<?xml version="1.0" encoding="UTF-8"?><!DOCTYPE article  PUBLIC "-//NLM//DTD Journal Publishing DTD v3.0 20080202//EN" "http://dtd.nlm.nih.gov/publishing/3.0/journalpublishing3.dtd"><article xmlns:mml="http://www.w3.org/1998/Math/MathML" xmlns:xlink="http://www.w3.org/1999/xlink" dtd-version="3.0" xml:lang="en" article-type="research article"><front><journal-meta><journal-id journal-id-type="publisher-id">JEP</journal-id><journal-title-group><journal-title>Journal of Environmental Protection</journal-title></journal-title-group><issn pub-type="epub">2152-2197</issn><publisher><publisher-name>Scientific Research Publishing</publisher-name></publisher></journal-meta><article-meta><article-id pub-id-type="doi">10.4236/jep.2012.311172</article-id><article-id pub-id-type="publisher-id">JEP-25062</article-id><article-categories><subj-group subj-group-type="heading"><subject>Articles</subject></subj-group><subj-group subj-group-type="Discipline-v2"><subject>Earth&amp;Environmental Sciences</subject></subj-group></article-categories><title-group><article-title>
 
 
  A Multiparameter Colloidal Titrations for the Determination of Cationic Polyelectrolytes
 
</article-title></title-group><contrib-group><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>duardo</surname><given-names>A. López Maldonado</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Adrián</surname><given-names>O. Terán</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref></contrib><contrib contrib-type="author" xlink:type="simple"><name name-style="western"><surname>Mercedes</surname><given-names>T. O. Guzmán</given-names></name><xref ref-type="aff" rid="aff1"><sup>1</sup></xref><xref ref-type="corresp" rid="cor1"><sup>*</sup></xref></contrib></contrib-group><aff id="aff1"><addr-line>Centro de Graduados e Investigación del Instituto Tecnológico de Tijuana. Blvd. Industrial s/n Mesa de Otay, Tijuana, México</addr-line></aff><author-notes><corresp id="cor1">* E-mail:<email>oropeza1@yahoo.com(MTOG)</email>;</corresp></author-notes><pub-date pub-type="epub"><day>27</day><month>11</month><year>2012</year></pub-date><volume>03</volume><issue>11</issue><fpage>1559</fpage><lpage>1570</lpage><history><date date-type="received"><day>August</day>	<month>10th,</month>	<year>2012</year></date><date date-type="rev-recd"><day>September</day>	<month>9th,</month>	<year>2012</year>	</date><date date-type="accepted"><day>October</day>	<month>6th,</month>	<year>2012</year></date></history><permissions><copyright-statement>&#169; Copyright  2014 by authors and Scientific Research Publishing Inc. </copyright-statement><copyright-year>2014</copyright-year><license><license-p>This work is licensed under the Creative Commons Attribution International License (CC BY). http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/</license-p></license></permissions><abstract><p>
 
 
  In water treatment processes and conditioning drinking water, PEs are widely used; however, their environmental impact is still doubtful, since residual concentrations increase organic matter content and represents a potential health hazard. This paper demonstrates a multiparametric study of two colloidal titration methods: spectrophotometric and zeta potential end point detection. The first one was optimized to guarantee the accuracy of cationic commercial PE quantification. It includes the indicator dose optimization using analytical criteria for competing equilibria, a calibration curve for two ranges of CPE concentration (1 - 5 ppm and 5 - 100 ppm) and the interference study of flocculant and Sn in the CPE quantification. The second method provides a physicochemical validation of the electric surface phenomena occurring during the colloidal titration and the end point detection. As an additional contribution the zeta potential titration was discussed and proposed as an alternative method for quantifying CPE when the sample is metal free.
