journal article·2017-06

Is autocorrelation image analysis the proper method in nanoparticle sizing?

J Marek, E Demjen

Journal of Nanoparticle Research· Volume 19· Issue 6
Publisher page

Abstract

Nanomaterials display a range of properties which are completely different to those of bulk materials. This unexpected behaviour is particularly apparent when the size of objects reaches the nanometre scale. A wide range of methods are currently used to characterize the properties of nanoparticles. The aim of this work is to analyse the application of image autocorrelation of atomic force microscope samples in determining the distribution of nanoparticle sizes. We propose a model of cross-correlation, which expands upon a recently published model and which further allows us to determine the limits of the image autocorrelation method. Numerical simulations of different configurations of positions, sizes and shapes of particles were used to study the impact of these parameters on the computation of particle size distribution. The precision of the method was found to be strongly dependent on the shape of particles and thus approximate corrections of the model autocorrelation function are limited in terms of validity. Furthermore, the omission of the cross-correlation component during analysis of very dense particle distributions causes a deformation of the central part of the autocorrelation function and a significant increase in errors. Taking the basic principles of auto correlation into consideration, it is clear that this method is very sensitive to any disturbance of the topographic surface of the distribution. Therefore, we suggest that data obtained using image autocorrelation particle distribution analysis should be interpreted very carefully and that the limits presented in this paper should be taken into consideration in such an interpretation.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗

Research context

OpenAlex topics: Field-Flow Fractionation Techniques · Grey System Theory Applications · Nanoparticles: synthesis and applications

SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.

References (29)

