FULL PAPER

Membranes www.afm-journal.de

Dopamine: Just the Right Medicine for Membranes

Hao-Cheng Yang, Ruben Z. Waldman, Ming-Bang Wu, Jingwei Hou, Lin Chen,
Seth B. Darling,* and Zhi-Kang Xu*

in molecular structure to the dihydroxy-

Mussel-inspired chemistry has attracted widespread interest in membrane phenylalanine in mussel foot proteins,
science and technology. Demonstrating the rapid growth of this field over which has been revealed to be responsible
the past several years, substantial progress has been achieved in both for the strong adhesive capacity of mus-
mussel-inspired chemistry and membrane surface engineering based on sels onto marine substrates. PDA has
been found to adhere onto nearly all kinds
mussel-inspired coatings. At this stage, it is valuable to summarize the most
of substrates, including some challenging
recent and distinctive developments, as well as to frame the challenges and low-surface-energy ones, via similar prin-
opportunities remaining in this field. In this review, recent advances in rapid ciples. The adhesive mechanism is caused
and controllable deposition of mussel-inspired coatings, dopamine-assisted by a few different interactions including
codeposition technology, and photoinitiated grafting directly on mussel- hydrogen bonds, chelation, electro-
static and hydrophobic interactions.[2,3]
inspired coatings are presented. Some of these technologies have not yet
Significantly, PDA coatings offer a chemi-
been employed directly in membrane science. Beyond discussing advances in cally and physically versatile platform for
conventional membrane processes, emerging applications of mussel-inspired further modification (Scheme 1).[4] For
coatings in membranes are discussed, including as a skin layer in nanofiltra- instance, the catechol groups can form
tion, interlayer in metal-organic framework based membranes, hydrophilic covalent bonds with thiol- or amino-
layer in Janus membranes, and protective layer in catalytic membranes. terminated reagents through Michael
addition or Schiff base reactions, which
Finally, some critical unsolved challenges are raised in this field and some
is useful to graft polymers, small mole­
potential pathways are proposed to address them. cules, and biomolecules onto PDA-
coated surfaces.[5,6] PDA coatings can
chelate metal ions and can coordinate
with metal/metal oxide nanoparticles from the solution,
1. Introduction
which can initiate further mineralization or metallization.[7,8]
It has been ten years since the first report concerning mussel- These systems can act as a hydrogen bond donor and also
inspired chemistry for surface modification was published.[1] interact with charged molecules through electrostatic inter-
In the past decade, mussel-inspired chemistry has attracted actions.[9] Moreover, the phenol structure endows PDA with
immense research effort and become a hot research focus in strong reducibility, which can directly reduce silver nitrate
materials science. Dopamine, a well-known neurotransmitter (a strong oxidant) to silver nanoparticles after chelating silver
in the human body, can self-polymerize to form polydopamine ions from solution.[10] These diverse features render PDA a
(PDA) in weak alkaline solutions with the participation of powerful tool to adjust the surface properties of materials.
oxygen, and form a surface coating on a variety of material sur- Membranes are 2D porous materials with permselectivity,
faces under ambient temperature. Dopamine is quite similar and have a large surface area directly contacting and interacting

Dr. H.-C. Yang, Dr. S. B. Darling Dr. J. Hou

Nanoscience and Technology Division UNESCO Centre for Membrane Science and Technology
Argonne National Laboratory School of Chemical Engineering
Lemont, IL 60439, USA University of New South Wales
E-mail: darling@anl.gov Sydney 2052, Australia
R. Z. Waldman, Dr. S. B. Darling Dr. J. Hou
Institute for Molecular Engineering Department of Materials Science and Metallurgy
University of Chicago University of Cambridge
Chicago, IL 60637, USA Cambridge CB3 0FS, UK
M.-B. Wu, Prof. Z.-K. Xu L. Chen
MOE Key Laboratory of Macromolecular Synthesis Energy Systems Division
and Functionalization Argonne National Laboratory
Department of Polymer Science and Engineering Lemont, IL 60439, USA
Zhejiang University Dr. S. B. Darling
Hangzhou 310027, China Institute for Molecular Engineering
E-mail: xuzk@zju.edu.cn Argonne National Laboratory
Lemont, IL 60439, USA
DOI: 10.1002/adfm.201705327

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (1 of 14) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Scheme 1. Possible paths for further functionalization of polydopamine coatings.
with a fluid medium.[11,12] Therefore, the properties of mem-
brane surfaces profoundly impact membrane performance
across different applications and processes. Although many
surface modification strategies for membranes have been
developed over the past decades including surface coating,[13]
grafting[14–18] and assembling,[19] it remains a challenge to
modify membrane surfaces uniformly and controllably.[20,21]
This is especially true for commercial membranes com-
posed of low-surface-energy polymers such as polyethylene
(PE), polypropylene (PP), polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and
polytetrafluoroethylene (PTFE).[22] Therefore, mussel-inspired
deposition is of particular interest to the membrane research
community for its facile technical processing, broad applica-
bility to various substrates including the low-surface-energy
ones,[23,24] and broad potential for postfunctionalization for
diverse uses. In 2015, we first reviewed the fundamentals
and major developments in surface engineering of polymer
Scheme 2. Roles dopamine/polydopamine play in membrane science.
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327
www.afm-journal.de
membranes based on mussel-inspired chemistry.[25] In that
review, we summarized the polymerization and adhesion
mechanisms of mussel-inspired chemistry, and demonstrated
the role of these materials in contexts that include: membrane
surface coatings, interlayers for membrane modifications, and
selective layers or fillers in membrane fabrication (Scheme 2).
Despite the promise offered by such materials, several fac-
tors limit their widespread application in membrane technolo-
gies. These drawbacks include tedious deposition times, the
unavoidable formation of PDA aggregates, and poor coating
stability in strongly acidic or alkaline environments. Many
groups have spent effort attempting to address one or more
of these issues by moving beyond the conventional dopamine
deposition.
Over the past three years, great progress has been achieved
in this field, and we believe it is time to highlight the most
significant progress made in addressing the limitations of
1705327 (2 of 14) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.afm-journal.de

