3. Result and discussion
3.4 Structural Characterization of GNSs
3.4 Structural Characterization of GNSs
The phase structure of the as-prepared final product was characterized by XRD. Figure14 shows a typical XRD pattern of the as-prepared 3-D GNSs/spherical carbon/GaN. A sharp and intense XRD diffraction peak at about 2θ = 26.6○ can be indexed as the (002) diffraction reveals the high-quality graphitic nature of nanosheets. The weak and very sharp peaks at about 2θ = 34.8○ and 2θ = 45○ could be due to the GaN substrate and these two diffraction peaks are corresponding to (002) and (101) planes, respectively.
Figure 14 XRD patterns of the GNSs/spherical carbon/GaN sample.
35
The thickness of the graphitic nanosheets along the (001) direction (i.e. the average crystallite size along the (001) direction) is about 56.6 nm estimated from the half-peak width of the (002) reflection peak using the Scherrer equation. This indicates that graphitization is complete and the degree of long-range order of these nanostructures is similar to that of bulk graphite [93]. The interlayer spacing is calculated to be ~0.34 nm from the position of (002) reflection peak are similar to those observed for bulk hexagonal graphite (~0.335 nm) [93]. Later in, high-resolution transmission electron microscope (HRTEM) analysis was performed to confirm the interlayer spacing.
The morphologies of the 3-D GNSs/spherical carbon/GaN sample obtained under typical synthesis conditions were examined by using field-emission scanning electron microscopy (FESEM, JEOL JSM-6700F), transmission electron microscope (Philips TEM), selected-area electron diffraction (SAED), and HRTEM. Figure 15 (A-D) shows the typical FESEM images of the product prepared by microwave plasma CVD in presence of methane/hydrogen gas mixture.
36
Figure 15 (A) Side-view FESEM image of the GNSs/spherical carbons/GaN; (B-C) plane-view FESEM images of the GNSs/spherical carbons/GaN sample at different magnifications; (D) CNS.
Figure 15(A) and 14(B) show the low-resolution side view and plane view FESEM images of the 3-D GNS/spherical carbon/GaN sample. As shown in the FESEM image in Figure 15(A), the as-obtained 3-D GNS consists of spheres with diameters ranging from 9 to 10 µm. The magnified FESEM images (Figure 15(B) shows that the surfaces of spheres are not smooth. And the microspheres look like completely covered by the 3-D GNSs. Figure 15(C) shows the high-resolution SEM image of the 3-D GNS/spherical carbon/GaN. According to Figure 15(C), transparent individual graphite clearly overlaps
37
on the other graphite structure. The higher magnification FESEM image (Figure 15C) clearly reveals that the GNSs have a thickness range 1 to 5 nm.
We have tried to nanoscrolls monolayer GNSs using isopropyl alcohol solution shown in Figure 15(D). Although preliminary result show formation of nanoscrolls from monolayer graphene however to confirm the result further investigation is in process. We believed that this can help us in drug loading.
Figure 16 TEM image of the individual GNS and the corresponding SAED pattern is shown in the inset, and (B) HRTEM of the individual GNS.
38
Figure 16(A) and 16(B) show the TEM image of an individual GNS and its corresponding SAED pattern with the electron beam directed along the individual GNS.
The SAD pattern from the individual GNS shows few bright spots. The clearly visible bright spots confirm that the GNSs are single crystals. The HRTEM image taken at the top edge of the individual GNS shows that the interlayer distance about ~0.34 nm, as shown in Figure 16(B). The lattice spacing of ~0.34 nm corresponds to the (002) plane.
This result is consistent with XRD data.
All the forms of carbon materials such as amorphous carbon, fullerenes, carbon nanotubes, polycrystalline carbon etc. have been characterized by Raman spectroscopy.
The positions, half widths, and relative areas of spectral bands are governed by the nature of the chemical bonds of carbon. Therefore, the Raman spectrum may provide additional information about the as-prepared 3-D GNSs/spherical carbon/GaN structure. Raman spectra taken on GNSs, as shown in Figure 17, are similar to those observed for graphitic carbon [94]. Second order modes in the range of 2000–3000 cm-1 are also present in Figure 17 shows that it has two strong peaks at 1363, and 1582 cm-1. The peak at around 1363 cm-1 is the D-band associated with vibrations of carbon atoms with dangling bonds in plane terminations of the disordered graphite. The peak at 1576 cm-1 (G band) is attributed to the vibration of sp2-bonded carbon atoms in a two-dimensional hexagonal lattice [95,96]. Figure 17 also shows that the strong peak at about 2716 cm-1, is attributed to the disorder mode 2D band.