 
</p></abstract><kwd-group><kwd>Polyelectrolyte Quantification; Colloidal Titration; Zeta Potential</kwd><kwd> Polydadmac; O-Toluidine Blue Indicator; Wastewater Treatment</kwd></kwd-group></article-meta></front><body><sec id="s1"><title>1. Introduction</title><p>A polyelectrolyte, PE, is a polymer that dissociates in solution. Usually, PEs are identified as macroions, i.e. charged macromolecules or dissociable groups covalently linked to the polymeric structure and balanced by simple counterions. Natural and synthetic PEs are used in different industrial areas by their ability to modify the stability of dispersed solid particles in water. In the environmental area, for example, PEs are mainly employed in sludge conditioning, removal of heavy metals [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref1">1</xref>], coagulants and flocculants in the wastewater treatment and drinking water conditioning. In those cases, PEs play the role of neutralizing agents that adsorb strongly into the solid particles, usually found in after-process raw water. When suspended or colloidal particles in waste water do not precipitate or they take long time to sediment two popular cationic polyelectrolytes are used: Polydadmac and EPI-DMA [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref1">1</xref>]. Frequently, the dose of PEs is exceeded looking for a faster sedimentation; however, this phenomenon depends on the particle size and particle density. For this reason PEs are recommended to promote solids separation by gravity [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref2">2</xref>]. Although cationic and anionic PEs are effective in the water treatment processes, in recent years they have claimed attention due to the environmental impact of residual concentration. Another environmental risk is that PEs may contain considerable amounts of toxic raw materials commonly used in their production chains. Moreover, there are reports [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref3">3</xref>] that show the adverse effect caused by PEs linked with toxic substances after a water treatment process. Consequently, operators of waste water treatment plants need to control the residual concentration of PEs, in the early stages of the treatment process, and improve the quality of treated water.</p><p>Therefore, sensitive and rapid analytical methods for measuring the concentration of PEs in different systems (biochemical, biomedical and environmental) are necessary, as well as in those cases where an overdose (processes out of control) or accidental spills occur. The desired limit of detection for polymers is 1 mg/L suggested by Michael Fielding AWWA [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref3">3</xref>] which is 10% of the maximum allowable dose (10 mg/L) for Polydadmac. This paper demonstrates how to optimize and guarantee the accuracy of cationic commercial PE quantification performing a multiparametric study of two colloidal titration methods: spectrophotometric and zeta potential end point detection. For the spectrophotometric end point detection the indicator dose optimization, two differente ranges of detection (1 - 5 ppm) (5 - 100 ppm), as well as the interference of flocculants and metals as Sn, were studied. Zeta potential end point detection was used to validate the spectrophotometric method, showing that the polydamac quantification could be done successfully for water samples without dissolved metals.</p><sec id="s1_1"><title>1.1. Analytical Methods for the Determination of PEs</title><p>Different analytical methods to quantify residual PEs in the effluent of treated water are reported (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig1">Figure 1</xref>). For example, size exclusion chromatography (with ultraviolet detection or refractive index) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref4">4</xref>], kinetic methods [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref5">5</xref>], fluorescent probes [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref6">6</xref>], tannic acid method [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref7">7</xref>], two-phase titration [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref8">8</xref>], polarography [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref9">9</xref>], voltammetry [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref10">10</xref>], extraction-spectroscopy [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref11">11</xref>], clay sedimentation rate [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref12">12</xref>], systems of injection analysis flow [13,14] and colloidal titration [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref15">15</xref>].</p><p>To quantify and identify PEs with high charge density, in solution, Terayama [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref15">15</xref>] proposed the colloidal titration. This method is based on the stoichiometric reaction between colloidal particles, positively and negatively charged. The end point is frequently detected with colorimetric indicators by visual inspection or spectrophotometric measurements. Several authors have shown that colorimetric detectors are preferred to quantify cationic PEs. For anionic PEs only few indicators work efficiently; however, it is common to use the well known back-titration [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref16">16</xref>].