p. 409−424
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 425−437
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 439−446
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 447−463
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 465−481
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 483−496
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 497−504
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 505−518
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 519−529
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 531−540
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
0 and ΔS > 0) indicated that hydrophobic forces play major roles in the interaction between Amaranth and BSA. Further, the fluorescent experiments revealed that the quenching mechanism of BSA by Amaranth was static. Also, no obvious increasing of BSA viscosity was observed by addition of Amaranth. The molecular docking method is also employed to understand the interaction of Amaranth with BSA. All these studies confirm that BSA has more affinity towards Amaranth and the groove binding must be predominant.]]>
p. 541−554
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 555−567
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 569−583
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 585−600
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3
p. 601−615
2345-2625
Vol.5/No.3