) emulsifier being tested at leastYES NO monthly?5.4.2 Is ASTM-D-95 or Karl Fischer test method used? YES NO5.4.3 Is the maximum acceptable limit 5%? YES NOYES NO5.4.4 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The test results may indicate the exactpercentage or simply state “acceptable” or some other term that denotes acceptance.5.5 Concentration of Hydrophilic Emulsifiers N/A5.5.1 Concentration of in-use (Method D) hydrophilic emulsifiers (used from containers /N/A tanks)YES NO5.5.1.1 Is the concentration of in-use (Method D) hydrophilic emulsifiers beingchecked at least weekly or prior to use?Compliance Assessment Guidance: This test is required to be conductedat least prior to use in systems that experience a low volume of activity, butif used more often than once a week, weekly would be the minimumrequired frequency. .YES NO5.5.1.2 Does this maximum concentration percentage comply with QPL-AMS-2644?What is the current concentration percent? _______________5.5.1.3 Is a refractometer used to perform this test? YES NOYES NO5.5.1.4 Has a correction graph(s) for in use emulsifier been established?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The graph shall have been preparedfor each emulsifier in use and traceable to a specific refractometer asidentified on the graph. A change in batch number does not necessitate anew graph. Graphs supplied by the manufacturer are not acceptable.Compliance Assessment Guidance: The graph may be prepared by anexternal source but must meet the requirement defined above.Compliance Assessment Guidance: The nominal value must be set at least3% points below the maximum concentration permitted by QPL-AMS-2644.5.5.1.6 Is the concentration verified upon initial mixing and when adjusted? YES NOYES NO5.5.1.7 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The actual percentage shall berecorded by the supplier or the reading from the refractometer if traceableto the percentage. Recording, “OK” or indicating a checkmark or othernotation, is not acceptable.YES NO5.5.1.8 Did the facility properly demonstrate this check?Compliance Assessment Guidance:a) The supplier shall be able to demonstrate the correct use of therefractometer in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions and shallrecord the exact concentration or the refractometer reading traceable to theconcentration.b) The refractometer shall be zeroed using water prior to use.5.5.2 Concentration of spray (Method D) hydrophilic emulsifiers N/A5.5.2.1 Are concentrations for spray applications kept at or below 5%? YES NOYES NO5.5.2.2 Is the concentration of the spray hydrophilic emulsifiers being checked atleast weekly or prior to use?5.5.2.3 Is a refractometer used to perform this test? YES NOYES NO5.5.2.4 Has a correction graph(s) for in use emulsifier been established?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The graph shall have been preparedfor each emulsifier in use and traceable to a specific refractometer asidentified on the graph. A change in batch number does not necessitate anew graph. Graphs supplied by the manufacturer are not acceptable.Compliance Assessment Guidance: The graph may be prepared by anexternal source but must meet the requirement defined above.YES NO5.5.2.5 Is the concentration verified upon initial start up and when maintenance isperformed?5.5.2.6 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance: The actual percentage shall berecorded by the supplier or the reading from the refractometer if traceableto the percentage. Recording, “OK” or indicating a checkmark or othernotation, is not acceptable.5.5.2.7 Did the facility properly demonstrate this check?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance:a) The supplier shall be able to demonstrate the correct use of therefractometer in accordance with the manufacturer’s instructions and shallrecord the exact concentration or the refractometer reading traceable to theconcentration.b) The refractometer shall be zeroed using water prior to use.5.6 Dry Developer Characteristics (Form a)N/AYES NO5.6.1 Is the dry developer being checked at least daily or prior to use?Compliance Assessment Guidance: All systems employing dry developer must bechecked at least for caking; this includes spray on systems and portable “bulbs” orblowers. This may be visually verified or demonstrated by system performance.YES NO N/A5.6.2 Does the check for recycled dry developer ensure the developer has not picked upexcessive fluorescent material (10 or more fluorescent specs observed in a 4inch/10cm circle), when tested utilizing the same method used for applying developerto hardware?Compliance Assessment Guidance: For the purpose of this check, “recycled” refersto any material that is drawn from a source where some or all of the remainingmaterial is returned to that source. Note: some spray systems actually return materialto the source. The auditor shall verify that a system labeled as “not recycled” is assuch in actual performance. The holding tanks for dry developer shall be verified forlack of fluorescent material when possible.5.6.3 Does the check ensure that the developer is not caked? (applicable to recycled andYES NO closed systems)YES NO5.6.4 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?Compliance Assessment Guidance: Records indicating “OK” or some other checkmark are acceptable for this test.5.6.5 Did the facility properly demonstrate this check? YES NO 5.7 Concentration of Aqueous Developer (Soluble [Form b] & Suspended [Form c])N/AYES NO5.7.1 Is the concentration of in-use Form b and Form c developer being checked at leastweekly?5.7.2 Is a hydrometer and a specific gravity chart being used for this test? YES NO5.7.3 Are the acceptance limits in accordance with manufacturer’s instructions? YES NOYES NO5.7.4 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?Compliance Assessment Guidance: Records indicating “OK” or some other checkmark are acceptable.5.7.5 Did the facility properly demonstrate this check? YES NO 5.8 Characteristics of Aqueous Developer (Soluble [Form b] & Suspended [Form c])N/A5.8.6 Are Form b developers excluded from use on Type 1 Method A systems? YES NO 5.9 Penetrant System PerformanceYES NO5.9.1 Has the supplier performed an initial check to establish a baseline for each knowndefect standard and material in use?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The supplier shall perform an initial check with allnew materials to establish a baseline for each known defect standard and material inuse. This check shall be performed utilizing a color photograph approximately 1:1,whose back ground does not interfere with the comparison) or by direct comparisonof used versus unused materials; to record the baseline performance. Therequirement is that the performance of the in use materials can not fall below that ofthe unused materials. Therefore a baseline performance must be established tocompare to the daily results. The requirement for a photo does not apply whendirectly comparing new and in use materials utilizing two identical test panels.(example: NiCr Panels) NOTE: The establishment of the baseline photo may beperformed by an external source providing that the color photo is representative ofthe panel when run at the supplier’s facility. The outside source shall process thepanel utilizing the same penetrant materials and test parameters as the supplier andproduce a color photo of approximately 1:1 scale.YES NO5.9.2 Is the penetrant system performance checked at least daily or prior to use?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The check is intended to be performed at leastprior to use, that is if the system is not used every day, the check would not berequired to be performed every day. This check includes all in use materials, recycledand not recycled. Note: This includes materials sprayed to waste but is notapplicable to solvent removable penetrant utilized from sealed aerosol containers.5.9.3 Are records of this test on file and do they indicate acceptable results?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance: Results of the system performance test, utilizingthe in-use materials, must indicate the same number and appearance (e.g. size, etc.)of the flaws detected originally when the baseline was established. Example: If 4stars of a certain size and appearance are originally detected, then the same numberand appearance of the stars is expected each subsequent test and the actual numbermust be recorded. This comparison shall be made utilizing a color photograph(approximately 1:1, whose back ground does not interfere with the comparison) or bydirect comparison of used versus unused materials.YES NO5.9.4 Did the facility properly demonstrate this check?