</p><p>The endpoint of cationic or anionic PE titration, without indicator, may be followed by measuring the zeta potential [2,17], conductimetry [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref18">18</xref>], viscosimetry (minimum viscosity at the point of equivalence) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref19">19</xref>], turbidimetry (maximum turbidity at the point of equivalence) [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref20">20</xref>], fluorimetry [2,22] and potentiometry [16,23].</p><p>In this paper the colloidal titration, with spectrophotometry and zeta potential end point detection, was chosen to show that analytical criteria as equilibrium predominance in parallel reactions and interferences of another PE or metallic species could be considered to improve the quantification of CPE even if they seem to be well known methods.</p></sec><sec id="s1_2"><title>1.2. Colloidal Titration Particularities</title><p>Cationic PEs are usually determined in water by colorimetric methods with OTB (blue/purple). The end point could be detected by visual inspection; however it depends on eye sensibility of each person, thus UV-Vis spectroscopy is a better technique. Kam and Gregory [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref24">24</xref>] and Zanuttini and Mocchiutti [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref9">9</xref>] suggested to relate the absorbance diminution at 628 nm as the titrant is added. They propose that the aqueous solution absorbance diminish first by a dilution effect but then the indicator starts to complex with PVSK, appearing a new absorbance point at 509.5 nm (hipsochromic displacement). As established for competing equilibriums the predominance of one reaction over the other one depends on the concentration of each reactive. For a colloidal titration three issues should also be considered, the formation of a solid phase that may interfere the UV-Vis detection, the pH and the ionic strenght. Zanuttini and Mocchiutti [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref9">9</xref>], for example, avoid the solid phase formation using surfacetants. Kam and Gregory [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref24">24</xref>] presented studies of pH and ionic strength. However they do not present any informa-</p><p>tion concerning the optimization of OTB concentration. In this paper the optimization of OTB dose is one of the main objectives using the Abs at 509 nm vs &#181;moles OTB. For direct titration of anionic PEs, there are few suitable indicators that show a distinct color change end point; moreover another disadvantage is that the absorption spectrum of the indicator is pH dependent, needing a buffer solutions shortening the pH range for accurate titration. On the other hand, some studies reported indirect colloidal titration for anionic PEs [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref25">25</xref>]. This method consists of adding a known amount of cationic PE, and back-titrate the excess of cationic PE with the system PVSK/OTB. However, back-titration is tedious and time consuming. The direct titration method with the system PE(+)/PE(−) using the streaming current and streaming potential technique to monitor the progress of the titration continuously is one method currently used to determine anionic PEs [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref25">25</xref>]. In this paper we use the direct titration method with the system PE(+)/PE(−) without the use of indicators detecting the end point titration by measuring the zeta potential, and even if it requires the understanding of the physicochemical phenomena (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig2">Figure 2</xref>), it results very simple to quantify the residual PEs in treated water.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s2"><title>2. Materials and Methods</title><sec id="s2_1"><title>2.1. Reagents</title><p>Poly(vinyl sulfate) potassium salt (PVSK), molar mass 170 KDa, obtained from Sigma-Aldrich. The negative charges are attributed to sulfate group in each monomer. Polydadmac (OPTIFLOC C-1008) and Flocculant (Trident 27506) that are commercial PEs intended to be quantified in an industrial waste water treatment process. The concentration of polymers, M (mol/L), was expressed on the basis of monomeric unit which indicates the moles of ionic group per liter of the polymer solution.</p><p>Toluidine Blue O (OTB) solution was used as an indicator and was obtained from Sigma-Aldrich. Tin solution standard for AAS, 1000 mg/L (FLUKA).</p></sec><sec id="s2_2"><title>2.2. Apparatus</title><p>Absorbance of the sample solution was measured at 400 - 800 nm with a spectrophotometer UV-Visible (Cary 100 Conc, Varian) using a 10 mm pathlength cell.</p><p>Turbidimetry. The optical density of aqueous polymer solutions was monitored at 500 nm by means of a Uvvisible spectrophotometer (Cary 100Conc, Varian) using a 10 mm pathlength cell.</p><p>For zeta potential measurements during titration of cationic PEs the Zetasizer ZS (Malvern) instrument was employed [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref26">26</xref>].