PDA-modifications in membrane science. This review will
focus on the latest representative developments, particularly
those from the past three years. We hope this review will help
clarify the remaining challenges in mussel-inspired surface and
interface engineering of polymer membranes.
This review will be divided into three parts. In the first
section, we will present some exciting advances in mussel-
inspired surface chemistry, some of which may not yet have
been applied in membrane science. In the second section, we
present the emerging developments of mussel-inspired chem-
istry in membrane manufacture and applications. Finally, we
discuss the major challenges remaining in this field and some
potential opportunities in future research.
2. Recent Advances in Mussel-Inspired
Surface Chemistry
Recent advances in mussel-inspired chemistry provide
researchers with new approaches to functionalize polymer
membranes more easily, efficiently, and diversely. In this
section, we will first introduce the latest developments in rapid
and controllable deposition of PDA. We then turn to dopa-
mine-assisted codeposition, which can overcome the intrinsic
deficiencies of dopamine deposition and broaden the surface
properties of resulting coatings. Lastly, we highlight photoini-
tiated grafting directly from the PDA surface as a promising
technology in future membrane surface modification.
2.1. Rapid and Controllable Deposition of PDA
Time-consuming and nonselective deposition is the main limi-
tation to the practical application of mussel-inspired modifi-
cation of surfaces. One of the most appealing developments
in this field is the rapid and controllable deposition of PDA
on material surfaces (Table 1). The oxidation of catechol to
o-quinone is the key step during dopamine polymerization.[26]
Therefore, the primary strategy to accelerate dopamine polym-
erization is to enhance the oxidation environment. In 2009,
Wei et al. used ammonium persulfate as an oxidant to facili-
tate dopamine deposition. This approach not only accelerates
the dopamine oxidation and polymerization, but also enables
the deposition to be conducted under neutral or even acidic
conditions (the conventional dopamine polymerization can be
only performed in alkaline solution).[27] Lee’s group presented
an ultrafast deposition process by adding sodium periodate to
the dopamine solution. The mixed solution was sprayed onto
polyethylene battery separators and formed a PDA coating
within one minute. However, this method cannot adequately
decorate the inner pores of the membranes because the coating
forms too fast—the aqueous solution cannot easily diffuse into
the inner pores via spray-coating.[28] To address this issue, our
group developed a dip-coating technology using CuSO4/H2O2
as the oxidant.[29] The generated free radicals promoted the
dopamine polymerization and shortened the deposition time to
around 10 minutes. Even hydrophobic membranes can be inte-
grally modified by this approach if prewetted by ethanol before
deposition. Moreover, extraneous free radicals can improve the
proportion of covalent bonds in PDA coatings, enhancing their
stability in both polar solvents and acidic or alkaline solutions.
Lastly, the Cu2+ ions embedded in the PDA coating endowed
the membrane with excellent antibacterial properties.
Beyond the use of oxidants, the deposition rate can be also
promoted by codepositing dopamine with reactive components.
For example, polyethyleneimine (PEI), an amino-rich polymer,
can accelerate the deposition process by reacting with PDA
through Michael addition or Schiff base reactions—though a
complete deposition still takes four hours.[30] More details about
the codeposition will be discussed in Section 2.2. Addition-
ally, oxidoreductases such as laccase was also reported to oxi-
dize the polyphenols to form material-independent coatings.[31]
Inspired by this research, our group developed a green strategy
to fabricate thin film composite nanofiltration membranes by
laccase-triggered codeposition of tea catechins and chitosan.[32]
All of the afore-mentioned methods involve a second com-
ponent, which may influence the intrinsic properties of PDA.
Therefore, various routes to accelerate the reaction rate without a
second component have been pursued. Freeman’s group applied
an oxygen atmosphere instead of air atmosphere to promote the

Table 1. Comparison of different strategies to accelerate dopamine deposition.

Method Solution pH Substrate Time Deposition speeda) References

Air, r.t. 8.5 Silicon wafer 24 h −1 [1]
2.1 nm h
Oxidant (NH4)2S2O8 7.0 Polyether sulfone 2h 35 nm h−1 [27]
Oxidant NaIO4 7.5–8.5 Silicon wafer 1 min ≈20 nm min−1 [28]
Oxidant CuSO4/H2O2 8.5 Silicon wafer 40 min 43 nm h−1 [29]
Laccase 8.5 PET film 15 h 2.7 nm h−1 [31]
Oxygen 8.5 Silicon wafer 30 min 8.8 nm h−1 [33]
Microwave radiation 8.6 Gold wafer 15 min 72 nm h−1 [34]
UV irradiation 7.0–8.5 Silica surface <2 h ≈3 nm h−1 [37]
Electric field 6.0 Gold wafer 1h ≈30 nm h−1 [41]
Microplasma 5.0 Silicon wafer 40 min 52.5 nm h−1 [43]

a)These
data show the maximum deposition speed mentioned in the literature. It should be noted that the thickness may not increase linearly with time and may also be
affected by the substrates.

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (3 of 14) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.afm-journal.de

dopamine oxidation in solution.[33] The oxygen-enriched depo-
sition resulted in a smoother surface compared to the conven-
tional deposition in air, which could also improve the permeating
and antifouling performance of PDA-coated membranes. Lee’s
group also reported a rapid, oxidant-free PDA deposition tech-
nology with the assistance of microwave radiation.[34] Generally,
increasing the temperature can improve the reaction kinetics
but also decrease the oxygen solubility in the solution, which
ultimately slows down the overall deposition process by sup-
pressing dopamine oxidation. Microwave irradiation overcomes
this limitation by simultaneously increasing the temperature
of the system and generating free radicals, which counteracts
the reduced oxygen solubility to realize a faster reaction. Simi-
larly, both UV radiation and electronic fields can be applied to
accelerate and control the PDA deposition on demand. Reactive
oxygen species are known to be generated under UV light, which
can trigger the dopamine polymerization under neutral or even
acidic environments. Therefore, by using lithography masks,
PDA can be selectively deposited under UV light to pattern the
surface.[35–37] Such kind of patterned surface is promising to be
applied in electrics, biochips and sensors.[38] The UV irradiation
can also trigger the polymerization and deposition of phenolic
compounds in plants on various substrates.[39] Compared with
dopamine, plant phenolic compounds are low-cost, easy-to-get
and environment friendly. Researchers also found electric fields
could enhance and regulate PDA deposition.[40] Kang et al. inves-
tigated the oxidation/reduction characteristics of dopamine by
cyclic voltammetry with Ag/AgCl as a reference, and found its
main oxidation peak at +0.4 V. Therefore, PDA can be depos-
ited onto the electrode under an acidic environment by electro-
chemical oxidation at a higher voltage.[41] We also applied an
electric field on dopamine/polyelectrolyte solutions to regulate
their codeposition on polymer materials. The oxygen generated
from the anode was beneficial for dopamine oxidation at voltages
higher than the −1.23 V required for water splitting. Moreover,
if the substrates were located in different positions between the
anode and cathode, the depositing components with charges
were driven by the electronic field to directionally deposit onto
the substrates.[42] This feature makes the technique suitable for
anisotropic/asymmetric Janus membrane fabrication, which
will be discussed in Section 3.3. Recently, Wang et al. found that
microplasma could also assist and regulate the rapid deposition
of PDA by generating reactive oxygen species.[43] Generating reac-
tive oxygen species is the key mechanism for the rapid deposition
of PDA, particularly in neutral or even acidic environments.
2.2. Dopamine-Assisted Codeposition
Pure PDA coatings cannot meet all the diverse demands on
membrane surface properties. Therefore, in most cases, PDA
itself only serves as a linker to introduce other components
onto the membranes for surface functionalization. There are
two major protocols to achieve this goal: premodification and
postfunctionalization. In the case of premodification, dopamine
is primarily grafted onto polymers that are then deposited onto
the surfaces. This process requires complicated synthesis[44]
and sometimes the protection and deprotection of phenolic
hydroxyl groups in dopamine.[45] In contrast, postfunction-
alization procedures are simple. The desired components are
covalently or noncovalently connected to the PDA-modified sur-
face through chemical or physical interactions between them.
A third strategy for modifying PDA termed dopamine-assisted
codeposition has recently emerged (Figure 1). Compared to the