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The objective of the system performance test isthat it be used as a comparison tool. That comparison day to day, must be performedutilizing the same system parameters as the original; that is; materials, dwell times,temperatures and other parameters, must be the same as the original. The system5.10 Known Defect Standard Maintenance / Degradation5.10.1 Are there maintenance procedures in place that assure that cleaning of the knownYES NO defect standards, between usage, is adequate and that physical changes in thestandard that make it unsuitable for use, can be detected?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The procedure must define what is actually doneby the supplier. The auditor shall require that the technician demonstrate that thepanel or test standard is clean and indication free prior to performance of the test.Unless defined by supplemental requirements, this does not require application ofdeveloper.YES NO N/A5.10.2 Is a degradation check performed for the known defect standard at least annually?Compliance Assessment Guidance: This check must be performed by comparing theoriginal results obtained utilizing all new materials to the current results, also using allnew materials. This check is a check of the defect standard, not of the system. It shallbe performed utilizing measurements with the actual measurement of the largestdimension of each indication being recorded. The degradation check is notapplicable if the defect standard is replaced before the requirement comes due or forknown defect standards where a direct comparison of new versus in-use materials ismade on a daily basis.YES NO N/A5.10.3 Is the stated tolerance for the degradation check +/- 30% of the baselinemeasurement?5.11 Penetrant Contamination Check (Reused)N/A5.11.1 Is a visual assessment performed on the penetrant for contamination at least daily?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance: This test may be performed in any way thatallows contamination to be detected in the penetrant material. Examples: a glass tubeis inserted into the penetrant and withdrawn trapping contaminants within the tube; asample of penetrant is collected in a glass container and allowed to settle indicatingcontaminants, etc. Determine if any of the following conditions are evidentprecipitates, waxy deposits, white coloration, separation of constituents, surfacescum, or any other evidence of contamination or breakdown. When any of the aboveconditions are detected the material shall be discarded or modified in accordancewith the manufacturers’ instructions.5.11.2 Are records of this check on file and do they indicate acceptable results?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance: Records indicating “OK” or some other checkmark are acceptable.5.12 Dryer Controls N/A5.12.1 Is the dryer oven controlled to a tolerance of +/-15º F (8.3ºC) or better?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance: It is expected that the auditor shall verify theperformance is acceptable via the calibration certificate.Compliance Assessment Guidance: If the temperature controlling device is to becalibrated at one point, then that point shall be the point of use for that dryer. Ifmultiple points are used, then they shall encompass the range of use for that dryer.Example: The dryer should not be calibrated at 130°F (54°C), 140°F (60°C) and150°F (66°C) and then used at 160°F (71°C).YES NO5.12.3 Is the calibration performed at least quarterly or with adequate documentation,extended to no more than every 6 months?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The calibration shall be performed at leastquarterly or extended as allowed by the governing standard but not to exceed 6months and only when 4 consecutive acceptable calibrations and adequatedocumentation is available to support the decreased frequency.5.12.4 Is the calibration current? YES NO5.12.5 Is there a temperature indicator for the dryer and is it calibrated to a tolerance of +/-YES NO 10º F (5.6ºC ) or better?YES NO5.12.6 Is the temperature indicator calibrated at a minimum of one point within its range ofuse?Compliance Assessment Guidance: If the indicator is to be calibrated at one point,then that point shall be the point of use for that dryer. If multiple points are used, thenthey shall encompass the range of use for that dryer. Example: The dryer should notbe calibrated at 130°F (54°C), 140°F (60°C) and 150°F (66°C) and then used at160°F (71°C).YES NO5.12.7 Is the calibration performed at least quarterly or with adequate documentation,extended to no more than every 6 months?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The calibration shall be performed at leastquarterly or extended as allowed by the governing standard but not to exceed 6months and only when 4 consecutive acceptable calibrations and adequatedocumentation is available to support the decreased frequency.5.12.8 Is the calibration current? YES NO5.13 Black Light Meters and MeasurementsYES NO5.13.1 Is a digital meter, with a spectral sensitivity from 320-400 nm, utilized to verify blacklight intensity?YES NO5.13.2 Is calibration of the meter being performed at least semi-annually or, with adequatedocumentation, extended as allowed by the governing standard but not to exceed 12months when 4 consecutive acceptable calibrations and adequate documentation isavailable to support the decreased frequency?5.13.3 Is calibration performed at a minimum of three points to establish linearity?YES NOCompliance Assessment Guidance: No specific values need to be used.NIST or other National Standard) light meter. It is not meant to represent a “true”±5% calibration tolerance.5.13.5 Is the calibration current?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance: The light meter shall be accurate to within ±5%of the standard reading. Note that the value of ±5% is in reference to a comparisonof the light meter being calibrated to another calibrated (traceable to NIST or otherNational Standard) light meter. It is not meant to represent a “true” ±5% calibrationtolerance.YES NO5.13.6 Is the black light meter traceable to calibration data?Compliance Assessment Guidance: To meet this requirement, the meter shall beserialized, stickered or otherwise identifiable to the calibration data.5.13.7 Is the black light intensity of the inspection light(s) checked at least daily, prior to useYES NO and after equipment maintenance?YES NO5.13.8 Is the minimum acceptable limit 1200 µW/cm2 at 15 inches (38cm)?Compliance Assessment Guidance: Borescope intensity shall be a minimum of 1000µW/cm2 at the inspection surface as measured from the inspection distance.YES NO5.13.9 Are records of this check on file and do they indicate acceptable results?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The actual light intensity shall be recorded forthis check; “OK” or some other mark is not acceptable.YES NO5.13.10 Did the facility properly demonstrate this check?Compliance Assessment Guidance: The auditor shall observe the check of the blacklight intensity being conducted.5.13.11 Are the black light reflectors and filters clean and in good condition? YES NO 5.14 White Light Meters and MeasurementsYES NO5.14.1 Is the calibration of the meter performed at least semi-annually or, with adequatedocumentation, extended as allowed by the governing standard but not to exceed 12months when 4 consecutive acceptable calibrations and adequate documentation isavailable to support the decreased frequency?5.14.2 Is calibration performed at a minimum of three points to establish linearity?YES NO Compliance Assessment Guidance: No specific values need to be used.YES NO5.14.3 Is the light meter accurate to within ± 5% of the standard reading?Compliance Assessment Guidance: Note that the value of ±5% is in reference to acomparison of the light meter being calibrated to another calibrated (traceable toNIST or other National Standard) light meter. It is not meant to represent a “true”。

Advancing Drug Discovery A Pharmaceutics Perspective

Correspondence to: Elizabeth Kwong (Telephone: +514-694-6475; E-mail: ec kwong@videotron.ca)
Journal of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Vol. 104, 865–871 (2015) C 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association