</p></sec><sec id="s2_3"><title>2.3. Quantification of Cationic PEs by UV-Visible</title><p>Synthetic PVSK-OTB solutions were prepared mixing 1.0 mL of a 1.24 mM PVSK and different additions of a 0.27 mM OTB into a 10 mL final volume.</p><p>First the optimal OTB/PVSK was studied to detect the equivalence point of the titration according to the following procedure: 1 mL of solution added PVSK 1.24 mM and dilute to 10 mL with deionized water in a volumetric flask 10 mL giving a final concentration of 0.124 mM, this was taken as blank. Other solutions were prepared containing 1 mL of 1.24 mM PVSK and additions</p><p>from 0.1 to 1 mL of 0.27 mM OTB and diluted to 10 mL with deionized water. A solution was prepared with 1 mL of 0.27 mM OTB and diluted to 10 mL with deionized water. UV-Vis absorbance of each prepared solutions were done and a graph of absorbance at 509 nm vs &#181;moles OTB, was constructed.</p><p>The determination of cationic PE was made by the colloidal titration method with spectrophotometric detection of the equivalence point using the color change of the OTB (blue to pink) via the PE system/indicator. Indicator solution was prepared by 0.27 mM OTB, a solution of 1.24 mM PVSK which was used as titrant.</p><p>A synthetic Polydadmac (10 mg/L) + OTB (13.5 &#181;M) solution was prepared in a volumetric flask of 10 mL. After the UV-Vis absorbance was read, the solution of the cell was returned to a 20 mL vial and added a known amount of titrant PVSK, stirred for 30 s, and returned to the UV-Vis cell for its absorbance measurement again. In the same way, titrant additions continued until the end of titration (the color changed from blue to pink) of the positive PE solution.</p><p>According to the colloidal titration method described above, the titration of synthetic Polydadmac solutions in the concentration range of 1 to 100 mg/L using the system PVSK/OTB were carried out until the end point detection.</p></sec><sec id="s2_4"><title>2.4. Quantification of Cationic PEs by pZ</title><p>Polydadmac synthetic solutions were prepared in the concentration range of 1 to 100 ppm, taking a certain amount of a solution 1.28 mM PVSK and diluting to 10 mL with distilled water in a volumetric flask. The prepared solution was poured into a 20 mL vial and the zeta potential was measured initial solution to be titrated. Next was added a certain amount of titrant 1.28 Mm PVSK solution, was stirred for 30 s and measured the pZ of the solution. There have been various additions of titrant until it reached the isoelectric point and the solution turned turbid.</p></sec><sec id="s2_5"><title>2.5. Flocculant and Metal Interference in the Quantification of Polydadmac</title><p>Solutions of 5 ppm Polydadmac in the presence of varying amounts of Sn (1, 2.5, 5 and 10 ppm Sn), then titrated with PVSK detecting the equivalence point by the spectrophotometric method.</p><p>Solutions of 5 ppm Polydadmac in the presence of varying amounts of flocculant (1, 2.5 and 5 ppm Flocculant Trident 27506), then titrated with PVSK detecting the equivalence point by the spectrophotometric method.</p></sec><sec id="s2_6"><title>2.6. Zeta Potential Measurements</title><p>With a syringe, 1 mL of sample was placed into a port of the zeta potential cell, the sample was injected slowly checking that all air bubbles were removed. Once the sample begins to come out the other port of the cell, the respective plugs were placed. Capillary cell was inserted in the Zetasizer ZS equipment and read the zeta potential value.</p></sec></sec><sec id="s3"><title>3. Results and Discussions</title><p>The experimental strategy was based on a multiparametric study of two colloidal titration methods: spectrophotometric and zeta potential end point detection. The first one was optimized to guarantee the accuracy of cationic commercial PE quantification. It includes the indicator dose optimization using analytical criteria for competing equilibrium, two linear regressions of CPE concentration vs. titrant added volume for different concentration ranges and the interference study of flocculant and Sn in the CPE quantification. The second method provides a physicochemical validation of the electric surface phenomena occurring during the colloidal titration and the end point detection. As a additional contribution the zeta potential titration (<xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig3">Figure 3</xref>) will be discussed and proposed as an alternative method for quantifying CPE when the sample is metal free.</p><sec id="s3_1"><title>3.1. Quantification of Cationic PEs by UV-Visible</title><p>Usually the indicator concentration is at least 10<sup>–</sup><sup>3</sup> times less concentrated than the titrant but there is no a strict rule to decide it. In this paper we propose a previous optimization of these parameters based on the used method for metal titrations with spectrophotometric detection [<xref ref-type="bibr" rid="scirp.25062-ref27">27</xref>].