Figure 1. Schematic illustration of the representative codeposition components and their potential interactions with dopamine. The potential code-
positing components include polycations (e.g., polyethyleneimine (PEI) and poly(allylamine hydrochloride) (PAH)), polyanions (e.g., poly(styrene
sulfonate) (PSS) and poly(acrylic acid) (PAA)), zwitterionic polymers (e.g., poly(sulfobetaine methacrylate) (PSBMA) and poly(methacryloyloxyethyl
phosphorylcholine) (PMCP)), nonionic polymers (e.g., poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG), poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA), and poly(N-vinyl pyrrolidone) (PVP)),
polysaccharide (e.g., hyaluronic acid (HA) and dextran), and small molecules (e.g., folic acid, teramethyloxysilane (TEOS), and KH-560).

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (4 of 14) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
aforementioned strategies, dopamine-assisted codeposition can
greatly simplify procedures and enrich possible coating func-
tionality by integrating the deposition and functionalization in
a single simultaneous step. In 2012, Lee and co-workers first
proposed the concept of dopamine-assisted codeposition.[4] In
that work, a second component of interest, such as polymeri-
zation initiators, antibacterial agents, tertiary amines, growth
factors, or polysaccharides, were codeposited onto the material
surfaces with dopamine for different uses.
Interactions between dopamine and the second component
dictate the parameters of codeposition. Zhang et al. investi-
gated the codeposition behavior of dopamine and nonionic
polymers including poly(ethylene glycol) (PEG), poly(N-vinyl
pyrrolidone) (PVP) and poly(vinyl alcohol) (PVA), where
hydrogen bonding is the only interaction between them.[46]
While relatively weak hydrogen bonds facilitate the codepo-
sition of PDA and polymers, strong hydrogen bonds may
overwhelm the noncovalent interactions within PDA itself
and impede the deposition. As a result, PVA or PEG could
be codeposited onto the surface with dopamine, while PVP,
with its strong hydrogen-bond acceptor species, would sup-
press PDA deposition. Based on this principle, polyhydroxy
compounds such as dextran[47] and hyaluronic acid[48] could
also be deposited with dopamine for their antifouling prop-
erties. Polyelectrolytes may also interact with PDA through
electrostatic interactions because the catechol group of the
PDA is negatively charged while the amino group is posi-
tively charged. Ball’s group revealed that both polycations
and polyanions could effectively inhibit PDA aggregate for-
mation, but that the polyanions could further suppress the
PDA deposition.[49] A possible explanation is polycations can
still form a cross-linked network with PDA through cova-
lent bonds although both polycations and polyanions can
interrupt the noncovalent aggregation of PDA. The detailed
mechanisms involved are still unexplored. It should be noted
chemical reactions are involved in the codeposition of dopa-
mine and amine compounds, which we will discuss individu-
ally later in this review. Interestingly, zwitterionic polymers,
such as poly(methacryloyloxyethyl phosphorylcholine)[50] and
poly(sulfobetaine methacrylate)[51] could be also applied in
dopamine-assisted codeposition. The local electrostatic inter-
actions contribute to this process,[52] and some researchers
ascribed their interactions to hydrogen bond and cation–π
interactions.[53] Combined with the H2O2/CuSO4-assisted
rapid deposition we developed, the codeposition process with
zwitterionic polymers could be accelerated without significant
decrease in fouling resistance.[54]
Polyamines are quite different from other polyelectrolytes
when codeposited with dopamine because they can react
with PDA during the deposition process. As mentioned in
Section 2.1, we developed the codeposition of dopamine with
low-molecular-weight PEI, an amino-rich polymer, on PP
membrane surfaces.[30] The incorporation of PEI improved the
deposition rate and suppressed the formation of PDA aggre-
gates by suppressing the noncovalent interactions within them,
leading to a thin and uniform surface. Moreover, the covalent
network between PDA and PEI can promote stability under
strong acidic and alkaline environments. It should be noted that
the molecular weight of polymers would significantly influence
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (5 of 14)
www.afm-journal.de
the deposition process. Evidence points to high molecular
weight polymers being detrimental to the deposition process,
though an underlying mechanism is still elusive.[55]
Beyond polymers, small molecules such as inorganic precur-
sors were also reported as second components in dopamine-
assisted codeposition to fabricate organic–inorganic hybrid
coatings. For example, Shao’s group codeposited dopamine with
silanes (i.e., tetramethyloxysilane and KH-560) for hydrophilic
modification of PVDF membranes.[56,57] This process is compli-
cated because it involves simultaneous dopamine self-polymer-
ization, silane hydrolysis and polycondensation, as well as any
potential reactions between dopamine and silanes. The silane-
coupling agents were hydrolyzed to nanoparticles and inter-
acted with PDA to form hybrid coatings. Generally, the selected
inorganic precursors should not be hydrolyzed too quickly, or
be too reactive with dopamine as that may affect dopamine
polymerization. This approach in dopamine-assisted codeposi-
tion can also advantageously affect the surface morphology. The
same group found that by codepositing dopamine with folic
acid, they could construct a rough surface with hierarchical
structures for further superhydrophobic modification.[40,58]
2.3. Photoinitiated Direct Grafting
Surface-initiated grafting polymerization is one of the most
popular techniques in membrane surface engineering and
can be extended to PDA-coated surfaces. Generally, initia-
tors are immobilized onto the membrane surface and then
initiate the growth of functional polymer brushes.[59] PDA
coatings always act as a substrate-independent interlayer to
anchor the initiators on the membrane surfaces. For example,
many researchers covalently immobilized 2-bromoisobutyryl
bromide onto PDA-modified surfaces and initiated the atom
transfer radical polymerization (ATRP) for constructing func-
tional polymer coatings.[60] Although this provides a universal
strategy to graft polymers onto the membrane surfaces,[61–63]
the disadvantages of conventional ATRP cannot be avoided.
These disadvantages include heavy metal contamination, as
well a complex fabrication process involving the balance of
dopamine deposition, initiator immobilization and monomer
polymerization.
As mentioned in Section 2.1, the radical nature of PDA
makes it a promising candidate to initiate radical polymeriza-
tion under proper conditions. Zhou’s group first reported a
photoinduced grafting polymerization of various vinyl mono-
mers directly onto PDA-coated substrates under simulated
sunlight irradiation (Figure 2).[64] It should be mentioned that
the PDA was deposited onto the surface under UV irradia-
tion, which is necessary to bring it to the photoexcited state.
After that, they found other polyphenols, such as green tea
polyphenol, could also generate radicals and initiate the poly­
merization under UV irradiation on material surfaces.[35] This
strategy has been employed in fabricating stimuli-responsive
hollow spheres for controlled pesticide release by Sheng et
al.[65] As a competitive strategy to graft functional polymers
onto surfaces, the PDA-initiated photografting is a promising
approach to be applied in membrane surface modification in
future research.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Figure 2. a) Schematic illustration of photoinitiated surface grafting on PDA-coated substrates
under simulated sunlight. b) Two strategies to fabricate patterned polymer-grafted surfaces.
c) Fluorescence images of different polymer-grafted patterned surfaces dyed by fluorescent
molecules. Reproduced with permission.[64] Copyright 2015, The Royal Society of Chemistry.
3. Emerging Developments in Membranes
and Membrane Technologies
In most of the recent literature, mussel-inspired surface
coatings are used as a modifying layer or an interlayer for
postmodification. It has been gradually recognized these coat-
ings can play diverse roles in membranes and membrane pro-
cesses. In this section, we discuss the emerging applications
of mussel-inspired coatings, and demonstrate their advantages
compared to conventional methods or materials.
3.1. As a Selective Layer in Nanofiltration
Significant progress has been made in the field of mussel-
inspired nanofiltration membranes over the past several years.
Although mussel-inspired coatings have been used as an inter-
layer or surface-modifying layer in nanofiltration membranes
for some time, they have only recently been directly imple-
mented as the selective layer in nanofiltration. In general, a
pure PDA coating cannot satisfy the requirement of thin and
dense skin layer because large PDA aggregates formed in the
solution always adhere to the substrate surface, leading to both
low rejection and low flux during nanofiltration. The PDA/PEI
codeposition strategy developed by our group overcomes the
drawbacks of conventional PDA deposition by destroying the
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (6 of 14)
www.afm-journal.de
noncovalent bonds within PDA aggregates
to make the coating uniformly thin and
dense (Figure 3a). The positively charged
PDA/PEI nanofiltration membranes showed
a rejection above 90% to divalent cations
after cross-linking by glutaraldehyde.[66]
Similarly, other phenol/amine combina-
tions such as catechol/PEI[67] can be applied
in nanofiltration membrane fabrication by
direct deposition. Moreover, inorganic com-
ponents such as SiO2 nanoparticles could
be incorporated in this layer to enhance the
surface mechanical strength of the mem-
brane, promoting the structural stability
and compaction resistance during long-term
filtration processing.[68] Similarly, Zhu et
al. codeposited PDA with PEI-modified Cu
nanoparticles to prepare a loose nanofiltra-
tion membrane with excellent antibacterial
performance.[69]
The codeposition process for uni-
form dense layers can also be triggered
by enzymes. Qiu et al. reported a laccase-
triggered catechins/chitosan nanofiltration
membrane with a negatively charged surface
(Figure 3b).[32] The laccase could facilitate
oxidation of catechins and following reac-
tions with chitosan, leading to a dense layer
with a Na2SO4 rejection around 99%. The
rapid deposition processes triggered by the
oxidants can also facilitate the formation of
thin and dense selective layers. For example,
our group reported a uniform, compact and
stable PDA membrane by using H2O2/CuSO4 as the oxidant.
The as-prepared membrane showed improved solvent resist-
ance because more covalent bonds formed in the coating,
enabling the membrane to filter out nanoparticles in organic
solvents.[70] Through a similar process, Wang et al. fabricated
a loose PDA/PEI nanofiltration membrane in the presence of
H2O2/CuSO4, demonstrating high flux and rejection to various
dye molecules.[71]
The wide distribution of surface pores is one of the major
challenges facing nanofiltration membranes. Therefore, Du
et al. selectively modified a PDA/PEI nanofiltration membrane
by filtrating sodium 3-mercapto-1-propanesulfonate (SMPS)
aqueous solution to narrow down the pore size distribution
(Figure 3c).[72] The SMPS can pass through the large pores and
react with PDA through Michael addition, whereas it is rejected
by the small pores. That team also developed a contra-diffusion
strategy to fabricate PDA/PEI nanofiltration membranes with
narrow pore size distributions (Figure 3d).[73] DA/PEI solution
and ammonium persulfate solution were separately settled at
each side of an ultrafiltration substrate. The ammonium per-
sulfate diffused through the membrane and oxidized the DA/
PEI to form the dense selective layer at the substrate surface,
resulting in narrow pore size distribution because more PDA/
PEI was formed at the pores. The membrane showed high
monovalent ion/divalent ion selectivity and great potential in
chemical products separation.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.afm-journal.de