ABSTRACT: Current industry perspective of how discovery is conducted seems to be fragmented and does not have a uniﬁed overall outlook of how discovery challenges are being addressed. Consequently, well-deﬁned processes and drug-likeness criteria are being viewed as “broken” and will not maintain future R&D productivity. In this commentary, an analysis of existing practices for deﬁning successful development candidates resulted in a 5 “must do” list to help advance Drug Discovery as presented from a Pharmaceutics perspectiБайду номын сангаасe. The 5 “must do” list includes: what an ideal discovery team model should look like, what criteria should be considered for the desired development candidate proﬁle, what the building blocks of the development candidate should look like, and how to assess the development risks of the candidate. C 2014 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. and the American Pharmacists Association J Pharm Sci 104:865–871, 2015 Keywords: drug-like properties; operating models in discovery; physicochemical properties; Drug Design; ADMET properties; insilico modeling; in-vitro models;target therapeutic proﬁle (TPP); developability risk assessment; MAD; rule of ﬁve

Osteoconductive and Hemostatic Properties of Apatite Formed

Osteoconductive and Hemostatic Properties of Apatite Formed on/in Agarose Gel as a Bone-Grafting MaterialMasashi Tabata,1Toru Shimoda,2Kazumasa Sugihara,3Daisuke Ogomi,4Takeshi Serizawa,4Mitsuru Akashi4,*1Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery,Miyakonojo National Hospital,5033-1Iwayoshi,Miyakonojo,Miyazaki885-0014,Japan2Department of Dentistry,National Sanatorium Hoshizukakeiaien,4204Hoshizuka,Kanoya,Kagoshima893-8502,Japan 3First Department of Oral and Maxillofacial Surgery,Kagoshima University Dental School,8-35-1Sakuragaoka, Kagoshima,890-8544,Japan4Department of Nanostructured and Advanced Materials Graduate School of Science and Engineering,Kagoshima University,1-21-40Korimoto,Kagoshima890-0065,JapanReceived19September2002;accepted24February2003Abstract:The biologic behavior of hydroxyapatite formed on/in agarose(HA/agarose)gelswith the use of a novel alternate soaking process was compared with commercially availableBone Ject(True-Bone ceramic–collagen combined bone-graft material,Koken,Japan)as aﬁller for the tooth-extraction sockets of six adult monkeys(Macasa fascicularis).After themonkeys’ﬁrst premolars were extracted,the defects created were replaced with one of thefollowing materials:(a)HA/agarose created by12soaking cycles,(b)HA/agarose created by9soaking cycles,(c)Bone Ject,and(d)no material implantation(control).The time ofhemostasis in each extraction site was estimated,and the samples were then studied histolog-ically.In the controls,the time of hemostasis was about5min.The Bone Ject particles wereeasily washed out by bleeding,and the time of hemostasis was about15min.The HA/agarosegel was densely packed into the bony defect.The hemorrhage from the defects stopped withina few seconds after graft placement.This hemostasis was most likely related to the compact-ibility and adhesiveness of the material.After12weeks of implantation,free Bone Jectparticles surrounded by inﬂammatory cells were observed.The bony defectﬁlled with theHA/agarose gels was completely absorbed and replaced by newly formed bone possessing bonemarrow.There was no difference in the biologic behavior of HA/agarose gels created by9versus12soaking cycles.The present study suggests that HA/agarose gels may play animportant role as an alternative biodegradable bone-graft material for autogenous bone inhumans.©2003Wiley Periodicals,Inc.J Biomed Mater Res Part B:Appl Biomater67B:680–688,2003Keywords:apatite–agarose composite;bone-graft material;osteoblast;hemostatic prop-erty;biodegradableINTRODUCTIONAutogenous bone is generally considered to be the best ma-terial forﬁlling bony defects.However,clinical situations such as the size of the bony defect,the absence of sufﬁcient donor tissue,or the need for a second surgical intervention may preclude its use.In an attempt to eliminate these difﬁ-culties,various biomaterials have been developed.Calcium phosphates,such as hydroxyapatite(HA),have a chemical structure similar to the mineral part of bone.The most attrac-tive characteristics of hydroxyapatite are the absence of any local or systemic toxicity,the absence of inﬂammatory or foreign-body responses connected with its use,and its bond-ing to bone,1–4although there may be woven connective ﬁbrous tissues between the implanted material and the bone.5,6These materials also possess osteoconductive activ-ity;they provide a physical matrix suitable for the deposition of new bone,and can stimulate bone growth.1,6–8 Hydroxyapatite(HA)is used to reconstruct bony defects and to augment resorbed alveolar ridges by providing aCorrespondence to:Mitsuru Akashi,Department of Nanostructured and Advanced Materials,Graduate School of Science and Engineering,Kagoshima University,1-21-40 Korimoto,Kagoshima890-0065,Japan(e-mail:akashi@apc.kagoshima-u.ac.jp) *Present address:Department of Molecular Chemistry,Graduate School of Engi-neering,Osaka University,2-1Yamada-oka,Suita565-0871,Japan©2003Wiley Periodicals,Inc.680scaffold for enhanced bone-tissue repair and growth.The mechanism of action for HA is osteoconduction.The most commonly used types of HA have been decaliciﬁed bovine bone,and those derived from natural sources.9,10New bone formation takes place along the surfaces of these materials. Hydroxyapatite particles are often used for ridge augmenta-tion and bony defects,and conform well to the underlying bony structure.However,HA particles are very difﬁcult to place into a bony defect,are problematic to transfer to the site of repair, and are easily washed out when bleeding occurs.It is difﬁcult to determine whether sufﬁcient material remains in the site before closing,and suction to clean the area has to be avoided because of the possibility of removing the needed material.It is also impossible to plug the bony defect densely.Therefore, a hemostasis effect with HA cannot be expected.11A biode-gradable form of HA that is easily mixed,transferred,and packed,and will remain in the defect site,is needed.Previ-ously,Akashi and co-workers developed a novel alternate soaking process and demonstrated that bone-like apatite was formed on/in the organic polymer hydrogel matrices when this process was used.This process is based on the widely known wet process for hydroxyapatite preparation performed by alternately soaking in CaCl2/HCl and Na2HPO4aqueous solutions.12–15In the present study,an agarose gel is applied to the organic polymer hydrogel matrices.Because agarose gel is potentially biodegradable,a composite formed with agarose and apatite may give it high osteoconductivity as well as biodegradability.The purpose of this study was to evaluate and compare the effectiveness of commercially available Bone Ject(dense HA,Koken,Japan)and hydroxyapatite formed on/in agarose (HA/agarose)gels prepared with the use of a novel alternate soaking process asﬁllers for tooth-extraction sockets in the jaws of Macasa fascicularis monkeys.MATERIALS AND METHODSMaterialsAgarose was purchased from BioProducts.Agarose gel was obtained by cooling3w/v%aqueous solutions of agarose in the molds.The agarose gels were then swollen in distilled water for3days.The gels were subsequently punched out into10–mm-diameter discs so they could be used in the alternate soaking process.The swelling ratio(SR)of agarose gel was32.2.It was calculated by the following equation: swelling ratioϭ(WϪW0)/W0,where W and W0are the weight of the swollen and dried agarose gel,respectively.HA Formation on/in Agarose GelsHA formation in the agarose gels was carried out as follows (see Figure1):Step1:A disk-shaped agarose gel was soaked in10ml of the CaCl2/HCl(pH7.4)(Ca solution)(200mM)at4°C for2h.Step2:The agarose gel was taken out of the Ca solution, and was rinsed with excess water at4°C.Step3:The gel was subsequently soaked in the Na2HPO4 aqueous solution(P solution)(120mM)at4°C for2h.Step4:Similar to Step2,the gel was removed from the P solution and then rinsed with excess water at4°C.With the use of these four steps,the HA formed on/in the agarose gel was deposited by alternately soaking the gel in the Ca and P solutions.The amount of HA formed on/in agarose gel was calculated by the following equation: (HA formed)ϭ(freeze-dried HA/agarose gel after soaking cycles)Ϫ(freeze-dried agarose gel)ϭ(freeze-dried HA/agarose gel after soaking cycles)Ϫ(wet agarose gel)/(1ϩswelling ratio of agarose gel).Analysis of the Reaction ProductsThe HA/agarose gels were freeze-dried and were analyzed