</p><p>As far as me understand there are no published data about the optimum wavelength and PVSK-OTB ratio, previous to perform the titration of cationic PE, the absorbance spectra of a PVSK and PVSK-OTB solutions were obtained. In <xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref> free OTB has a maximum absorbance at 628 nm and the intensity decreases when OTB interacts with PVSK. The complex formed by the association of these two species presents an absorbance band at 509 nm. In the first solution (0.1 mL OTB solution + 1.0 mL 1.24 mM KPVS solution) the spectrum shows almost exclusively the absorption band corresponding to the OTB-PVSK complex (509 nm). For the rest of solutions the absorption band corresponding to the formed complex increases, but also the absorption band of free OTB in solution indicating that at higher concentration of OTB, PVSK has been saturated.</p><p><xref ref-type="fig" rid="fig4">Figure 4</xref>(b) reports the profile of OTB-PVSK complex absorbance, at 509 nm, versus the amounts (&#181;moles) of OTB added. It is observed a change in slope at 0.5 mL of OTB solution added (13.5 &#181;moles). This corresponds</p></sec></sec></body><back><ref-list><title>References</title><ref id="scirp.25062-ref1"><label>1</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">A. E. Hatch, “Removal of Heavy Metals from Aqueous Solutions,” US Patent 3859210, 1975.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref2"><label>2</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">X. Feng, M. Leduc and R. Pelton, “Polyelectrolyte Com plex Characterization with Isothermal Titration Calorimetry and Colloid Titration,” Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical Engineering Aspects, Vol. 317, No. 1-3, 2008, pp. 535-542. doi:10.1016/j.colsurfa.2007.11.053</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref3"><label>3</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Fielding, J. Hutchison, et al., “Analytical Methods for Polymers and Their Oxidation By-Products,” American Water Works Association Research Foundation, 1999, p. 13.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref4"><label>4</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">V. T. Wee, “Determination of Cationic Surfactants in Waste and River Waters,” Water Research, Vol. 18, No. 2, 1984, pp. 223-225. doi:10.1016/0043-1354(84)90072-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref5"><label>5</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. V. Kozel, E. K Skosyrskaya and M. K. Beklemishev, “Kinetic Methods for Determining Water-Soluble Polymers,” Journal of Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 63, No. 7, 2008, pp. 693-699. doi:10.1134/S1061934808070162</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref6"><label>6</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">N. S. C. Becker, D. M Bennett, B. A. Bolto, et al., “Detection of Polyelectrolytes at Trace Levels in Water by Fluorescent Tagging,” Reactive &amp; Functional Polymers, Vol. 60, 2004, pp. 183-193.  
doi:10.1016/j.reactfunctpolym.2004.02.022</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref7"><label>7</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">T. Hanasaki, H. Ohnishi, A. Nikaidoh, et al., “Determination of Trace Polymer in Waste Water,” Bulletin of Environmental Contamination and Toxicology, Vol. 35, No. 1, 1985, pp. 476-481. doi:10.1007/BF01636541</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref8"><label>8</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Tsubouchi, H. Mitsushio and N. Yamasaki, “Determination of Cationic Surfactants by Two-Phase Titration,” Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 53, No. 12, 1981, pp. 1957-1959. doi:10.1021/ac00235a060</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref9"><label>9</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">D. P Parazak, C. W. Burkhardt and K. J. McCarthy, “De termination of Low Levels of Cationic Polyelectrolytes in Water,” Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 59, No. 10, 1987, pp. 1444-1445. doi:10.1021/ac00137a015</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref10"><label>10</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">V. P. Y. Gadzekpo, K. P. Xiao, H. Aoki, et al., “ Voltammetric Detection of the Polycation Protamine by the Use of Electrodes Modified with Self-Assembled Monolayers of Thioctic Acid,” Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 71, No. 22, 1999, pp. 5109-5115. doi:10.1021/ac990580m</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref11"><label>11</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. Kawase and M. Yamanaka, “Continuous Solvent-Ex traction Method for the Spectrophotometric Determination of Cationic Surfactants,” Analyst, Vol. 104, No. 1241, 1979, pp. 750-755. doi:10.1039/an9790400750</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref12"><label>12</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">W. Weindel and H. Sontheimer, Chemical Abstract, Vol. 112, 1971, pp. 74.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref13"><label>13</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">T. Masadome, “Flow Injection Spectrophotometric Determination of Anionic Polyelectrolytes Using the Cationic Dyes,” Analytical Letters, Vol. 34, No. 15, 2001, pp. 2711-2719. doi:10.1081/AL-100108417</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref14"><label>14</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">K. T?ei and T. Zaitsu, “Spectrophotometric Determi nation of Micro Amounts of Cationic Polymeric Flocculants by Flow Injection Analysis,” Analytical Chimica Acta, Vol. 174, 1985, pp. 369-373.  