39
Figure 17 Raman spectrums of the GNSs/spherical carbons/GaN sample.
From, Figure 17 we can see that, the G-band peak is stronger than the D-band peak and their intensity ratio is about 1.4 unambiguously suggests that the 3-D GNSs have high degree of graphitization. In addition, the area ratio between the two bands (AD/AG) allows the degree of ordering or graphitization of the carbon structure to be characterized [97,98]. In the spectra of highly crystalline graphite, D-band is absent, which indicates the 100 %-degree of graphitization. It should be noted that the AD/AG value of GNSs (1.02) was smaller than that of Vulcan XC-72 and AP-carbon [99].
Furthermore, a similar value of AD/AG between GNSs (1.02) and MWCNT (1.03) [99]
confirms that the 3-D GNSs retained similar graphitic characteristics to the MWCNT.
40
Conclusion
The preliminary data of this study suggest SPIO-mPEG-8G7 nanoparticles are highly specific to MUC4 expression and it can be successfully used for early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. This finding will be taken into account in highest priority for the development of carbon based T2 MRI contrast agent for early diagnosis of pancreatic cancer. As for now we have successfully synthesized GNSs in high yield.
41
10. Moniaux, N.; Andrianifahanana, M.; Brand, R. E.; Batra, S. K. Br J Cancer 2004, 91, 1633.
11. Swartz, M. J.; Batra, S. K.; Varshney, G. C. Am J Clin Pathol. 2002, 117, 791.
12. Singh, A. P.; Chaturvedi, P.; Batra, S. K. Cancer Res. 2007, 67, 433.
13. Bloch, F. Phys. Rev. 1946, 70, 460.
14. Bloch, F.; Hansen, W. W.; Packard, M. Phys. Rev. 1946, 70, 474.
42
19. Lacerda, L.; Bianco, A.; Prato, M.; Kostarelos, K. Adv. Drug Deliv. Rev. 2006, 58, 1460.
20. Hirsch, L. R.; Gobin, A. M.; Lowery, A. R.; Tam, F.; Drezek, R. A.; Halas , N. J.
Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2006, 34, 15.
21. Thorek, D. L.; Chen, A. K.; Czupryna, J.; Tsourkas, A. Ann. Biomed. Eng. 2006, 34, 23.
43
33. Moon, H. K.; Lee., S. H.; Choi,H.C. ACS Nano 2009, doi: 10.1021/nn900904h 34. Choi, J. H.; Nguyen, F. T.; Barone, P. W.; Heller, D. A.; Moll, A. E.; Patel, D.;
44
39. Moniaux, N.; Chaturvedi, P.; Van Seuningen, I.; Porchet, N.; Singh, A.P.; Batra, S.K . Atlas Genet Cytogenet Oncol Haematol. February 2007. URL : http://AtlasGeneticsOncology.org/Genes/MUC4ID41459ch3q29.html
40. Andrianifahanana, M.; Moniaux, N.; Schmied, B. M.; Ringel, J.; Friess, H.;
Hollingsworth, M. A.; Bu¨ chler, M. W.; Aubert, J. P.; Batra, S. K. Clin Cancer Res. 2001, 7, 4033.
41. Chaturvedi, P.; Singh, A. P.; Batra, S. K. FASEB J. 2008, 22, 966.
42. Nollet, S.; Moniaux, N.; Maury, J.; Petitprez, D.; Degand, P.; Laine, A.; Porchet, N.; Aubert, J. P. Biochem J. 1998, 332, 739.
46. Aime, S.; Fasano, M.; Terreno, E.; Botta, M. The Chemistry of Contrast Agents in Medical Magnetic Resonance Imaging; John Wiley and Sons: New York. 2001.
47. Lawaczeck, R.; Menzel, M. P., H. Appl. Organomet. Chem. 2004, 18, 506.
48. Willard, M. A.; Kurihara, L. K.; Carpenter, E. E.; Calvin, S.; Harris, V. G. Int.
Mater. Rev. 2004, 49, 125.
49. Geraldes, C.F.; Laurent, S. Contrast Media Mol Imaging 2009, 4, 1.
50. Aime, S.; Crich, S. G.; Gianolio, E.; Giovenzana, G. B.; Tei, L.; Terreno, E.
Coord. Chem. Rev. 2006, 250, 1562.