by X-ray diffraction with a Geigerﬂex RAD-⌸B(Rigaku Co., Tokyo,Japan)at a scanning angle that ranged from50°to20°at2°/min.The HA/agarose gels were thenﬁxed onto a stage for scanning electron microscopic(SEM)observation.Gold was spattered on theﬁlms at a thickness of approximately20 nm,and then the surface was observed with a HITACHI S-4100H SEM.Animal StudyThis study was approved by the Institutional Animal Exper-imental Committee.Six female adult Macasa fascicularis monkeys were used in this investigation(age5years,weight ranging from3.34to3.77kg).The animals were anesthetized with ketamine(10mg/kg)given intramuscularly.All proce-dures were performed under sterile conditions.The areas that received the surgery were inﬁltrated locally with2%xylo-caine with1:100,000epinephrine for hemostasis.After theﬁrst premolar was extracted,the bony defect was replaced with one of the following materials:(a)HA/agarose gel created by12soaking cycles,(b)HA/agarose gel created by9soaking cycles,(c)Bone Ject,and(d)no material implantation(control).The bony defect of the maxilla was not closed,and was evaluated for the bleeding time.The bony defect of the mandible was closed with4-0silk for histolog-ical evaluation.The animals were maintained in individual cages during the entire experimental period,and were sacriﬁced after30 and90days.For sacriﬁce,they were again anesthetized,and the jaws were dissected.After90days,the bone width in the center of the extraction cavities was calculated.This morpho-681OSTEOCONDUCTIVE AND HEMOSTATIC PROPERTIES OF APATITEmetric analysis was performed four times in order to deter-mine the reproducibility of the method employed.After rou-tine laboratory procedures were performed,the specimens with the extraction cavities were embedded in parafﬁn,and histologic serial sections were prepared.These sections were 6␮m thick,and were taken as transverse sections of the specimens.Tissue reaction,amount of newly formed bone, bone characteristics,and the presence or absence of the implanted materials were all evaluated.RESULTSCharacterization of the HA/AgaroseHA was formed on/in the agarose gels by an alternate soaking process.First,the morphology of the HA/agarose was ob-served by scanning-electron microscopy(SEM).Figure2 shows SEM observation of the agarose gel and HA/agarose created by12soaking cycles.The HA/agarose had small HA particles of about200–500nm.The HA/agarose created by this method,as expected,was replaced in the bony defect. The crystallographic structure of the HA was studied with X-ray diffraction.The pattern of the HA/agarose appeared as broad peaks of the HA and octacalcium phosphate.The HA is the most thermodynamically stable calcium phosphate in a natural or basic environment;thus,HA-rich calcium phos-phates formed on/in the agarose gels.Although the crystal-linity of the HA formed on/in agarose gels is relatively low, it is similar to that of natural bone apatite.16These results suggest that this method can be applied to bone-like materi-als.Subsequently,the quantity of HA formed on/in the aga-rose gels was determined.The amount of HA formed on/in the agarose gel continued to increase almost linearly with an increase in the soaking cycles in agreement with previous studies.13–15After9and12soaking cycles,an agarose gel has about12and14mg of HA on/in the gel.The animal studies evaluated here used HA/agarose created by9and12soaking cycles.Gross ObservationsThe postoperative period was uneventful for all animals.All extraction wounds healed completely.No macroscopic signs of infection could be detected.Table I shows the mean width of the extraction sites after90days.The mean bone width of the maxilla was3.8Ϯ0.1mm in the HA/agarose cavity of maxilla and,2.9Ϯ0.2mm in the control cavity.The mean bone width of the mandible was 3.3Ϯ0.1mm in the HA/agarose cavity,2.5Ϯ0.0mm in the Bone Ject cavity,and 2.3Ϯ0.1mm in the control cavity(Figures3and4).The mean bone width in the HA/agarose cavity was signiﬁcantly larger than that of the control and Bone Ject cavity.Results of the Hemostatic Evaluation●Cavities(Bone Ject):The Bone Ject particles were easily washed out by bleeding(Figure5);the time of hemostasis was about15min.Delayed bleeding was observed in the animals after they woke.●Cavities(control):No material wasﬁlled.The bleeding time was about5min.Figure1.Experimental procedures of an alternate soakingprocess.Figure2.SEM image of(a)the agarose gel,(b)the HA/agarose gel created by12soaking cycles. 682TABATA ET AL.●Cavities(HA/agarose gel):HA/agarose gel created by9 and12cycles could be densely packed into the bony defect (Figure6).Hemorrhage from the defects stopped within a few seconds after graft placement.This hemostasis was most likely related to the compactibility and adhesiveness of the material.After awakening,delayed bleeding did not occur in the animals.Results of the Histologic Evaluation●At30days postoperative,the HA/agarose gel cavity ex-hibited a trabecular bone pattern with large marrow spaces ﬁlled with adipose-type tissue(Figure7).Reversion lines limited the newly formed bone and preexisting bone.The HA/agarose gel could not be seen.The newly formed bone demonstrated other features of the haversian system,pre-senting with a larger amount of osteocytes that showed an immaturity in relation to the surrounding bone,thus indi-cating a process of bone repair(Figure7).After90days,the cavity had been completely repaired by denser lamellar bone,with scarcer and smaller marrow spaces(Figure8).●At30days postoperative,the control cavities were nearly the same as the HA/agarose cavities(Figure9).After90 days,the amount of newly formed bone was less than the HA/agarose cavity(Figure10).●At30days postoperative,the Bone Ject cavity demon-strated newly formed lamellar bone between the Bone Ject granules(Figure11).The newly formed bone was denser as compared to the30-day HA/agarose gel cavity.Some free granules in theﬁbrous connective tissue and epithe-lium were observed.The connective tissue demonstrated mild inﬂammatory inﬁltrate characterized by the presence of mononuclear cells(Figure11).After90days,more free granules and a smaller amount of newly formed bone as compared to30days was recognized.As compared to the HA/agarose gel,less new bone was formed(Figure12).DISCUSSIONWith the use of extraction bony defects in monkeys,the biocompatibility,resorption,osteogenic potential,hemosta-sis,and bonding of exogenous materials(HA/agarose gel and Bone Ject)into bony tissues were evaluated.The HA/agarose gel formed a cohesive mass when in contact with the blood of the animal,a feature that ensured its accommodation in the cavity with a minimum loss of material duringimplantation.Figure3.Occlusal aspect of the mandible after90days.The right cavity(HA/agarose)had well-preserved bone width.TABLE I.Bone-Width Mean Values after90Days(N؍2)Mean Bone Widths(mm)Maxilla HA/agarose 3.8Ϯ0.1control 2.9Ϯ0.2Mandible HA/agarose 3.3Ϯ0.1Bone Ject 2.5Ϯ0control 2.3Ϯ0.1683 OSTEOCONDUCTIVE AND HEMOSTATIC PROPERTIES OF APATITEIt also seemed to assist in controlling the bleeding.The Bone Ject,even after hemostasis of the cavity,showed a tendency to move when in contact with blood.Consequently,because of the characteristics of the material,displacement of the Bone Ject granules may occur during the stabilization of the clot and the initial healing period.At 30days postoperative,the HA/agarose cavity demon-strated less newly formed bone as compared with thecontrolFigure 4.Occlusal aspect of mandible after 90days.The bone width of the right cavity (Bone Ject)was the same as the left cavity(control).Figure 5.Packed Bone Ject particles were washed out by bleeding from the bone cavity.684TABATA ET AL.Figure6.HA/agarose gel was densely packed into the bone cavity,and the hemorrhage stopped within a fewminutes.Figure7.Histologic evaluation of the30-days-postoperative HA/agarose gel cavity.The lower-magniﬁcation view shows the trabecular bone pattern with large marrow spaces(hematoxylin-eosin staining,original magniﬁcationϫ25).Reversian lines(arrow)were observed.685OSTEOCONDUCTIVE AND HEMOSTATIC PROPERTIES OF APATITEand Bone Ject.Almost all of the HA/agarose gel was resorbed.In the connective tissue,abundant mesenchymal cells were observed.After 90days,the newly formed bone was more abundant and denser than in the control or Bone Ject cavities.These ﬁndings suggest that the HA/agarose gel absorbed by the mesenchymal cells can stimulate osteogen-esis in the bone cavity.The biocompatibility of the HA/agarose gel used in this experiment was shown by the fact that HA/agarose gel