4(%3)3 - Ecole nationale supérieure de chimie de Montpellier

Since the only change in the membrane’s morphology could come from the presence of proteinmolecules surrounding the micelles, hence their translocation is confirmed. Interestingly, the proteins inbetween the micelles seem to delay the morphological change at higher pressure value (as observed in3 rd chapter) since nothing happened at 4 bar. An explanation could be that the protein will avoid or delaythe partial fusion of the micelles due to the low affinity between PEO and the BSA.Moving further across the continuum, the response of stiffer and more voluminous polystyrenelatex nanoparticles (NPs) showed unsurprising pressure dependence within the pressure range of 0.2 barto 0.8 bar. For each given pressure, the respective collected permeates and retentates were analyzedusing PCCS to determine the presence of NPs (Figure – 3.15a,b,c). The curves for 0.07 bar & 0.8 bar arenot shown since 100 % retention and permeation were observed respectively for poly(styrene) NPs.Differential Distribution25,0020,0015,0010,000.2 barFeed solutionRetentate FITPermeate FITDifferential Distribution25,0020,0015,0010,000.4 barFeed solutionRetention FITPermeate FIT5,005,000,000 50 100 150 200 250 300Diameter (nm)0,000 50 100 150 200 250 300Diameter (nm)Differential Distribution252015100.6 barFeed solutionRetentate FITPermeate FIT500 50 100 150 200 250 300Diameter (nm)Figure – 3.15: Differential distribution curves observed for retentates and permeates obtained at different pressuresusing Photon Cross Correlation Spectroscopy.88