51. Khemtong, C.; Kessinger, C. W.; Gao, J. Chem. Commun. 2009, 3497.
45
52. Skomski, R.; Coey, J. M. D. Permanent Magnetism, Institute of Physics Publishing, Bristol and Philadelphia, 1999.
53. Leslie-Pelecky, D. L.; Rieke, R. D. Chem. Mater 1996, 8, 1770.
54. Neel, L. C. R. Acad. Sci. 1949, 228, 664.
55. Barbara, B. Magnetism and Synchrotron Radiation, Springer Berlin / Heidelberg, 2001.
56. Bjørnerud, A.; Johansson, L. NMR Biomed. 2004, 17, 465.
57. Chin, A. B.; Yaacob, I. I. J. Mater. Process. Technol. 2007, 191, 235.
58. Albornoz, C.; Jacobo, S. E. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2006, 305, 12.
59. Kim, E. H.; Lee, H. S.; Kwak, B. K.; Kim, B. K. J. Magn. Magn. Mater. 2005, 289, 328.
60. Wan, J.; Chen, X.; Wang, Z.; Yang, X.; Qian, Y. J. Cryst. Growth 2005, 276, 571.
61. Kimata, M.; Nakagawa, D.; Hasegawa, M. Powder Technol. 2003, 132, 112.
62. Alvarez, G. S.; Muhammed, M.; Zagorodni, A. A. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2006, 61, 4625.
63. Basak, S.; Chen, D.-R.; Biswas, P. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2007, 62, 1263.
64. Cornell, R. M.; Schwertmann, U. The Iron Oxides; VCH Publishers: Weinheim, Germany, 1996.
65. Boistelle, R.; Astier, J. P. J. Cryst. Growth 1988, 90, 14.
66. Sugimoto, T. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2003, 26, 3.
67. Gupta, A. K.; Gupta, M. Biomaterials 2005, 26, 3995.
68. Sun, S.; Zeng, H.; Robinson, D. B.; Raoux, S.; Rice, P. M.; Wang, S. X.; Li, G. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 2004, 126, 273.
69. Xu, C.J.; Sun, S.H. Polymer Int. 2007, 56, 821.
46
75. Gannon, C. J.; Cherukuri, P.; Yakobson, B. I.; Cognet, L.; Kanzius, J. S.; Kittrell, C.; Weisman, R. B.; Pasquali, M.; Schmidt, H. K.; Smalley, R. E.; Curley, S. A.
M.; Parpia, J. M.; Craighead, H. G.; McEuen, P. L. Science 2008, 315, 490.
82. Singh, R.; Kroll, P. J. Phys.: Condens. Matter 2009, 21, 196002.
83. Takahashi, M.; Turek, P.; Nakazawa, Y.; Tamura, M.; Nozawa, K.; Shiomi, D.;
Ishikawa, M.; Kinoshita, M. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1991, 67, 746.
47
84. Novoselov, K. S.; Geim, A. K.; Morozov, S. V.; Jiang, D.; Zhang, Y.; Dubonos, S. V.; Grigorieva, I. V.; Firsov, A. A. Science 2004, 306, 666.
85. Xie, X.; Ju, L.; Feng, X.; Sun, Y.; Zhou, R.; Liu, K.; Fan, S.; Li, Q.; Jiang, K. S. T.; Wilson, L. J. J. Phys. Chem. C 2009 doi: 10.1021/jp907891n.
89. Wang, S.; Tang, L. A. l.; Bao, Q.; Lin, M.; Deng, S.; Goh, B. M.; Loh, K. P. J.
Am. Chem. Soc. 2009, doi: 10.1021/ja905968v.
90. Smith, P. K. Anal. Biochem. 1985, 150, 76.
91. Tylianakis, P. E. Anal. Biochem. 1994, 219, 335.
92. Horák, D.; Babič, M.; Jendelová, P.; Herynek, V.; Trchova, M.; Pientka, Z.;
Pollert, E.; Hájek, M.; Syková, E. Bioconjug Chem. 2007, 8, 635.
93. Zhang, H.B.; Lin, G.D.; Zhou, Z.H.; Dong, X.; Chen, T. Carbon 2002, 40, 2429.
94. Reich S.; Thomsen, C.Phil. Trans. R. Soc. Lond. A 2004, 362, 2271.
95. Liu, J. W.; Shao, M. W.; Chen, X. Y.; Yu, W. C.; Liu, X. M.; Qian, Y. T. J. Am.
48
98. Mnaldonao, F.; Moreno, C.; Rivera, J.; Hanzawa, Y.; Yamada, Y. Langmuir 2000, 16, 4367.
99. Joo, J. B.; Kim, Y. J.; Kim, W.; Kim, P.; Yi, J. Catalysis Commun. 2008, 10, 267.