re-maining in the defect were bonded to the bony tissue without the presence of inﬂammatory cells after 90days.The material aspect inside the newly formed bone indicates the formation of chambers in the granules,resulting in the removal of the agarose gel,thus allowing bone formation around theinsideFigure 8.Histologic evaluation of the 90-days-postoperative HA/agarose cavity.The lower-magniﬁ-cation view shows that the cavity was completely repaired by denser lamellar bone (hematoxylin-eosin staining,original magniﬁcation ϫ25).Figure 9.Histologic evaluation of the 30-days-postoperative control cavity (hematoxylin-eosin stain-ing,original magniﬁcation ϫ25).686TABATA ET AL.of HA/agarose gel.This demonstrates that the material was a good scaffold for bone formation.After 30days,abundant newly formed bone was observed between the Bone Ject particles.However,after 90days,the newly formed bone decreased signiﬁcantly,and free Bone Ject granules in the connective tissue increased.This phe-nomenon can characterize a foreign-body reaction to this material.This foreign-body reaction to the Bone Ject granules could be due to their huge diameter and nonresolution.The diam-eter of the Bone Ject particles was 300–600␮m.The diam-eter of HA formed on/in agarose gel was 200–500nm,and it was biodegradable.Therefore,its ability to promote osteo-genesis in the cavity was superior to that of Bone Ject.In summary,HA/agarose gel possesses the following char-acteristics:(a)it appears to completely repair intraosseous defects by quickly ﬁlling the defects through osteoconduc-tion;(b)the osseous repair is superior to that obtained with Bone Ject;(c)it is easily mixed,transferred,and packed,and is well-contained in the defect site;(d)it has hemostatic functions within the intraosseous defect;and (e)it is rapidly resorbed within 30days.Figure 10.Histologic evaluation of the 90-days-postoperative control cavity (hematoxylin-eosin staining,original magniﬁcation ϫ25).Figure 11.Histologic evaluation of the 30-days-postoperative Bone Ject cavity.The lower-magniﬁ-cation view shows the newly formed lamellar bone between the Bone Ject granules (hematoxylin-eosin staining,original magniﬁcation ϫ25).687OSTEOCONDUCTIVE AND HEMOSTATIC PROPERTIES OF APATITEThe present study suggests that HA/agarose gel may play an important role as an alternative biodegradable bone-graft material for autogenous bone in humans.REFERENCES1.Jarcho M.Biomaterial aspects of calcium phosphate.Dent Clin North Am 1986;30:25–47.2.Cobb CM,Eick JD,Barker BF,Mosby EL,Hiatt WR.Resto-ration of mandibular continuity defects using combinations of hydroxyapatite and autogenous bone:Microscopic observa-tions.J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48:268–275.3.Denissen HW,Kalk W.Preventive implantations.Int Dent J 1991;47:17–24.4.Byrd HS,Nobar CP,Shewmake K.Augmentation of the cranio-facial skeleton with porous hydroxyapatite granules.Plast Re-constr Surg 1993;91:15–22.5.Passi P,Terribile Wiel Marin V,Parenti A,Miotti A.Ultra-structural ﬁndings on the interface between hydroxyapatite and oral tissues.Quintessence Int 1991;22:193–197.6.Pettis GY,Kaban LB,Glowacki J.Tissue response to composite ceramic hydroxyapatite/demineralized bone implants.J Oral Maxillofac Surg 1990;48:1068–1074.7.Bauer G.Biochemical aspects of osseointegration.In:Heimke G,editor.Osseointegrated implants.Boston:CRC Press;1990.pp 81–89.8.Nagahara K,Isogai M,Shibata K,Meenaghan M.Osteogenesis of hydroxyapatite and tricalcium phosphate used as a bone substitute.Int J Oral Maxillofac Implants 1992;7:72–79.9.Meffert RM,Thomas JR,Hamilton KM,Brownstein CN.Hy-droxyapatite as an alloplastic graft in the treatment of human periodontal osseous defects.J Periodontol 1985;56:63–73.10.Misch CE,Dietsh F.Bone-grafting materials in implant den-tistry.Implant Dent 1993;2:158–167.11.Wilson J.Bioactive ceramics for periodontal treatment:Com-parative studies in the Patus monkey.J Appl Biomater 1992;3:123-129.12.Taguchi T,Kishida A,Akashi M.Hydroxyapatite formationon/in hydrogels using a novel alternate soaking process.Chem Lett 1998;8:711–712.13.Taguchi T,Kishida A,Akashi M.Apatite formation on/inhydrogel matrices using an alternate soaking process.II:Effect of swelling ratios of poly(vinyl alcohol)hydrogel matrices on apatite formation.J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 1999;10:331–339.14.Taguchi T,Kishida A,Akashi M.Apatite formation on/inhydrogel matrices using an alternate soaking process III:Effect of physico-chemical factor on apatite formation on/in poly(vinyl alcohol)hydrogel matrices.J Biomater Sci Polym Ed 1999;10:795–804.15.Tachaboonyakiat W,Serizawa T,Akashi M.Hydroxyapatiteformation on/in biodegradable chitosan hydrogels by an alter-nate soaking process.Polym J 2001;33:177–181.16.Okazaki M,Ohmae H,Tanahashi J,Kimura H,Sakuda M.Insolubilized properties of UV-irradiated CO 3apatite–collagen composites.Biomaterials1990;11:568–572.Figure 12.Histologic evaluation of the 90-days-postoperative Bone Ject cavity shows more free Bone Ject granules and a smaller amount of newly formed bone (hematoxylin-eosin staining,original magniﬁcation ϫ25).688TABATA ET AL.。

Analyzing the Properties of Amphiphilic Molecules

Analyzing the Properties ofAmphiphilic MoleculesAmphiphilic molecules, also known as amphiphiles, are compounds that possess both hydrophilic (water-loving) and hydrophobic (water-fearing) properties. They are made up of two distinct regions: a polar or charged head group that interacts with water, and a nonpolar or uncharged hydrophobic tail that avoids water. Due to their unique properties, amphiphilic molecules are commonly found in nature, and are an essential component of living organisms.One of the most well-known examples of an amphiphilic molecule is phospholipids, which are the building blocks of cell membranes. A phospholipid molecule consists of a hydrophilic head (phosphate group) and two hydrophobic tails (fatty acids). When phospholipids are placed in water, the hydrophilic heads interact with water while the hydrophobic tails avoid it. This results in the formation of a bilayer structure, with the hydrophobic tails facing each other and the hydrophilic heads facing the surrounding water. This bilayer structure is the basis for the selective permeability of cell membranes.Another example of an amphiphilic molecule is soap. Soap is a combination of a long hydrophobic tail (made of a fatty acid) and a hydrophilic head (made of a carboxylate ion). When soap is added to water, it forms micelles – small clusters of molecules with their hydrophobic tails pointing inward and their hydrophilic heads pointing outward. The hydrophobic tails bind to oil and dirt, while the hydrophilic heads interact with water, allowing the micelles to remove the dirt and oil from the surface being cleaned.Amphiphilic molecules also play a crucial role in biological processes such as protein folding and DNA structure. Proteins are complex macromolecules that consist of one or more long chains of amino acids. When proteins are synthesized, they initially form a linear chain. However, the final folded structure of a protein is essential to its function. The folding process is facilitated by the interaction of hydrophilic andhydrophobic interactions between amino acid residues, allowing the protein to fold into its unique three-dimensional structure.In DNA, the nucleotides that make up the backbone of the molecule are hydrophilic, allowing them to interact with the water molecules in the surrounding environment. However, the nitrogenous bases that make up the rungs of the DNA ladder are hydrophobic, causing them to stack on top of each other in the interior of the double helix molecule.In conclusion, the properties of amphiphilic molecules allow them to play vital roles in a wide range of biological processes. The interaction between hydrophilic and hydrophobic regions is essential for the structure and function of biological molecules, from cell membranes to proteins and DNA. The understanding of amphiphilic molecules and their properties is crucial to understanding the complex workings of living organisms.。

1、下载文档前请自行甄别文档内容的完整性，平台不提供额外的编辑、内容补充、找答案等附加服务。
2、"仅部分预览"的文档,不可在线预览部分如存在完整性等问题,可反馈申请退款(可完整预览的文档不适用该条件!)。
3、如文档侵犯您的权益，请联系客服反馈,我们会尽快为您处理(人工客服工作时间：9:00-18:30)。

