Journal of Radioanalytical and Nuclear Chemistry

, Volume 314, Issue 2, pp 1189–1196 | Cite as

Degradation of Triton X-100 surfactant/lipid regulator systems by ionizing radiation in water

  • Gergely Rácz
  • Tamás Csay
  • Erzsébet Takács
  • László Wojnárovits


The radiolytic degradation of Triton X-100 surfactant was investigated at concentrations below and above the critical micelle concentration (CMC, ~ 0.23 mmol dm−3) in air saturated aqueous solutions. At low concentrations the degradation took place both on the aromatic head and on the polyethoxylates chain, while above CMC it was shifted towards the chain. The CMC was higher in irradiated solutions at 10 Gy by a factor of 2, at 20 kGy by a factor of 3 than in the un-irradiated solution. The degradation of clofibric acid in the presence of TX-100 was more effective outside the micelles than inside them.


Critical micelle concentration Triton X-100 Surfactant Radiolytic degradation Solubilisation Clofibric acid Gemfibrozil Bezafibrate 


  1. 1.
    Tiller GE, Mueller TJ, Docker ME, Sturve WG (1984) Hydrogenation of Triton X-100 eliminates its fluorescence and ultraviolet light absorption while preserving its detergent properties. Anal Biochem 141:262–266CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Valdés-Díaz G, Rodrígez-Calvo S, Pérez-Gramatges A, Rapado-Paneque M, Fernandez-Lima FA, Ponciano CR, da Silveira EF (2007) Effects of gamma radiation on phase behaviour and critical micelle concentration of Triton X-100 aqueous solutions. J Colloid Interface Sci 311:253–261CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Karci A, Arsal-Alton I, Bekbolet M, Ozhan G, Alpertunga B (2014) H2O2/UV-C and photo-Fenton treatment of a nonylphenolpolyethoxylate in synthetic freshwater: follow-up of degradation products, acute toxicity and genotoxicity. Chem Eng J 241:43–51CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Olmez-Hanci T, Arsal-Alton I, Genc B (2014) Degradation of the nonionic surfactant Triton™ X-45 with HO• and SO4•–based advanced oxidation processes. Chem Eng J 239:332–340CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Bansal KM, Patterson LK, Fendler EJ, Fendler JH (1971) Reactions of hydrated electrons, hydrogen atoms and hydroxyl radicals in micellar systems. Int J Radiat Phys Chem 3:321–331CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Razavi B, Song W, Cooper WJ, Greaves J, Jeong J (2009) Free-radical-induced oxidative and reductive degradation of fibrate pharmaceuticals: kinetic studies and degradation mechanisms. J Phys Chem A 113:1287–1294CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Wojnárovits L, Takács E (2013) Structure dependence of the rate coefficients of hydroxyl radical + aromatic molecule reaction. Radiat Phys Chem 87:82–87CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Csay T, Rácz G, Salik Á, Takács E, Wojnárovits L (2014) Reactions of clofibric acid with oxidative and reductive radicals—Products, mechanisms, efficiency and toxic effects. Radiat Phys Chem 102:72–78CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Andreozzi R, Caprio V, Marott R, Radovnikovic A (2003) Ozonation and H2O/UV treatment of clofibric acid in water: a kinetics investigation. J Hazard Mater 103:233–246CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Al-Soufi W, Piñeiro L, Novo M (2012) A model for monomer and micellar concentrations in surfactant solutions. Application to conductivity, NMR, diffusion and surface tension data. J Colloid Interface Sci 370:102–110CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Sehested K, Holcman J (1979) Radical cations of ethyl-, isopropyl- and tert-butylbenzene in aqueous solution. Nukleonika 24:941–950Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Pelizzetti E, Minero C, Maurino V, Sciafani A, Hidaka H, Serpone N (1989) Photocatalytic degradation of nonylphenol ethoxylated surfactants. Environ Sci Technol 23:1380–1385CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Eibenberger J (1980) Pulse radiolytic investigations concerning the formation and the oxidation of organic radicals in aqueous solutions. Ph.D., Thesis, Vienna Univ., Vienna, AustriaGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Gebicki JM, Allen AO (1969) Relationship between critical micelle concentration and rate of radiolysis of aqueous sodium linoleate. J Phys Chem 73:2443–2445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Zhang J, Zhang P, Ma K, Han F, Chen G, Wei X (2008) Hydrogen bonding interactions between ethylene glycol and water: density, excess molar volume, and spectral study. Sci China, Ser B: Chem 51:420–426CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    de la Fuente L, Acosta T, Babay P, Curutchet G, Candal R, Litter MI (2010) Degradation of nonylphenol ethoxylate-9 (NPE-9) by photochemical advanced oxidation technologies. Ind Eng Chem Res 49:6909–6915CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Iqbal M, Bhatti IA (2015) Gamma radiation/H2O2 treatment of nonylphenolethoxylates: degradation, cytotoxicity and mutagenicity evaluation. J Hazard Mater 299:351–360CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Doll TE, Frimmel FH (2004) Kinetic study of photocatalytic degradation of carbamazeprine, clofibric acid, imperol and iopromide assisted by different TiO2 materials-determination of intermediates and reaction pathways. Water Res 38:955–964CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Sirés I, Arias C, Cabot PL, Centellas F, Garrido JA, Rodríguez RM, Brillas E (2007) Degradation of clofibric acid in acidic aqueous medium by electro-Fenton and photoelecro-Fenton. Chemosphere 66:1660–1669CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Rosal R, Gonzalo MS, Boltes K, Letón P, Vaquero JJ, Garcia-Calvo E (2009) Identification of intermediates and assessment of ecotoxicity in the oxidation products generated during ozonation of clofibric acid. J Hazard Mater 172:1061–1068CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Akadémiai Kiadó, Budapest, Hungary 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Institute for Energy Security and Environmental Safety, Centre for Energy ResearchHungarian Academy of SciencesBudapestHungary
  2. 2.Faculty of Light Industry and Environmental EngineeringÓbuda-UniversityBudapestHungary

Personalised recommendations