Influence of electrospinning parameters on Poly(hydroxybutyrate) electrospun membranes fiber size and distribution

Poly(hydroxybutyrate) (PHB) obtained from sugar cane was dissolved in a blend of chloroform and dimethylformamide (DMF) and electrospun at 40 ºC. By adding DMF to the solution, the electrospinning process for the PHB polymer becomes more stable, allowing complete polymer crystallization during the jet travelling between the tip and the grounded collector. The influence of processing parameters on fiber size and distribution was systematically studied. It was observed that an increase of tip inner diameter promotes a decrease of the fiber average size and a broader distribution. On the other hand, an increase of the electric field and flow rate produces an increase of fiber diameter until a maximum of ~2.0 m, but for electric fields higher than 1.5 kV.cm-1, a decrease of the fiber diameter was observed. Polymer crystalline phase seems to be independent of the processing conditions and a crystallinity degree of 53 % was found. Moreover, thermal degradation of the as-spun membrane occurs in single step degradation with activation energy of 91 kJ/mol. Furthermore, MC-3T3-E1 cell adhesion was not inhibited by the fiber mats preparation, indicating their potential use for biomedical applications.

Anotação, numa perspectiva de Direito Penal e de Criminologia, ao Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (português), de 13 de Abril de 2009 [Juiz Conselheiro Rodrigues da COSTA (Relator), Juiz Conselheiro Arménio SOTTOMAYOR (vencido nos termos da declaração junta) e Juiz Conselheiro Mota MIRANDA] - são o «lenocínio» e a prostituição, entre adultos livres, crimes? «Roxanne, you don't have to put on the red light»

Resumo: 1 – Sumário do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 13 de Abril de 2011; 2 – Texto completo do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 13 de Abril de 2009, Juiz Conselheiro Rodrigues da COSTA (Relator), Juiz Conselheiro Arménio SOTTOMAYOR (vencido nos termos da declaração junta) e Juiz Conselheiro Mota MIRANDA: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 26 de Abril de 2011; 3 – Anotação; 3.1 – Introdução à anotação; 3.2 – A questão do suposto «bem jurídico» que seria tutelado pelo crime de «lenocínio» p.p.p.p.p. 169.º do código penal português; 3.2.1 – Ainda a questão do suposto «bem jurídico» que seria tutelado pelo crime de «lenocínio» p.p.p.p.p. 169.º do código penal português: uma maior procura e concretização jurídica e científica; 4 – Conclusões; § Abstract: 1 - Summary of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 13 of April of 2011; 2 - Complete text of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 13 of April of 2009, Advising Judge Rodrigues da COSTA (Reporter), Advising Judge Arménio SOTTOMAYOR (looser in the terms of the together declaration) and Advising Judge Mota MIRANDA: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 26 of April of 2011; 3 - Notation; 3.1 - Introduction to the notation; 3.2 - The question of the presumption «legally protected interest» that would be tutored person for the crime of «pimpery (“pimping”)» p.p.p.p.p. 169.º of the Portuguese criminal code; 3.2.1 - Still the question of the presumption «legally protected interest» that would be tutored person for the crime of «pimpery» («pimping») p.p.p.p.p. 169.º of the Portuguese criminal code: a bigger search and legal and scientific concretion; 4 - Conclusions;

Anotação ao Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Português), de 25 de Janeiro de 2011 - o contrato de franquia e a resolução

Resumo: 1 – Sumário do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 25 de Janeiro de 2011; 2 – Texto completo do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 25 de Janeiro de 2011, Juiz Conselheiro Garcia CALEJO (Relator), Juiz Conselheiro Hélder ROQUE e Juiz Conselheiro Sebastião PÓVOAS: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 21 de Abril de 2011; 3 – Anotação; 3.1 – Introdução à anotação; 3.2 – A questão da resolução em termos gerais; 3.3 – A questão da resolução no «contrato atípico de franquia»; 4 – Conclusões; § Abstract: 1 - Summary of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 25 of January of 2011; 2 - Complete text of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 25 of January of 2011, Advising Judge Garcia CALEJO (Reporter), Advising Judge Hélder ROQUE and Advising Juiz Sebastião PÓVOAS: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 21 of April of 2011; 3 - Notation; 3.1 - Introduction to the notation; 3.2 - The question of the resolution in general terms; 3.3 - The question of the resolution in the «atypical contract of franshise»; 4 - Conclusions;

Anotação ao Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Português), de 25 de Janeiro de 2011 - a resolução e o contrato de franquia

É importante chamar a atenção das possíveis diferenças entre o contrato de franquia e o contrato de agência no que diz respeito também ao problema da resolução em termos mais gerais ou em termos mais concretos; 1 – Sumário do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 25 de Janeiro de 2011; 2 – Texto completo do Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça, de 25 de Janeiro de 2011, Juiz Conselheiro Garcia CALEJO (Relator), Juiz Conselheiro Hélder ROQUE e Juiz Conselheiro Sebastião PÓVOAS: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 21 de Abril de 2011; 3 – Anotação; 3.1 – Introdução à anotação; 3.2 – A questão da resolução em termos gerais; 3.3 – A questão da resolução no «contrato atípico de franquia»; 4 – Conclusões; Abstract: is important to draw attention to potential differences between the franchise agreement and agency agreement with regard also to the resolution problem in more general terms or in more concrete terms; 1 - Summary of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 25 of January of 2011; 2 - Complete text of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 25 of January of 2011, Advising Judge Garcia CALEJO (Reporter), Advising Judge Hélder ROQUE and Advising Juiz Sebastião PÓVOAS: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 21 of April of 2011; 3 - Notation; 3.1 - Introduction to the notation; 3.2 - The question of the resolution in general terms; 3.3 - The question of the resolution in the «atypical contract of franshise»; 4 - Conclusions;

Anotação ao Acórdão do Supremo Tribunal de Justiça (Português), de 25 de Janeiro de 2011 - a resolução e o contrato de franquia

is important to draw attention to potential differences between the franchise agreement and agency agreement with regard also to the resolution problem in more general terms or in more concrete terms; 1 - Summary of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 25 of January of 2011; 2 - Complete text of the Sentence of the Supreme Court of Justice, 25 of January of 2011, Advising Judge Garcia CALEJO (Reporter), Advising Judge Hélder ROQUE and Advising Juiz Sebastião PÓVOAS: cfr. http://www.dgsi.pt , 21 of April of 2011; 3 - Notation; 3.1 - Introduction to the notation; 3.2 - The question of the resolution in general terms; 3.3 - The question of the resolution in the «atypical contract of franshise»; 4 - Conclusions;