CONCENTRATIVE PROPERTIES OF AQUEOUS SOLUTIONS: DENSITY, REFRACTIVE INDEX, FREEZING POINT DEPRESSION, AND VISCOSITYThis table gives properties of aqueous solutions of 66 substanc-es as a function of concentration. All data refer to a temperature of 20°C. The properties are:Mass %: Mass of solute divided by total mass of solution,expressed as percent.m Molality (moles of solute per kg of water).c Molarity (moles of solute per liter of solution).ρ Density of solution in g/cm3.n Index of refraction, relative to air, at a wavelength of 589 nm (sodium D line); the index of pure water at 20°C is1.3330.∆ Freezing point depression in °C relative to pure water. η Absolute (dynamic) viscosity in mPa s (equal tocentipoise, cP); the viscosity of pure water at 20°C is1.002 mPa s.Density data for aqueous solutions over a wider range of tem-peratures and pressures (and for other compounds) may be found in Reference 2. Solutes are listed in the following order:Acetic acid Lithium chloride2-PropanolAcetone Magnesium chloride Silver nitrateAmmonia Magnesium sulfate Sodium acetateAmmonium chloride Maltose Sodium bicarbonateAmmonium sulfate Manganese(II) sulfate Sodium bromideBarium chloride D-Mannitol Sodium carbonateCalcium chloride Methanol Sodium chlorideCesium chloride Nitric acid Sodium citrateCitric acid Oxalic acid Sodium hydroxideCopper sulfate Phosphoric acid Sodium nitrateDisodium ethylenediamine Potassium bicarbonate Sodium phosphatetetraacetate (EDTA sodium)Potassium bromide Sodium hydrogen phosphateEthanol Potassium carbonate Sodium dihydrogen phosphateEthylene glycol Potassium chloride Sodium sulfateFerric chloride Potassium hydroxide Sodium thiosulfateFormic acid Potassium iodide Strontium chlorideD-Fructose Potassium nitrate SucroseD-Glucose Potassium permanganate Sulfuric acidGlycerol Potassium hydrogen phosphate Trichloroacetic acidHydrochloric acid Potassium dihydrogen phosphate Tris(hydroxymethyl)methylamineLactic acid Potassium sulfate UreaLactose1-Propanol Zinc sulfateReferences1. Wolf, A. V., Aqueous Solutions and Body Fluids, Hoeber, 1966.2. Söhnel, O., and Novotny, P., Densities of Aqueous Solutions of Inorganic Substances, Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1985.Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s Acetic acid0.50.0840.0830.9989 1.33340.16 1.012 CH3COOH 1.00.1680.1660.9996 1.33370.32 1.0222.00.3400.333 1.0011 1.33450.63 1.0423.00.5150.501 1.0025 1.33520.94 1.0634.00.6940.669 1.0038 1.3359 1.26 1.0845.00.8760.837 1.0052 1.3366 1.58 1.1056.0 1.063 1.006 1.0066 1.3373 1.90 1.1257.0 1.253 1.175 1.0080 1.3381 2.23 1.1438.0 1.448 1.345 1.0093 1.3388 2.56 1.1629.0 1.647 1.515 1.0107 1.3395 2.89 1.18610.0 1.850 1.685 1.0121 1.3402 3.23 1.21012.0 2.271 2.028 1.0147 1.3416 3.91 1.25314.0 2.711 2.372 1.0174 1.3430 4.61 1.29816.0 3.172 2.718 1.0200 1.3444 5.33 1.34118.0 3.655 3.065 1.0225 1.3458 6.06 1.38020.0 4.163 3.414 1.0250 1.3472 6.81 1.43122.0 4.697 3.764 1.0275 1.34857.57 1.47824.0 5.259 4.116 1.0299 1.34988.36 1.525 8-52Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s26.0 5.851 4.470 1.0323 1.35129.17 1.57228.0 6.476 4.824 1.0346 1.352510.00 1.61330.07.137 5.180 1.0369 1.353710.84 1.66932.07.837 5.537 1.0391 1.355011.70 1.71534.08.579 5.896 1.0413 1.356212.55 1.76236.09.367 6.255 1.0434 1.357413.38 1.81238.010.207 6.615 1.0454 1.3586 1.85240.011.102 6.977 1.0474 1.3598 1.91250.016.6538.794 1.0562 1.3653 2.15860.024.97910.620 1.0629 1.3700 2.40970.038.85712.441 1.0673 1.3738 2.62980.066.61114.228 1.0680 1.3767 2.72090.0149.87515.953 1.0644 1.3771 2.38692.0191.50716.284 1.0629 1.3766 2.24094.0260.89416.602 1.0606 1.3759 2.03696.0399.66716.911 1.0578 1.3748 1.81398.0815.98717.198 1.0538 1.3734 1.535100.017.447 1.0477 1.3716 1.223Acetone0.50.0870.0860.9975 1.33340.16 1.013 (CH3)2CO 1.00.1740.1720.9968 1.33370.32 1.0242.00.3510.3430.9954 1.33440.65 1.0473.00.5330.5130.9940 1.33520.97 1.0724.00.7170.6840.9926 1.3359 1.30 1.0995.00.9060.8530.9912 1.3366 1.63 1.1256.0 1.099 1.0230.9899 1.3373 1.96 1.1507.0 1.296 1.1910.9886 1.3381 2.29 1.1748.0 1.497 1.3600.9874 1.3388 2.62 1.1989.0 1.703 1.5280.9861 1.3395 2.95 1.22110.0 1.913 1.6960.9849 1.3402 3.29 1.244Ammonia0.50.2950.2920.9960 1.33320.55 1.009 NH3 1.00.5930.5840.9938 1.3335 1.14 1.0152.0 1.198 1.1620.9895 1.3339 2.32 1.0293.0 1.816 1.7360.9853 1.3344 3.53 1.0434.0 2.447 2.3040.9811 1.3349 4.78 1.0575.0 3.090 2.8680.9770 1.33546.08 1.0716.0 3.748 3.4280.9730 1.33597.43 1.0857.0 4.420 3.9830.9690 1.33658.95 1.0998.0 5.106 4.5330.9651 1.337010.34 1.1139.0 5.807 5.0800.9613 1.337611.90 1.12710.0 6.524 5.6220.9575 1.338113.55 1.14112.08.007 6.6950.9502 1.339317.13 1.16914.09.5587.7530.9431 1.340421.13 1.19516.011.1848.7940.9361 1.341625.63 1.21818.012.8899.8230.9294 1.342830.70 1.23720.014.67910.8370.9228 1.344036.42 1.25422.016.56111.8380.9164 1.345343.36 1.26824.018.54212.8260.9102 1.346551.38 1.28026.020.63013.8010.9040 1.347760.77 1.28828.022.83414.7640.8980 1.349071.6630.025.16415.7130.8920 1.350284.06 Ammonium0.50.0940.0930.9998 1.33400.320.999 chloride 1.00.1890.187 1.0014 1.33490.640.996 NH4Cl 2.00.3820.376 1.0045 1.3369 1.270.9923.00.5780.565 1.0076 1.3388 1.910.9884.00.7790.756 1.0107 1.3407 2.570.9855.00.9840.948 1.0138 1.3426 3.250.9826.0 1.193 1.141 1.0168 1.3445 3.940.9797.0 1.407 1.335 1.0198 1.3464 4.660.976Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s8.0 1.626 1.529 1.0227 1.3483 5.400.9749.0 1.849 1.726 1.0257 1.3502 6.160.97210.0 2.077 1.923 1.0286 1.3521 6.950.97012.0 2.549 2.320 1.0344 1.35598.600.96914.0 3.043 2.722 1.0401 1.35960.96916.0 3.561 3.128 1.0457 1.36340.97118.0 4.104 3.537 1.0512 1.36710.97320.0 4.674 3.951 1.0567 1.37080.97822.0 5.273 4.368 1.0621 1.37450.98624.0 5.903 4.789 1.0674 1.37820.996 Ammonium0.50.0380.038 1.0012 1.33380.17 1.008 sulfate 1.00.0760.076 1.0042 1.33460.33 1.014 (NH4)2SO4 2.00.1540.153 1.0101 1.33630.63 1.0273.00.2340.231 1.0160 1.33790.92 1.0414.00.3150.309 1.0220 1.3395 1.21 1.0575.00.3980.389 1.0279 1.3411 1.49 1.0736.00.4830.469 1.0338 1.3428 1.77 1.0907.00.5700.551 1.0397 1.3444 2.05 1.1088.00.6580.633 1.0456 1.3460 2.33 1.1279.00.7480.716 1.0515 1.3476 2.61 1.14710.00.8410.800 1.0574 1.3492 2.89 1.16812.0 1.0320.971 1.0691 1.3523 3.47 1.21014.0 1.232 1.145 1.0808 1.3555 4.07 1.25616.0 1.441 1.323 1.0924 1.3586 4.69 1.30518.0 1.661 1.504 1.1039 1.3616 1.35920.0 1.892 1.688 1.1154 1.3647 1.42122.0 2.134 1.876 1.1269 1.3677 1.49024.0 2.390 2.067 1.1383 1.3707 1.56626.0 2.659 2.262 1.1496 1.3737 1.65028.0 2.943 2.460 1.1609 1.3766 1.74330.0 3.243 2.661 1.1721 1.3795 1.84732.0 3.561 2.866 1.1833 1.3824 1.96134.0 3.898 3.073 1.1945 1.3853 2.08636.0 4.257 3.284 1.2056 1.3881 2.22238.0 4.638 3.499 1.2166 1.3909 2.37140.0 5.045 3.716 1.2277 1.3938 2.530 Barium0.50.0240.024 1.0026 1.33370.12 1.009 chloride 1.00.0490.048 1.0070 1.33450.23 1.016 BaCl2 2.00.0980.098 1.0159 1.33600.46 1.0263.00.1490.148 1.0249 1.33750.69 1.0374.00.2000.199 1.0341 1.33910.93 1.0495.00.2530.251 1.0434 1.3406 1.18 1.0626.00.3070.303 1.0528 1.3422 1.44 1.0757.00.3610.357 1.0624 1.3438 1.70 1.0878.00.4180.412 1.0721 1.3454 1.98 1.1019.00.4750.468 1.0820 1.3470 2.27 1.11410.00.5340.524 1.0921 1.3487 2.58 1.12912.00.6550.641 1.1128 1.3520 3.22 1.16114.00.7820.763 1.1342 1.3555 3.92 1.19516.00.9150.889 1.1564 1.3591 4.69 1.23418.0 1.054 1.019 1.1793 1.3627 1.27720.0 1.201 1.156 1.2031 1.3664 1.32522.0 1.355 1.297 1.2277 1.3703 1.37824.0 1.517 1.444 1.2531 1.3741 1.43726.0 1.687 1.597 1.2793 1.3781 1.503 Calcium0.50.0450.045 1.0024 1.33420.22 1.015 chloride 1.00.0910.091 1.0065 1.33540.44 1.028 CaCl2 2.00.1840.183 1.0148 1.33780.88 1.050Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s3.00.2790.277 1.0232 1.3402 1.33 1.0784.00.3750.372 1.0316 1.3426 1.82 1.1105.00.4740.469 1.0401 1.3451 2.35 1.1436.00.5750.567 1.0486 1.3475 2.93 1.1757.00.6780.667 1.0572 1.3500 3.57 1.2088.00.7840.768 1.0659 1.3525 4.28 1.2429.00.8910.872 1.0747 1.3549 5.04 1.27910.0 1.0010.976 1.0835 1.3575 5.86 1.31912.0 1.229 1.191 1.1014 1.36257.70 1.40814.0 1.467 1.413 1.1198 1.36779.83 1.50816.0 1.716 1.641 1.1386 1.373012.28 1.62518.0 1.978 1.878 1.1579 1.378415.11 1.76420.0 2.253 2.122 1.1775 1.383918.30 1.93022.0 2.541 2.374 1.1976 1.389521.70 2.12724.0 2.845 2.634 1.2180 1.395125.30 2.35626.0 3.166 2.902 1.2388 1.400829.70 2.64528.0 3.504 3.179 1.2600 1.406634.70 3.00030.0 3.862 3.464 1.2816 1.412441.00 3.46732.0 4.240 3.759 1.3036 1.418349.70 4.03534.0 4.642 4.062 1.3260 1.4242 4.82036.0 5.068 4.375 1.3488 1.4301 5.80738.0 5.522 4.698 1.3720 1.43617.32140.0 6.007 5.030 1.3957 1.44208.997 Cesium0.50.0300.030 1.0020 1.33340.10 1.000 chloride 1.00.0600.060 1.0058 1.33370.200.997 CsCl 2.00.1210.120 1.0135 1.33450.400.9923.00.1840.182 1.0214 1.33530.610.9884.00.2470.245 1.0293 1.33610.810.9845.00.3130.308 1.0374 1.3369 1.020.9806.00.3790.373 1.0456 1.3377 1.220.9777.00.4470.438 1.0540 1.3386 1.430.9748.00.5160.505 1.0625 1.3394 1.640.9719.00.5870.573 