Figure 3. a) Fabrication process of PDA/PEI nanofiltration skin layer on an ultrafiltration substrate. Reproduced with permission.[66] 2015, Elsevier.
b) Laccase-triggered polymerization and deposition for catechins/chitosan nanofiltration membranes. Reproduced with permission.[32] 2016, the Royal
Society of Chemistry. c) Self-regulating process of PDA/PEI nanofiltration membranes. The rejection increases with the reaction time while the flux
remains unchanged. The molecular weight cutoff reflects the narrowing of pore size distribution. MPSIs is the abbreviation of 3-mercapto-1-propane-
sulfonate ions. Reproduced with permission.[72] 2016, the Royal Society of Chemistry. d) PDA/PEI nanofiltration membranes fabricated by contra-
diffusion process. The membrane shows a narrow cumulative distribution of pore size and high monovalent ion/divalent ion selectivity. Reproduced
with permission.[73] 2016, American Chemical Society.

3.2. As an Intermediate Layer for Promoting Compatibility
in MOF-Based Membranes
Metal-organic framework (MOF) materials have drawn growing
attention in gas separation membranes due to their regular
nanopores with high selectivity. There are two strategies to
include MOFs in membrane materials. One way is to blend
MOF particles with polymer matrix to form mixed matrix mem-
branes (MMMs), and the other is to grow a dense MOF film
on a porous substrate. The interfacial compatibility between
MOFs and polymer matrix/substrate is crucial in both cases.
In the case of MMMs, interfacial defects between MOF fillers
and polymer matrix are detrimental to the selectivity of mem-
branes during gas separation. Wang et al. modified ZIF-8, a
type of zeolitic imidazolate MOF, with an ultrathin PDA layer
and blended it with an intrinsically microporous polyimide
(Figure 4a).[74] The authors suggested the secondary or primary
amine groups from PDA would form hydrogen bonds with the
tertiary amine from polyimide, and the promoted interfacial
compatibility is beneficial for both permeability and ideal selec-
tivity of the MMMs. Similarly, Zhang et al. fabricated PVA-based
MMMs with PDA-coated MOF particles to separate ethylene
glycol from water.[75] The hydrogen bonds between amino
groups in PDA and hydroxyl groups in PVA also contributed
to the high permeability and selectivity. In these cases, the PDA
acts as an interlayer to improve the interfacial compatibility and
avoid defect formation in MOF-involved MMMs. Cao et al. fab-
ricated a MMM composed of PDA-coated CAU-1-NH2 (a kind of
MOF material) and polymethylmethacrylate as the separator for
Li–air batteries.[76] CAU-1-NH2 facilitates O2 permeation while
resisting moisture and CO2. The PDA coating could suppress
void formation between the MOF particles and polymer matrix
as well as trap CO2 through the abundant hydroxyl groups.
Alternatively, some researchers utilized PDA to fabricate MOF-
based nanocomposites as the fillers. For example, Rao et al.
grew UiO-66-NH2 onto graphene oxide sheets through the PDA
interlayer, which was blended with Nafion to fabricate proton
exchange membranes for fuel cells.[77]
Recently, supported MOF membranes have attracted wide-
spread interest owing to their highly diversified structures and
regular pore size. A modified surface is required for in situ
growth of uniform and continuous MOF layers. In general,
functional groups such as amino and carboxyl groups could
chelate the metal ions from the solution to form the nucleation

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (7 of 14) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Figure 4. a) Schematic illustration of the mixed matrix membrane fabricated by incorporating PDA-coated ZIF-8 particles into a polyimide matrix and
the hydrogen bonds at the polyimide/PDA interface. b) Schematic illustration of depositing MOFs on the polypropylene fibrous membranes by using
PDA layer as nucleation center.
sites on the surface. In 2013, Huang’s group first reported a
ZIF-8 membrane on a PDA-coated Al2O3 porous substrate for
gas separation.[78,79] Catechol groups from the PDA coating
serve as nucleation sites to chelate zinc ions from solution. After
this first report, they demonstrated the potential of a PDA inter-
layer to induce MOF or zeolite growth on various other sub-
strates, mostly inorganic materials.[80–82] Recently, Zhou et al.
showed that PDA could enable various MOFs to grow even on
inert PP surfaces via layer-by-layer deposition, which makes it
possible to build various thin MOF films on polymer substrates
(Figure 4b).[83] In addition, the PDA-modified scaffold can act as
a template rather than a support for thin MOF film growth. For
example, Wang and co-workers fabricated a sub-200 nm ZIF-8
membrane within a PDA-coated carbon nanotube (CNT) layer
by a contra-diffusion method.[84] The PDA-coated CNT layer
acted as pseudoseeds to induce ZIF-8 growth, and the formed
crystals hinder a further increase of film thickness. Similar pro-
cesses have been used by Zhang et al. to prepare free-standing
ZIF-8 membranes for high-performance hydrogen separation.[85]
3.3. As a Hydrophilic Coating in Janus Membranes
The Janus membrane is an emerging concept that refers to a
membrane with opposing properties on either surface.[86] Most
of the reported examples are membranes with asymmetric
wettability. Such membranes have drawn increasing research
interest because they can simultaneously satisfy competing
requirements in challenging applications. For example, in the
case of membrane reactors based on oxidases, the hydrophilic
layer is preferred to maintain the enzyme activity as a support,
while the hydrophobic layer is necessary to keep a stable air/
water interface for better mass transfer.[87,88] Another example
is demulsification. The hydrophobic layer pulls the oil from the
feed while the hydrophilic layer facilitates oil coalescence and
also keeps the droplet spherical for continuous driving force
from the curved interface.[89,90]
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (8 of 14)
www.afm-journal.de
Though several fabrication strategies have already been
reported, it is still difficult to quickly and easily create Janus
membranes. Fabrication processes such as single-surface
photochemical reactions and vapor treatments are complicated
and amenable only to a limited choice of substrates. Recently,
we developed a mussel-inspired single-surface deposition
strategy to prepare Janus flat and hollow fiber membranes.[91–93]
For flat membranes, the hydrophobic membranes were simply
floated on the interface of a DA/PEI solution (Figure 5a). The
membrane surface in contact with the solution was hydrophi-
lized by PDA/PEI while the air-facing side remained hydro-
phobic.[91] For hollow fiber membranes, the DA/PEI solution
was pumped into the lumen side of hydrophobic hollow fiber
membranes for single-surface hydrophilization (Figure 5b).[93]
The as-prepared Janus flat membrane shows superior per-
formance in bubble aeration compared to the hydrophobic or
hydrophilic membranes with similar pore size (Figure 5c,d).[91]
The hydrophilic side, which is superaerophobic underwater,
allows the bubble to depart from the surface when still small
in size, while the hydrophobic side reduces the operation pres-
sure by trapping the air into the pores. Such Janus membranes
can be also implemented in both oil-to-water and water-to-oil
emulsification by simply switching the emulsifying direction
(Figure 5e).[92] Similar to its role in aeration processes, the
asymmetric Janus structure efficiently reduces the operating
pressure without significant change in emulsion size. Janus
hollow fiber membranes can improve the comprehensive
performance in direct contact membrane distillation.[93] The
underlying idea in applying Janus membranes to membrane
distillation is to reduce the mass transfer resistance but main-
tain the heat transfer resistance by introducing a hydrophilic
layer on the permeate side (Figure 5f). Very recently, Wang
et al. reported a facile “peel-off” method to obtain the Janus
membranes.[94] The PET-supported PTFE membranes were
uniformly modified by hydrophilic PDA-based coatings, and
then the surface coating on PTFE side was peeled off by an
adhesive tape to make the hydrophobic surface. In contrast to
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com www.afm-journal.de

Figure 5. Schematic illustration of the Janus membrane preparation and applications. a) Preparation of Janus flat sheet membrane by floating a
hydrophobic membrane on DA/PEI solution. Reproduced with permission.[91] Copyright 2017, Wiley. b) Preparation of Janus hollow fiber membrane by
pumping DA/PEI solution through the lumen side of a hydrophobic hollow fiber membrane. Reproduced with permission.[93] Copyright 2017, Elsevier.
c) Dynamic water contact angles on each side of the Janus flat membrane. d) Bubbling through a hydrophobic membrane (top) and a Janus membrane
with the hydrophilic side toward water (bottom). Reproduced with permission.[91] Copyright 2017, Wiley. e) Schematic illustration of oil-to-water and
water-to-oil emulsification through Janus membrane. Reproduced with permission.[92] Copyright 2017, American Chemical Society. f) Direct contact
membrane distillation through a Janus membrane. The hydrophilic layer can facilitate mass transfer with a relatively minor effect on the heat transfer.
Reproduced with permission.[93] Copyright 2017, Elsevier. g) Carbon nanotube Janus membrane for switchable oil-in-water and water-in-oil emulsion
separation. Reproduced with permission.[95] Copyright 2016, The Royal Society of Chemistry.