Show source-provided references
1. Akhmadeev AA, Salakhov MK (2016) A new approach of recognition of ellipsoidal micro- and nanoparticles on AFM images and determination of their sizes. Meas Sci Technol 27:105402. doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/27/10/10540210.1088/0957-0233/27/10/105402 ↗
2. Amini R, Brar SK, Cledon M, Surampalli RY (2015) Intertechnique comparisons for nanoparticle size measurements and shape distribution. J Hazard Toxic Radioact Waste 20(1):B4015004. doi: 10.1061/(ASCE)HZ.2153-5515.000028610.1061/(ASCE)HZ.2153-5515.0000286 ↗
3. Barnard PL, Rubin DM, Harney J, Mustain N (2007) Field test comparison of an autocorrelation technique for determining grain size using a digital ‘beachball’ camera versus traditional methods. Sediment Geol 201:180–195. doi: 10.1016/j.sedgeo.2007.05.01610.1016/j.sedgeo.2007.05.016 ↗
4. Boisseau P, Loubaton B (2011) Nanomedicine, nanotechnology in medicine. Comptes Rendus Physique 12:620–636. doi: 10.1016/j.crhy.2011.06.00110.1016/j.crhy.2011.06.001 ↗
5. Boyd RD, Cuenat A (2011a) New analysis procedure for fast and reliable size measurement of nanoparticles from atomic force microscopy images. J Nanopart Res 13:105–113. doi: 10.1007/s11051-010-0007-210.1007/s11051-010-0007-2 ↗
6. Boyd RD, Pichaimuthu SK, Cuenat A (2011b) New approach to inter-technique comparisons for nanoparticle size measurements; using atomic force microscopy, nanoparticle tracking analysis and dynamic light scattering. Colloids Surf A Physicochem Eng Asp 387:35–42. doi: 10.1016/j.colsurfa.2011.07.02010.1016/j.colsurfa.2011.07.020 ↗
7. Brigger I, Dubernet C, Couvreur P (2012) Nanoparticles in cancer therapy and diagnosis. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 64:24–36. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2012.09.00610.1016/j.addr.2012.09.006 ↗
8. Buscombe D (2008) Estimation of grain-size distributions and associated parameters from digital images of sediment. Sediment Geol 210:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.sedgeo.2008.06.00710.1016/j.sedgeo.2008.06.007 ↗
9. Buscombe D, Rubin DM, Warrick JA (2010) A universal approximation of grain size from images of noncohesive sediment. J Geophys Res 115:1–17. doi: 10.1029/2009JF00147710.1029/2009JF001477 ↗
10. Chen T, Dai L (2013) Carbon nanomaterials for high-performance supercapacitators. Mater Today 16(7,8):272–280. doi: 10.1016/j.mattod.2013.07.00210.1016/j.mattod.2013.07.002 ↗
11. Cheng Z, Liu H (2015) Digital grain-size analysis based on autocorrelation algorithm. Sediment Geol 327:21–31. doi: 10.1016/j.sedgeo.2015.07.00810.1016/j.sedgeo.2015.07.008 ↗
12. Couvreur P (2013) Nanoparticles in drug delivery: past, present and future. Adv Drug Deliv Rev 65:21–23. doi: 10.1016/j.addr.2012.04.01010.1016/j.addr.2012.04.010 ↗
13. Fekete L, Kůsová K, Petrák V, Kratochvílová I (2012) AFM topographies of densely packed nanoparticles: a quick way to determine the lateral size distribution by autocorrelation function analysis. J Nanopart Res 14:1062. doi: 10.1007/s11051-012-1062-710.1007/s11051-012-1062-7 ↗
14. Ganesan P, Choi DK (2016) Current application of phytocompound-based nanocosmeceuticals for beauty and skin therapy. Int J Nanomedicine 11:1987–1207. doi: 10.2147/IJN.S10470110.2147/IJN.S104701 ↗
15. Gredig T, Silverstein EA, Byrne MP (2013) Height-height correlation function to determine grain size in iron phthalocyanine thin films. J Phys Conf Ser 417:012069. doi: 10.1088/1742-6596/417/1/01206910.1088/1742-6596/417/1/012069 ↗
16. Hassellöv M, Readman JW, Ranville JF, Tiede K (2008) Nanoparticle analysis and characterization methodologies in environmental risk assessment of engineered nanoparticles. Ecotoxicology 17(5):344–361. doi: 10.1007/s10646-008-0225-x10.1007/s10646-008-0225-x ↗
17. Heiligtag FJ, Niederberger M (2013) The fascinating world of nanoparticle research. Mater Today 16(7,8):262–271. doi: 10.1016/j.mattod.2013.07.00410.1016/j.mattod.2013.07.004 ↗
18. Hoo CM, Starostin N, West P, Mecartney ML (2008) A comparison of atomic force microscopy (AFM) and dynamic light scattering (DLS) methods to characterize nanoparticle size distributions. J Nanopart Res 10:89–96. doi: 10.1007/s11051-008-9435-710.1007/s11051-008-9435-7 ↗
19. Ju-Nam Y, Lead JR (2008) Manufactured nanoparticles: an overview of their chemistry, interactions and potential environmental implications. Sci Total Environ 400:396–414. doi: 10.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.06.04210.1016/j.scitotenv.2008.06.042 ↗
20. Kato H, Nakamura A, Takahashi K, Kinugasa S (2012) Accurate size and size-distribution determination of polystyrene latex nanoparticles in aqueous medium using dynamic light scattering and asymmetrical flow field flow fractionation with multi-angle light scattering. Nano 2:15–30. doi: 10.3390/nano201001510.3390/nano2010015 ↗
21. Klapetek P, Valtr M, Nečas D, Salyk O, Dzik P (2011) Atomic force microscopy analysis of nanoparticles in non-ideal conditions. Nanoscale Res Lett 6:514 http://www.nanoscalereslett.com/content/6/1/51410.1186/1556-276X-6-514 ↗
22. Kreuter J (2007) Nanoparticles—a historical perspective. Int J Pharm 331:1–10. doi: 10.1016/j.ijpharm.2006.10.02110.1016/j.ijpharm.2006.10.021 ↗
23. Kreyling WG, Semmler-Behnke M, Chaudhry Q (2010) A complementary definition of nanomaterial. Nano Today 5:165–168. doi: 10.1016/j.nantod.2010.03.00410.1016/j.nantod.2010.03.004 ↗
24. Nečas D, Klapetek P (2012) Gwyddion: an open-source software for SPM data analysis. Centr Eur J Phys (Open Physics) 10(1):181–188. doi: 10.2478/s11534-011-0096-210.2478/s11534-011-0096-2 ↗
25. Rossi M, Cubadda F, Dini L, Terranova ML, Aureli F, Sorbo A, Passeri D (2014) Scientific basis of nanotechnology, implications for the food sector and future trends. Trends Food Sci Technol 40:127–148. doi: 10.1016/j.tifs.2014.09.00410.1016/j.tifs.2014.09.004 ↗
26. Rubin DM (2004) A simple autocorrelation algorithm for determining grain size from digital images of sediment. J Sediment Res 74(1):160–165. doi: 10.1306/05220374016010.1306/052203740160 ↗
27. Sedlář J, Zitová B, Kopeček J, Flusser J, Todorciuc T, Kratochvílová I (2013) Automatic determination of the size of elliptical nanoparticles from AFM images. J Nanopart Res 15:1842. doi: 10.1007/s11051-013-1842-810.1007/s11051-013-1842-8 ↗
28. Walker JG (2012) Improved nanoparticle tracking analysis. Meas Sci Technol 23:065605. doi: 10.1088/0957-0233/23/6/06560510.1088/0957-0233/23/6/065605 ↗
29. Warrick JA, Rubin DM, Ruggiero P, Harney JN, Draut AE, Buscombe D (2009) Cobble cam: grain-size measurements of sand to boulder from digital photographs and autocorrelation analyses. Earth Surf Process Landf 34:1811–1821. doi: 10.1002/esp.187710.1002/esp.1877 ↗