1.0711 1.3403 1.850.96910.00.6600.641 1.0798 1.3412 2.060.96612.00.8100.782 1.0978 1.3430 2.510.96114.00.9670.928 1.1163 1.3448 2.970.95516.0 1.131 1.079 1.1355 1.3468 3.460.95018.0 1.304 1.235 1.1552 1.3487 3.960.94520.0 1.485 1.397 1.1756 1.3507 4.490.93922.0 1.675 1.564 1.1967 1.35280.93424.0 1.876 1.737 1.2185 1.35500.93026.0 2.087 1.917 1.2411 1.35720.92628.0 2.310 2.103 1.2644 1.35940.92430.0 2.546 2.296 1.2885 1.36170.92232.0 2.795 2.497 1.3135 1.36410.92234.0 3.060 2.705 1.3393 1.36660.92436.0 3.341 2.921 1.3661 1.36910.92638.0 3.640 3.146 1.3938 1.37170.93040.0 3.960 3.380 1.4226 1.37440.93442.0 4.301 3.624 1.4525 1.37710.94044.0 4.667 3.877 1.4835 1.38000.94746.0 5.060 4.142 1.5158 1.38290.95648.0 5.483 4.418 1.5495 1.38600.96750.0 5.940 4.706 1.5846 1.38920.98160.08.910 6.368 1.7868 1.4076 1.12064.010.5607.163 1.8842 1.4167 1.238 Citric acid0.50.0260.026 1.0002 1.33360.05 1.013 (HO)C(COOH)3 1.00.0530.052 1.0022 1.33430.11 1.0242.00.1060.105 1.0063 1.33560.21 1.048Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s3.00.1610.158 1.0105 1.33680.32 1.0734.00.2170.211 1.0147 1.33810.43 1.0985.00.2740.265 1.0189 1.33940.54 1.1256.00.3320.320 1.0232 1.34070.65 1.1537.00.3920.374 1.0274 1.34200.76 1.1838.00.4530.430 1.0316 1.34330.88 1.2149.00.5150.485 1.0359 1.3446 1.00 1.24710.00.5780.541 1.0402 1.3459 1.12 1.28312.00.7100.655 1.0490 1.3486 1.38 1.35714.00.8470.771 1.0580 1.3514 1.66 1.43616.00.9910.889 1.0672 1.3541 1.95 1.52518.0 1.143 1.008 1.0764 1.3569 2.26 1.62520.0 1.301 1.130 1.0858 1.3598 2.57 1.74022.0 1.468 1.254 1.0953 1.3626 2.88 1.87224.0 1.644 1.380 1.1049 1.3655 3.21 2.01726.0 1.829 1.508 1.1147 1.3684 3.55 2.17828.0 2.024 1.639 1.1246 1.3714 3.89 2.35630.0 2.231 1.772 1.1346 1.3744 4.25 2.549Copper0.50.0310.031 1.0033 1.33390.08 1.017 sulfate 1.00.0630.063 1.0085 1.33480.14 1.036 CuSO4 2.00.1280.128 1.0190 1.33670.26 1.0843.00.1940.194 1.0296 1.33860.37 1.1294.00.2610.261 1.0403 1.34050.48 1.1735.00.3300.329 1.0511 1.34240.59 1.2216.00.4000.399 1.0620 1.34430.70 1.2767.00.4720.471 1.0730 1.34620.82 1.3368.00.5450.543 1.0842 1.34810.93 1.4009.00.6200.618 1.0955 1.3501 1.05 1.46910.00.6960.694 1.1070 1.3520 1.18 1.54312.00.8540.850 1.1304 1.3560 1.45 1.70114.0 1.020 1.013 1.1545 1.3601 1.75 1.88916.0 1.193 1.182 1.1796 1.3644 2.13618.0 1.375 1.360 1.2059 1.3689 2.449Disodium0.50.0150.015 1.0009 1.33390.07 1.017 ethylenediamine 1.00.0300.030 1.0036 1.33480.14 1.032 tetraacetate 1.50.0450.045 1.0062 1.33560.21 1.046 (EDTA sodium) 2.00.0610.060 1.0089 1.33650.27 1.062 Na2C10H14N2O8 2.50.0760.075 1.0115 1.33740.33 1.0773.00.0920.090 1.0142 1.33830.40 1.0933.50.1080.106 1.0169 1.33920.46 1.1094.00.1240.121 1.0196 1.34000.52 1.1254.50.1400.137 1.0223 1.34090.58 1.1425.00.1570.152 1.0250 1.34180.65 1.1605.50.1730.168 1.0277 1.34270.71 1.1786.00.1900.184 1.0305 1.34360.77 1.197Ethanol0.50.1090.1080.9973 1.33330.20 1.023 CH3CH2OH 1.00.2190.2160.9963 1.33360.40 1.0462.00.4430.4320.9945 1.33420.81 1.0953.00.6710.6460.9927 1.3348 1.23 1.1404.00.9040.8600.9910 1.3354 1.65 1.1835.0 1.142 1.0740.9893 1.3360 2.09 1.2286.0 1.385 1.2860.9878 1.3367 2.54 1.2797.0 1.634 1.4980.9862 1.3374 2.99 1.3318.0 1.887 1.7100.9847 1.3381 3.47 1.3859.0 2.147 1.9210.9833 1.3388 3.96 1.44210.0 2.412 2.1310.9819 1.3395 4.47 1.50112.0 2.960 2.5510.9792 1.3410 5.56 1.62714.0 3.534 2.9670.9765 1.3425 6.73 1.761Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s16.0 4.134 3.3820.9739 1.34408.01 1.89018.0 4.765 3.7950.9713 1.34559.40 2.01920.0 5.427 4.2050.9687 1.346910.92 2.14222.0 6.122 4.6130.9660 1.348412.60 2.25924.0 6.855 5.0180.9632 1.349814.47 2.37026.07.626 5.4190.9602 1.351116.41 2.47628.08.441 5.8170.9571 1.352418.43 2.58130.09.303 6.2120.9539 1.353520.47 2.66732.010.215 6.6010.9504 1.354622.44 2.72634.011.182 6.9870.9468 1.355724.27 2.76836.012.2107.3700.9431 1.356625.98 2.80338.013.3047.7470.9392 1.357527.62 2.82940.014.4718.1200.9352 1.358329.26 2.84642.015.7188.4880.9311 1.359030.98 2.85244.017.0558.8530.9269 1.359832.68 2.85046.018.4909.2130.9227 1.360434.36 2.84348.020.0369.5680.9183 1.361036.04 2.83250.021.7069.9190.9139 1.361637.67 2.81360.032.55911.6050.8911 1.363844.93 2.54770.050.64813.1830.8676 1.3652 2.21480.086.82414.6490.8436 1.3658 1.88190.0195.35515.9800.8180 1.3650 1.54292.0249.62016.2250.8125 1.3646 1.47594.0340.06216.4660.8070 1.3642 1.40796.0520.94616.6970.8013 1.3636 1.34298.016.9200.7954 1.3630 1.273100.017.1330.7893 1.3614 1.203Ethylene0.50.0810.0800.9988 1.33350.15 1.010 glycol 1.00.1630.1610.9995 1.33390.30 1.020 (CH2OH)2 2.00.3290.322 1.0007 1.33480.61 1.0483.00.4980.484 1.0019 1.33580.92 1.0744.00.6710.646 1.0032 1.3367 1.24 1.0995.00.8480.809 1.0044 1.3377 1.58 1.1256.0 1.0280.972 1.0057 1.3386 1.91 1.1537.0 1.213 1.136 1.0070 1.3396 2.26 1.1828.0 1.401 1.299 1.0082 1.3405 2.62 1.2129.0 1.593 1.464 1.0095 1.3415 2.99 1.24310.0 1.790 1.628 1.0108 1.3425 3.37 1.27712.0 2.197 1.959 1.0134 1.3444 4.16 1.34814.0 2.623 2.292 1.0161 1.3464 5.01 1.42416.0 3.069 2.626 1.0188 1.3484 5.91 1.50018.0 3.537 2.962 1.0214 1.3503 6.89 1.57820.0 4.028 3.300 1.0241 1.35237.93 1.66124.0 5.088 3.981 1.0296 1.356410.28 1.84328.0 6.265 4.669 1.0350 1.360513.03 2.04732.07.582 5.364 1.0405 1.364616.23 2.28036.09.062 6.067 1.0460 1.368719.82 2.53740.010.741 6.776 1.0514 1.372823.84 2.83244.012.6597.491 1.0567 1.376928.32 3.16648.014.8728.212 1.0619 1.381133.30 3.54452.017.4538.939 1.0670 1.385138.81 3.98156.020.5059.671 1.0719 1.389244.83 4.47560.024.16610.406 1.0765 1.393151.23 5.026 Ferric0.50.0310.031 1.0025 1.33440.21 1.024 chloride 1.00.0620.062 1.0068 1.33580.39 1.047 FeCl3 2.00.1260.125 1.0153 1.33860.75 1.0933.00.1910.189 1.0238 1.3413 1.15 1.1394.00.2570.255 1.0323 1.3441 1.56 1.1875.00.3240.321 1.0408 1.3468 2.00 1.238Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s6.00.3940.388 1.0493 1.3496 2.48 1.2927.00.4640.457 1.0580 1.3524 2.99 1.3508.00.5360.526 1.0668 1.3552 3.57 1.4129.00.6100.597 1.0760 1.3581 4.19 1.48010.00.6850.669 1.0853 1.3611 4.85 1.55312.00.8410.817 1.1040 1.3670 6.38 1.70714.0 1.0040.969 1.1228 1.37308.22 1.87916.0 1.174 1.126 1.142010.45 2.08018.0 1.353 1.289 1.161513.08 2.31120.0 1.541 1.457 1.181616.14 2.57024.0 1.947 1.810 1.223423.79 3.17828.0 2.398 2.189 1.267933.61 4.03832.0 2.901 2.595 1.315349.16 5.27436.0 3.468 3.030 1.36547.13040.0 4.110 3.496 1.41769.674Formic acid0.50.1090.1090.9994 1.33330.21 1.006 HCOOH 1.00.2190.217 1.0006 1.33360.42 1.0112.00.4430.436 1.0029 1.33420.82 1.0173.00.6720.655 1.0053 1.3348 1.24 1.1954.00.9050.876 1.0077 1.3354 1.67 1.0325.0 1.143 1.097 1.0102 1.3359 2.10 1.0396.0 1.387 1.320 1.0126 1.3365 2.53 1.0467.0 1.635 1.544 1.0150 1.3371 2.97 1.0528.0 1.889 1.768 1.0175 1.3376 3.40 1.0589.0 2.149 1.994 1.0199 1.3382 3.84 1.06410.0 2.414 2.221 1.0224 1.3387 4.27 1.07012.0 2.962 2.678 1.0273 1.3397 5.19 1.08214.0 3.537 3.139 1.0322 1.3408 6.11 1.09416.0 4.138 3.605 1.0371 1.34187.06 1.10618.0 4.769 4.074 1.0419 1.34288.08 1.11920.0 5.431 4.548 1.0467 1.34379.11 1.13228.08.449 6.481 1.0654 1.347513.10 1.17936.012.2208.477 1.0839 1.351117.65 1.22744.017.07010.529 1.1015 1.354722.93 1.28152.023.53512.633 1.1183 1.358129.69 1.34060.032.58714.813 1.1364 1.361238.26 1.41068.046.16617.054 1.1544 1.3641 1.490D-Fructose0.50.0280.028 1.0002 1.33370.05 1.015 C6H12O6 1.00.0560.056 1.0021 1.33440.10 1.0282.00.1130.112 1.0061 1.33580.21 1.0543.00.1720.168 1.0101 1.33730.32 1.0804.00.2310.225 1.0140 1.33870.43 1.1065.00.2920.283 1.0181 1.34020.54 1.1346.00.3540.340 1.0221 1.34170.66 1.1657.00.4180.399 1.0262 1.34310.78 1.1988.00.4830.458 1.0303 1.34460.90 1.2329.00.5490.517 1.0344 1.3461 1.03 1.27010.00.6170.576 1.0385 1.3476 1.16 1.30912.00.7570.697 1.0469 1.3507 1.43 1.39114.00.9040.820 1.0554 1.3538 1.71 1.48316.0 1.0570.945 1.0640 1.3569 2.01 1.58718.0 1.218 1.072 1.0728 1.3601 2.32 1.70320.0 1.388 1.201 1.0816 1.3634 2.64 1.83722.0 1.566 1.332 1.0906 1.3667 3.05 1.98624.0 1.753 1.465 1.0996 1.3700 3.43 2.15426.0 1.950 1.600 1.1089 1.3734 3.82 2.34828.0 2.159 1.738 1.1182 1.3768 4.20 2.56230.0 2.379 1.878 1.1276 1.3803 2.81732.0 2.612 2.020 1.1372 1.3839 3.112Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s34.0 2.859 2.164 1.1469 1.3874 3.46236.0 3.122 2.312 1.1568 1.3911 3.89938.0 3.402 2.461 1.1668 1.3948 4.41840.0 3.700 2.613 1.1769 1.3985 5.04642.0 4.019 2.767 1.1871 1.4023 5.77344.0 4.361 2.925 1.1975 1.4062 6.64446.0 4.728 3.084 1.2080 1.41017.75348.0 5.124 3.247 1.2187 1.41419.060 D-Glucose0.50.0280.028 1.0001 1.33370.05 1.010 C6H12O6 1.00.0560.056 1.0020 1.33440.11 1.0212.00.1130.112 1.0058 1.33580.21 1.0523.00.1720.168 1.0097 1.33730.32 1.0834.00.2310.225 1.0136 1.33870.43 