the direct asymmetric modification, this method could be con-
cluded as the asymmetric post-treatment followed by the uni-
form modification.
Beyond asymmetric surface modification, Hu et al. reported
a composite Janus membrane by filtrating hydrophobic
carbon nanotubes and hydrophilic PDA-coated carbon nano-
tubes sequentially on a mixed cellulose ester filter membrane
(Figure 5g).[95] After removing the substrate, the as-prepared
membrane was applied in pressure-responsive oil/water emul-
sion separation. The membrane can separate water-in-oil emul-
sions by allowing oil permeation with an operating pressure
lower than the intrusion pressure of water. At operating pres-
sures exceeding the water intrusion pressure, the same device
can be used for oil-in-water emulsion separations.
3.4. As a Protective Layer in Catalytic Membranes
As was discussed in our previous review, PDA and its deriva-
tives are versatile and have many unexplored properties, one
of which is superior free radical scavenging.[96,97] Polymer
membranes uniformly suffer from degradation by free radicals
during membrane cleaning or photocatalytic processes. Some
researchers have immobilized photocatalysts on polymer mem-
brane surfaces to degrade surface foulants.[98] Unfortunately, the
most common commercial membranes, including PP, PVDF,
polysulfone, poly(ether sulfone), and polyacrylonitrile, show
poor chemical stability under UV light or in strong oxidizing
environments.[99] As a consequence, combining photocatalysts
with polymer membranes risks degrading the membrane.

Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (9 of 14) © 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
Figure 6. a) Schematic illustration of PDA as a free-radical-scavenger layer
in photocatalytic membrane. b) Membrane performance of the nascent,
TiO2-blended and TiO2/PDA-coated PSf membranes after several cycles of
UV irradiation. Reproduced with permission.[100] Copyright 2016, Elsevier.
PDA, however, can serve as a protective layer to scavenge active
radicals generated during the catalysis process. For example,
Feng et al. deposited PDA onto polysulfone ultrafiltration mem-
branes and immobilized amino-tailed TiO2 nanoparticles onto
its surface (Figure 6).[100] The PDA layer can protect the under-
lying membrane from the attack of free radicals generated
under UV light, leading to better chemical stability compare to
the TiO2-blended membrane without PDA. Moreover, contami-
nants on the surface were easily degraded by the TiO2 photocat-
alysts under UV light, yielding a self-cleaning membrane with
a mitigated risk of self-degradation. In another study, Wu et al.
prepared TiO2-PDA hybrid nanospheres and blended them into
polysulfone membranes.[101] The PDA-absent catalytic mem-
brane showed a significant flux increase and rejection decrease
caused by degradation after several cycles of UV light irradia-
tion, while the PDA-containing one retained good separation
performance during long-term operation.
PDA can play even further advantageous roles in coupling
catalytic functionality to membranes. For example, during cat-
alyst immobilization, the catechol groups in PDA can chelate
ions from the solution to initiate the in situ catalyst growth
or directly catch the catalyst crystals. Our group grew FeOOH
nanorods on PDA-coated surfaces to trigger photo-Fenton
reactions in the presence of H2O2.[102] Similarly, we integrated
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (10 of 14)
www.afm-journal.de
FeOOH nanorods with the abovementioned PDA/PEI nanofil-
tration membrane and enabled self-cleaning under visible light
after filtrating dye solutions.[103] Some researchers have also
demonstrated that dopamine could promote catalytic perfor-
mance by facilitating electron transfer during photocatalysis.[104]
3.5. Other Applications
Beyond the afore-mentioned applications, mussel-inspired sur-
face coatings have been used in other membrane processes
such as oil/water separation, affinity membrane chromatog-
raphy, molecularly imprinted membranes, forward osmosis,
and gas separation. We will briefly introduce the recent devel-
opments in these fields. The PDA or PDA-based coatings play
three familiar roles in these applications: surface coatings,
interlayers for better compatibility and interlayers for further
functionalization.
3.5.1. Oil/water Separation
Oil/water separation is a long-studied but still hot topic in cur-
rent research owing to continuing increase in crude oil spills
and related accidents. In 2004 and 2011, the pioneering work
from Jiang’s group introduced the concept of superwetta-
bility to this field, which revealed the principal role of surface
properties in separation performance of membranes.[105,106]
Mussel-inspired chemistry provides a facile and promising
surface-modification approach to introduce special wettability
behavior and hierarchical structures onto surfaces, potentially
offering exciting opportunities in this type of separation. In
general, hydrophilic membranes are oleophobic underwater,
enabling selective water permeation and oil rejection. Con-
versely, hydrophobic/oleophilic membranes allow oil to pass
through. Such membranes can be prepared by the following
protocols: direct PDA deposition, dopamine-assisted codepo-
sition, and postmodification of a PDA-coated surface. In early
studies, researchers directly applied PDA-coated membranes
in oil/water separation because the pure PDA coating is hydro-
philic.[107] However, the aromatic structure in PDA limits its
hydrophilicity and antifouling property. Later, some modi-
fied processes were developed to promote surface wettability.
Codeposition with a second hydrophilic component including
polymers, inorganic precursors, or particles is one such strategy
as mentioned in Section 2.2.[30,56,57,108–110] As a testament to the
versatility of PDA, both hydrophilic and hydrophobic mem-
branes have been achieved via PDA postmodification. For
example, Gao et al. grafted PEI onto PDA-coated carbon nano-
tubes to fabricate a superhydrophilic membrane for ultrafast
separation of oil-in-water nanoemulsions,[111] and Xu et al.
anchored perfluorodecanethiol onto Ag metalized PDA coatings
for superhydrophobic membranes.[112] Our group developed a
biomineralization strategy based on the PDA/PEI interlayer to
fabricate superhydrophilic/superoleophobic membranes for oil-
in-water emulsion separation.[113,114] Rigid mineral coatings can
also improve the structure stability of the membranes. It should
be mentioned the PDA-based coating can adsorb heavy metals
or charged dye molecules through chelation and electrostatic
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
interactions, which has been integrated with oil/water separa-
tion functionality by some research groups.[108,115]
3.5.2. Affinity Membrane Chromatography
Affinity separation refers to a separation process through
specific adsorption of molecules in a feed stream to tailored
adsorptive sites on the membrane surface. The interactions
between target molecules and adsorptive sites should be revers-
ible, stable and specific. Luo and co-workers developed a series
of affinity membranes based on mussel-inspired interlayers to
separate biochemical mixtures.[116–120] For example, they grafted
different “ligand” molecules, including dodecyl mercaptan,
histidine and PEI onto PDA-coated membranes through cat-
echol-amino or catechol-thiol reactions. The membranes can
selectively adsorb human serum albumin (HSA) through elec-
trostatic interaction between HAS and PEI, or immunoglobulin
G (IgG) through hydrophobic interaction between IgG and alkyl
chain or by specific affinity between IgG and histidine.[116] The
PDA-coated membranes grafted by amino-rich polymers such
as PEI and polyallylamine can purify α1-antitrypsin, a thera-
peutic protein can prevent proteolysis and tissue breakdown,
from pretreated human plasma fraction IV through electrostatic
interactions.[117] Recently, they applied PDA/PEI-coated mem-
branes to selectively adsorb laccase, a copper-containing oxidase