doi:10.1016/S0003-2670(00)84402-5</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref15"><label>15</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. Terayama, “Method of Colloid Titration (A New Titration between Polymer Ions),” Journal of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chemistry, Vol. 8, No. 2, 1952, pp. 243-253. doi:10.1002/pol.1952.120080209</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref16"><label>16</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">T. Masadome and T. Imato, “Use of Marker Ion and Cationic Surfactant Plastic Membrane Electrode for Potentiometric Titration of Cationic Polyelectrolytes,” Talanta, Vol. 60, No. 4, 2003, pp. 663-668.  
doi:10.1016/S0039-9140(03)00140-1</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref17"><label>17</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. P. Cardwell, “Technique of Streaming Current Detection and Applications,” Environmental Science and Technology, Vol. 1, No. 6, 1967, pp. 482-487.  
doi:10.1021/es60006a002</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref18"><label>18</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">K. T?ei and T. Kohara, “A Conductometric Method for Colloid Titrations,” Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 83, 1976, pp. 59-65. doi:10.1016/S0003-2670(01)84631-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref19"><label>19</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">D. F. Hodgson and E. J. Amis, “Viscometric Titration of a Linear Polyelectrolyte,” Journal of Chemical Physics, Vol. 91, No. 4, 1989, p. 2635. doi:10.1063/1.456972</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref20"><label>20</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">K. T?ei and M. Sawada, “A Turbidimetric Method for Colloid Titrations,” Analytica Chimica Acta, Vol. 89, No. 2, 1977, pp. 383-389.  
doi:10.1016/S0003-2670(01)84736-X</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref21"><label>21</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. Tanaka and Y. Sakamoto, “Polyelectrolyte Titration Using Fluorescent Indicator. I. Direct Titration of Anionic and Cationic Polyelectrolytes with 10?4N Standard Solutions,” Journal of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chemistry, Vol. 31, No. 11, 1993, pp. 2687-2691. </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref22"><label>22</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">H. Tanaka and Y. Sakamoto, “Polyelectrolyte Titration Using Fluorescent Indicator. II. Analysis of Cationic Starches and Flocculants,” Journal of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chemistry, Vol. 31, No. 11, 1993, pp. 2693-2696.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref23"><label>23</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">T. Masadome and T. Imato, “Potentiometric Titration of Anionic Polyelectrolytes Using a Cationic Surfactant So lution as a Titran and a Titrant-Sensitive Plasticized Poly(Vinyl Chloride) Membrane Electrode,” Journal of Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 358, No. 4, 1997, pp. 538-540.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref24"><label>24</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">S. K. Kam and J. Gregory, “Charge Determination of Synthetic Cationic Polyelectrolyte by Colloid Titration,” Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineer ing Aspects, Vol. 159, No. 1, 1999, pp. 165-179.  
doi:10.1016/S0927-7757(99)00172-7</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref25"><label>25</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">K. H. Wasmer, U. Schroeder and D. Horn, “Characteriza tion and Detection of Polyanions by Direct Polyelectro lyte Titration,” Die Makromolekulare Chemie, Vol. 192, No. 3, 1991, pp. 553-565.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref26"><label>26</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">Zetasizer Nano Series User Manual, Malvern Instruments, England, 2004.</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref27"><label>27</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">J. S. Fritz, J. P. Sickafoose and M. A. Schmitt, “Determination of Total Hardness in Water Employing Visual and Spectrophotometric Titration Procedures,” Analytical Chemistry, Vol. 41, No. 14, 1969, pp. 1954-1958.  
doi:10.1021/ac50159a028 </mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref28"><label>28</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">U. Sj?din and L. ?dberg, “The Influence of Metal Ions on Polyelectrolyte Titration,” Colloids and Surfaces A: Physicochemical and Engineering Aspects, Vol. 116, No. 3, 1996, pp. 269-275.  
doi:10.1016/0927-7757(96)03554-6</mixed-citation></ref><ref id="scirp.25062-ref29"><label>29</label><mixed-citation publication-type="other" xlink:type="simple">M. Rice and J. Roeraade, “Continuous Filtration and Ti tration Apparatus for Real Time Monitoring of Polyelectrolyte Concentration and Cationic Demand of a Paper Furnish,” Nordic Pulp and Paper Research Journal, Vol. 18, No. 1, 2003, pp. 95-107.</mixed-citation></ref></ref-list></back></article>