1.1135.00.2920.282 1.0175 1.34020.55 1.1456.00.3540.340 1.0214 1.34170.67 1.1797.00.4180.398 1.0254 1.34320.79 1.2148.00.4830.457 1.0294 1.34470.91 1.2509.00.5490.516 1.0334 1.3462 1.04 1.28910.00.6170.576 1.0375 1.3477 1.17 1.33012.00.7570.697 1.0457 1.3508 1.44 1.41614.00.9040.819 1.0540 1.3539 1.73 1.51216.0 1.0570.944 1.0624 1.3571 2.03 1.62518.0 1.218 1.070 1.0710 1.3603 2.35 1.75720.0 1.388 1.199 1.0797 1.3635 2.70 1.90422.0 1.566 1.329 1.0884 1.3668 3.07 2.06324.0 1.753 1.462 1.0973 1.3702 3.48 2.24226.0 1.950 1.597 1.1063 1.3736 3.90 2.45828.0 2.159 1.734 1.1154 1.3770 4.34 2.70730.0 2.379 1.873 1.1246 1.3805 4.79 2.99832.0 2.612 2.014 1.1340 1.3840 3.32434.0 2.859 2.158 1.1434 1.3876 3.70436.0 3.122 2.304 1.1529 1.3912 4.19338.0 3.402 2.452 1.1626 1.3949 4.78640.0 3.700 2.603 1.1724 1.3986 5.49342.0 4.019 2.756 1.1823 1.4024 6.28844.0 4.361 2.912 1.1924 1.40627.23546.0 4.728 3.071 1.2026 1.41018.45448.0 5.124 3.232 1.2130 1.41419.88350.0 5.551 3.396 1.2235 1.418111.88452.0 6.013 3.562 1.2342 1.422214.48954.0 6.516 3.732 1.2451 1.426317.91656.07.064 3.905 1.2562 1.430622.88658.07.665 4.081 1.2676 1.434929.38960.08.326 4.261 1.2793 1.439437.445 Glycerol0.50.0550.0540.9994 1.33360.07 1.011 CH2OHCHOHCH2OH 1.00.1100.109 1.0005 1.33420.18 1.0222.00.2220.218 1.0028 1.33530.41 1.0483.00.3360.327 1.0051 1.33650.63 1.0744.00.4520.438 1.0074 1.33760.85 1.1005.00.5720.548 1.0097 1.3388 1.08 1.1276.00.6930.659 1.0120 1.3400 1.32 1.1577.00.8170.771 1.0144 1.3412 1.56 1.1888.00.9440.883 1.0167 1.3424 1.81 1.2209.0 1.0740.996 1.0191 1.3436 2.06 1.25610.0 1.207 1.109 1.0215 1.3448 2.32 1.29112.0 1.481 1.337 1.0262 1.3472 2.88 1.36514.0 1.768 1.568 1.0311 1.3496 3.47 1.44516.0 2.068 1.800 1.0360 1.3521 4.09 1.53318.0 2.384 2.035 1.0409 1.3547 4.76 1.630Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s20.0 2.715 2.271 1.0459 1.3572 5.46 1.73724.0 3.429 2.752 1.0561 1.36247.01 1.98828.0 4.223 3.242 1.0664 1.36768.77 2.27932.0 5.110 3.742 1.0770 1.373010.74 2.63736.0 6.108 4.252 1.0876 1.378512.96 3.08840.07.239 4.771 1.0984 1.384115.50 3.65344.08.532 5.300 1.1092 1.3897 4.44348.010.024 5.838 1.1200 1.3954 5.41352.011.764 6.385 1.1308 1.4011 6.66656.013.820 6.944 1.1419 1.40698.34960.016.2887.512 1.1530 1.412910.68164.019.3058.092 1.1643 1.418913.65768.023.0758.680 1.1755 1.424918.45772.027.9239.277 1.1866 1.431027.62576.034.3879.884 1.1976 1.437040.57180.043.43610.498 1.2085 1.443159.90084.057.00911.121 1.2192 1.449284.33888.079.63211.753 1.2299 1.4553147.49492.0124.87812.392 1.2404 1.4613384.46796.0260.61513.039 1.2508 1.4674780.458100.013.694 1.2611 1.4735Hydrochloric0.50.1380.137 1.0007 1.33410.49 1.008 acid 1.00.2770.275 1.0031 1.33530.99 1.015 HCl 2.00.5600.553 1.0081 1.3376 2.08 1.0293.00.8480.833 1.0130 1.3399 3.28 1.0444.0 1.143 1.117 1.0179 1.3422 4.58 1.0595.0 1.444 1.403 1.0228 1.3445 5.98 1.0756.0 1.751 1.691 1.0278 1.34687.52 1.0917.0 2.064 1.983 1.0327 1.34919.22 1.1088.0 2.385 2.277 1.0377 1.351511.10 1.1259.0 2.713 2.574 1.0426 1.353813.15 1.14310.0 3.047 2.873 1.0476 1.356115.40 1.16112.0 3.740 3.481 1.0576 1.360720.51 1.19914.0 4.465 4.099 1.0676 1.3653 1.23916.0 5.224 4.729 1.0777 1.3700 1.28218.0 6.020 5.370 1.0878 1.3746 1.32620.0 6.857 6.023 1.0980 1.3792 1.37422.07.736 6.687 1.1083 1.3838 1.42624.08.6617.362 1.1185 1.3884 1.48326.09.6368.049 1.1288 1.3930 1.54728.010.6668.748 1.1391 1.3976 1.62030.011.7549.456 1.1492 1.4020 1.70532.012.90710.175 1.1594 1.4066 1.79934.014.12910.904 1.1693 1.4112 1.90036.015.42711.642 1.1791 1.4158 2.00238.016.81012.388 1.1886 1.4204 2.10540.018.28413.140 1.1977 1.4250Lactic acid0.50.0560.0550.9992 1.33350.10 1.014 CH3CHOHCOOH 1.00.1120.111 1.0002 1.33400.19 1.0272.00.2270.223 1.0023 1.33500.38 1.0563.00.3430.334 1.0043 1.33600.57 1.0844.00.4630.447 1.0065 1.33700.76 1.1105.00.5840.560 1.0086 1.33800.95 1.1386.00.7090.673 1.0108 1.3390 1.16 1.1677.00.8360.787 1.0131 1.3400 1.36 1.1988.00.9650.902 1.0153 1.3410 1.57 1.2299.0 1.098 1.017 1.0176 1.3420 1.79 1.26210.0 1.233 1.132 1.0199 1.3430 2.02 1.29612.0 1.514 1.365 1.0246 1.3450 2.49 1.366Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s14.0 1.807 1.600 1.0294 1.3470 2.99 1.44116.0 2.115 1.837 1.0342 1.3491 3.48 1.52218.0 2.437 2.076 1.0390 1.3511 3.96 1.60720.0 2.775 2.318 1.0439 1.3532 4.44 1.69924.0 3.506 2.807 1.0536 1.3573 1.90228.0 4.317 3.305 1.0632 1.3615 2.13632.0 5.224 3.811 1.0728 1.3657 2.41436.0 6.244 4.325 1.0822 1.3700 2.73040.07.401 4.847 1.0915 1.3743 3.11444.08.722 5.377 1.1008 1.3786 3.56648.010.247 5.917 1.1105 1.3828 4.10652.012.026 6.466 1.1201 1.3871 4.78956.014.1297.023 1.1297 1.3914 5.57960.016.6527.588 1.1392 1.3958 6.67964.019.7368.161 1.1486 1.40018.02468.023.5908.741 1.1579 1.40459.86372.028.5469.328 1.1670 1.408812.86676.035.1549.922 1.1760 1.413116.97480.044.40510.522 1.1848 1.417322.164 Lactose0.50.0150.015 1.0002 1.33370.03 1.013 C12H22O11 1.00.0300.029 1.0021 1.33450.06 1.0262.00.0600.059 1.0061 1.33590.11 1.0583.00.0900.089 1.0102 1.33750.17 1.0894.00.1220.119 1.0143 1.33900.23 1.1205.00.1540.149 1.0184 1.34060.29 1.1546.00.1860.179 1.0225 1.34210.35 1.1917.00.2200.210 1.0267 1.34370.42 1.2328.00.2540.241 1.0308 1.34530.50 1.2769.00.2890.272 1.0349 1.3468 1.32110.00.3250.304 1.0390 1.3484 1.37012.00.3980.367 1.0473 1.3515 1.47614.00.4760.432 1.0558 1.3548 1.59316.00.5560.498 1.0648 1.3582 1.72418.00.6410.565 1.0746 1.3619 1.869 Lithium0.50.1190.118 1.0012 1.33410.42 1.019 chloride 1.00.2380.237 1.0041 1.33510.84 1.037 LiCl 2.00.4810.476 1.0099 1.3373 1.72 1.0723.00.7300.719 1.0157 1.3394 2.68 1.1084.00.9830.964 1.0215 1.3415 3.73 1.1465.0 1.241 1.211 1.0272 1.3436 4.86 1.1856.0 1.506 1.462 1.0330 1.3457 6.14 1.2267.0 1.775 1.715 1.0387 1.34787.56 1.2698.0 2.051 1.971 1.0444 1.34999.11 1.3139.0 2.333 2.230 1.0502 1.352010.79 1.36010.0 2.621 2.491 1.0560 1.354112.61 1.41112.0 3.217 3.022 1.0675 1.358316.59 1.52214.0 3.840 3.564 1.0792 1.362521.04 1.64716.0 4.493 4.118 1.0910 1.3668 1.78718.0 5.178 4.683 1.1029 1.3711 1.94220.0 5.897 5.260 1.1150 1.3755 2.12822.0 6.653 5.851 1.1274 1.3799 2.34124.07.449 6.453 1.1399 1.3844 2.60026.08.2887.069 1.1527 1.3890 2.92528.09.1737.700 1.1658 1.3936 3.31830.010.1098.344 1.1791 1.3983 3.785 Magnesium0.50.0530.053 1.0022 1.33430.26 1.024 chloride 1.00.1060.106 1.0062 1.33560.52 1.046 MgCl2 2.00.2140.213 1.0144 1.3381 1.06 1.091Solute Mass %m/mol kg–1c/mol L–1ρ/g cm–3n∆/°Cη/mPa s3.00.3250.322 1.0226 1.3406 1.65 1.1394.00.4380.433 1.0309 1.3432 2.30 1.1885.00.5530.546 1.0394 1.3457 3.01 1.2416.00.6700.660 1.0479 1.3483 1.2987.00.7910.777 1.0564 1.3508 1.3588.00.9130.895 1.0651 1.3534 1.4239.0 1.039 1.015 1.0738 1.3560 1.49310.0 1.167 1.137 1.0826 1.3587 1.57012.0 1.432 1.387 1.1005 1.3641 1.74514.0 1.710 1.645 1.1189 1.3695 1.95616.0 2.001 1.911 1.1372 1.3749 2.20718.0 2.306 2.184 1.1553 1.3804 2.50720.0 2.626 2.467 1.1742 1.3859 2.86722.0 2.962 2.758 1.1938 1.3915 3.32324.0 3.317 3.060 1.2140 1.3972 3.91726.0 3.690 3.371 1.2346 1.4030 4.69428.0 4.085 3.692 1.2555 1.4089 5.70930.0 4.501 4.022 1.2763 1.41487.017Magnesium0.50.0420.042 1.0033 1.33400.10 1.027 sulfate 1.00.0840.084 1.0084 1.33500.19 1.054 MgSO4 2.00.1700.169 1.0186 1.33710.36 1.1123.00.2570.256 1.0289 1.33910.52 1.1774.00.3460.345 1.0392 1.34110.69 1.2495.00.4370.436 1.0497 1.34310.87 1.3286.00.5300.528 1.0602 1.3451 1.05 1.4117.00.6250.623 1.0708 1.3471 1.24 1.4988.00.7220.719 1.0816 1.3492 1.43 1.5939.00.8220.817 1.0924 1.3512 1.64 1.70210.00.9230.917 1.1034 1.3532 1.85 1.82912.0 1.133 1.122 1.1257 1.3572 2.31 2.10414.0 1.352 1.336 1.1484 1.3613 2.86 2.41216.0 1.582 1.557 1.1717 1.3654 3.67 2.80918.0 1.824 1.788 1.1955 1.3694 3.36020.0 2.077 2.027 1.2198 1.3735 4.14722.0 2.343 2.275 1.2447 1.3776 5.19924.0 2.624 2.532 1.2701 1.3817 6.49826.0 2.919 2.800 1.2961 1.38588.066Maltose0.50.0150.015 1.0003 1.33370.03 1.016 C12H22O11 1.00.0300.029 1.0023 1.33450.06 1.0302.00.0600.059 1.0063 1.33590.11 1.0603.00.0900.089 1.0104 1.33740.17 1.0924.00.1220.119 1.0144 1.33890.23 1.1265.00.1540.149 1.0184 1.34040.29 1.1626.00.1860.179 1.0224 1.34200.35 1.2007.00.2200.210 1.0265 1.34350.42 1.2398.00.2540.241 1.0305 1.34500.48 1.2819.00.2890.272 1.0345 1.34660.55 1.32510.00.3250.303 1.0385 1.34820.62 1.37212.00.3980.367 1.0465 1.35130.77 1.47414.00.4760.431 1.0545 1.35460.92 1.58816.00.5560.497 1.0629 1.3578 1.08 1.71518.00.6410.564 1.0716 1.3612 1.25 1.85920.00.7300.631 1.0801 1.3644 1.43 2.02122.00.8240.700 1.0894 1.3678 1.64 2.21624.00.9230.770 1.0984 1.3714 1.85 2.46326.0 1.0260.842 1.1080 1.3749 2.08 2.75328.0 1.1360.914 1.1171 1.3785 2.34 3.06630.0 1.2520.988 1.1269 1.3821 2.62 3.42740.0 1.948 1.375 1.1769 1.4013 4.41 6.926。