enzyme, from a fermentation broth and obtain a laccase-immo-
bilized biocatalytic membrane. This process integrated enzyme
purification with immobilization, leading to both high enzyme
purity and high enzyme loading.[118] Although only electrostatic
and hydrophobic interactions were applied in the abovemen-
tioned examples due to their relatively high specificity, other
interactions such as hydrogen bonds, coordination, or compli-
cated multi-interactions could also have relevance.
3.5.3. Molecularly Imprinted Membranes (MIMs)
MIMs are another class of membranes designed to separate
target molecules through specific recognition and adsorption by
molecularly imprinted polymers. Li and co-workers contributed
significantly to MIMs based on mussel-inspired chemistry. In
some cases, the PDA coating served as a platform to enable in
situ fabrication[121–123] of rigid and hierarchical inorganic layers
onto the membrane surface, followed by imprinted polymeriza-
tion on the inorganic surfaces. In another approach, PDA coat-
ings with grafted initiators could directly initiate the imprinted
polymerization on membrane surfaces.[124,125] PDA can be also
deposited onto nanoparticle surfaces, directly acting as the
imprinted polymer layer,[126] or initiating imprinted polymeri-
zation after anchoring ATRP initiators.[127] These nanoparticles
were then blended with membrane polymers to fabricate MIMs
through phase inversion processes.
3.5.4. Forward Osmosis (FO)
In forward osmosis, most researchers applying PDA coatings
seek to enhance the interfacial compatibility between the FO
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (11 of 14)
www.afm-journal.de
skin layer and substrates, or improve the antifouling prop-
erty of the membrane though PDA-mediated hydrophiliza-
tion.[128–133] Similarly, PDA coatings were employed in pressure
retarded osmosis (PRO) membranes to improve the antifouling
properties.[134,135] A work of particular merit is presented by
Yang et al. who coated PDA on both sides of a cellulous triac-
etate FO membrane followed by Ag metallization. The as-pre-
pared membranes were then applied in osmotic microbial fuel
cells.[136] The Ag/PDA composite coating showed excellent anti-
fouling and antibacteria properties, and has since been widely
reported for other different kinds of membranes.[136–139]
3.5.5. Gas Separation
Though most examples of PDA-involved gas separation mem-
branes are MOF-based membranes already presented in Section 3.2,
PDA-based coatings can be also applied in polymer-based gas
separation membranes. Li et al. fabricated a triple-layer thin
film composed of polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS), PDA, and
polyvinylamine on porous substrates for CO2/N2 separation.[140]
The highly permeable PDMS layer can decrease transmem-
brane resistance while the polyvinylamine layer can facilitate
the transport of CO2. The PDA layer was applied to improve the
interfacial compatibility between them. Fang et al. deposited a
PDA layer onto the PDMS interlayer as the selective layer to
collect hydrocarbons from nitrogen, which could enhance both
separation selectivity and permeability due to its high affinity
for hydrocarbons and defect-free dense structure.[141]
4. Challenges and Opportunities
Mussel-inspired surface chemistry has become one of the most
popular technologies in membrane surface engineering over
the past decade. Although it has been widely investigated and
applied in different membranes and membrane processes,
there are still key challenges remaining in this field, which rep-
resent opportunities for exciting future research.
First, dopamine-assisted codeposition is expected to be
widely applied in membrane surface engineering because
it can bring more functionality to the surface compared to
conventional dopamine deposition. However, the under-
lying mechanisms of codeposition are still unclear because
of the complicated interactions and reactions in the solution.
Though some researchers have proposed plausible descrip-
tions for the codeposition process, there are limited experi-
mental data in the literatures. The effect of molecular weight
on codeposition processes is another critical but poorly under-
stood problem. Deeper insight into these topics will allow for
easily adjustable processing parameters to fine-tune novel
coating properties.
Second, more and more researchers employ mussel-inspired
coatings as interlayers to further functionalize membrane sur-
faces, or to improve interfacial compatibility during membrane
fabrication. While this type of work successfully uses PDA as a
means to an important end, there has been little thought given
to how the intrinsic properties of PDA can be integrated into
coating functionality. Such intrinsic properties include its ability
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
as a radical-scavenger, which has been demonstrated in the cat-
alytic protection layers discussed in Section 3.4. We expect that
these merits will attract widespread interest as a focus in future
research. Furthermore, we should pay more attention to the
common properties of such coatings. For example, the hydro-
philicity of mussel-inspired coatings can play more diverse
roles in membrane fabrication. It has been well established
that mussel-inspired interlayers can improve the interfacial
compatibility between skin layer and support layer in thin film
composite membranes. It is only now being realized that such
interlayers can also adjust the polymerization process by tuning
the surface wettability and capillary effect of porous support
layer, resulting in a thin and uniform skin layer with both high
flux and salt rejection.[142,143] Moreover, the mussel-inspired
deposition shows its superiority in Janus membrane fabrication
over other modifying methods because the PDA-based coatings
can be easily deposited onto low-surface-energy hydrophobic
surfaces for hydrophilization.
Third, the low utilization efficiency is still a main obstacle
to up-scaling to widespread application of these materials.
During conventional mussel-inspired deposition, dopamine
is oxidized and polymerized both in bulk solution and on the
membrane surface. Even with the development of alternative
cheap phenols and amines,[144–148] precursor that is polym-
erized in the solution is essentially wasted. Minimization of
resources employed in membrane coating is an important
goal. Possible routes involve minimizing solution volume or
tailoring the reactions in solution to specify the deposition on
the surface.
Lastly, growing attention has been paid recently to natural phe-
nols or polyphenols with similar structure to dopamine.[144–146]
The properties of phenolic coatings with chemistry different
from PDA is a promising topic in future research; only a few
such examples have been explored to date. For instance, one
of the most studied polyphenols is tannic acid (TA). Similar to
dopamine, it can be directly deposited onto hydrophobic mem-
branes for hydrophilization,[149] or reacted with trimesoylchlo-
ride or terephthaloyl chloride to form a skin layer for nanofiltra-
tion.[150,151] This material exhibits some unique properties when
applied in membrane construction. For example, TA can interact
with gelatin via hydrophobic interaction and form an ultrathin
film for ethanol/water separation.[152] Also, TA can chelate metal
ions to directly form a stable cross-linked film with high water
flux and dye rejection.[153] These properties are attributed to its
multiaromatic-ring and multiphenolic-hydroxyl structures. As
the field expands to even more related materials, it becomes
clear that the diversity of natural phenolic compounds provides
a rich toolbox for surface engineering of polymer membranes.
In summary, we highlight the recent advances in mussel-
inspired chemistry including rapid and controllable deposition,
and demonstrate their potential in membrane surface engi-
neering. Then we turn our focus onto emerging applications
of mussel-inspired surface coatings covering selective layer for
nanofiltration, compatible interlayer for MOF-based membrane
construction, hydrophilic layer of Janus membranes, and pro-
tective layer in catalytic membranes. We hope this review can
provide potential directions on mussel-inspired surface engi-
neering of polymer membranes and inspire creative research
on this topic in the future.
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (12 of 14)
www.afm-journal.de
Acknowledgements
Financial support is acknowledged to the National Natural Science
Foundation of China (21534009). Use of the Center for Nanoscale
Materials, an Office of Science user facility, was supported by the U. S.
Department of Energy, Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences,
under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. This material is based upon
work supported by Laboratory Directed Research and Development
(LDRD) funding from Argonne National Laboratory, provided by the
Director, Office of Science, of the U.S. Department of Energy under
Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357.
Conflict of Interest
The authors declare no conflict of interest.
Keywords
Janus membranes, membranes, metal-organic framework membranes,
nanofiltration, photocatalysis, polydopamine
Received: September 15, 2017
Revised: October 11, 2017
Published online:
[1] H. Lee, S. M. Dellatore, W. M. Miller, P. B. Messersmith, Science
2007, 318, 426.
[2] H. Lee, N. F. Scherer, P. B. Messersmith, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci.
USA 2006, 103, 12999.
[3] J. Yu, Y. Kan, M. Rapp, E. Danner, W. Wei, S. Das, D. R. Miller,
Y. Chen, J. H. Waite, J. N. Israelachvili, Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. USA
2013, 110, 15680.
[4] S. M. Kang, M.-H. Ryou, J. W. Choi, H. Lee, Chem. Mater. 2012, 24,
3481.
[5] H. Lee, J. Rho, P. B. Messersmith, Adv. Mater. 2009, 21, 431.
[6] H. Yang, Y. Lan, W. Zhu, W. Li, D. Xu, J. Cui, D. Shen, G. Li,
J. Mater. Chem. 2012, 22, 16994.
[7] J. Ryu, S. H. Ku, H. Lee, C. B. Park, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2010, 20, 2132.
[8] L. Guo, Q. Liu, G. Li, J. Shi, J. Liu, T. Wang, G. Jiang, Nanoscale
2012, 4, 5864.
[9] J. Jiang, L. Zhu, L. Zhu, H. Zhang, B. Zhu, Y. Xu, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2013, 5, 12895.
[10] S.-K. Li, Y.-X. Yan, J.-L. Wang, S.-H. Yu, Nanoscale 2013, 5, 12616.
[11] J. R. Werber, C. O. Osuji, M. Elimelech, Nat. Rev. Mater. 2016, 1,
16018.
[12] D. J. Miller, D. R. Dreyer, C. W. Bielawski, D. R. Paul, B. D. Freeman,
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2017, 56, 4662.
[13] A. Lee, J. A. Libera, R. Z. Waldman, A. Ahmed, J. R. Avila,
J. W. Elam, S. B. Darling, Adv. Sustainable Syst. 2017, 1, 1600041.
[14] N. Singh, S. M. Husson, B. Zdyrko, I. Luzinov, J. Membr. Sci. 2005,
262, 81.
[15] M. Ulbricht, H. Matuschewski, A. Oechel, H.-G. Hicke, J. Membr.
Sci. 1996, 115, 31.
[16] K. Kato, E. Uchida, E.-T. Kang, Y. Uyama, Y. Ikada, Prog. Polym. Sci.
2003, 28, 209.
[17] Y.-F. Yang, Y. Li, Q.-L. Li, L.-S. Wan, Z.-K. Xu, J. Membr. Sci. 2010,
362, 255.
[18] D. S. Wavhal, E. R. Fisher, Langmuir 2003, 19, 79.
[19] A. E. Livari, A. Aroujalian, A. Raisi, M. F. et al., Procedia Eng. 2012,
44, 1783.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
[20] F. Liu, N. A. Hashim, Y. Liu, M. R. M. Abed, K. Li, J. Membr. Sci.
2011, 375, 1.
[21] D. Rana, T. Matsuura, Chem. Rev. 2010, 110, 2448.
[22] A. Lee, J. W. Elam, S. B. Darling, Environ. Sci.: Water Res. Technol.
2016, 2, 17.
[23] J. Jiang, L. Zhu, L. Zhu, B. Zhu, Y. Xu, Langmuir 2011, 27, 14180.
[24] Z.-Y. Xi, Y.-Y. Xu, L.-P. Zhu, Y. Wang, B.-K. Zhu, J. Membr. Sci. 2009,
327, 244.
[25] H.-C. Yang, J. Luo, Y. Lv, P. Shen, Z.-K. Xu, J. Membr. Sci. 2015,
483, 42.
[26] N. F. Della Vecchia, R. Avolio, M. Alfè, M. E. Errico, A. Napolitano,
M. d’Ischia, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2013, 23, 1331.
[27] Q. Wei, F. Zhang, J. Li, B. Li, C. Zhao, Polym. Chem. 2010, 1, 1430.
[28] S. H. Hong, S. Hong, M.-H. Ryou, J. W. Choi, S. M. Kang, H. Lee,
Adv. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 3, 1500857.
[29] C. Zhang, Y. Ou, W.-X. Lei, L.-S. Wan, J. Ji, Z.-K. Xu, Angew. Chem.,
Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 3054.
[30] H.-C. Yang, K.-J. Liao, H. Huang, Q.-Y. Wu, L.-S. Wan, Z.-K. Xu,
J. Mater. Chem. A 2014, 2, 10225.
[31] J.-R. Jeon, J.-H. Kim, Y.-S. Chang, J. Mater. Chem. B 2013, 1, 6501.
[32] W.-Z. Qiu, Q.-Z. Zhong, Y. Du, Y. Lv, Z.-K. Xu, Green Chem. 2016,
18, 6205.
[33] H. W. Kim, B. D. McCloskey, T. H. Choi, C. Lee, M.-J. Kim,
B. D. Freeman, H. B. Park, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2013, 5, 233.
[34] M. Lee, S.-H. Lee, I.-K. Oh, H. Lee, Small 2017, 13, 1600443.
[35] G. Bai, S. Ma, R. Qie, Z. Liu, Y. Shi, C. Li, R. Wang, X. Guo,
F. Zhou, X. Jia, Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2016, 37, 1256.
[36] X. Du, L. Li, F. Behboodi-Sadabad, A. Welle, J. Li, S. Heissler,
H. Zhang, N. Plumere, P. A. Levkin, Polym. Chem. 2017, 8, 2145.
[37] X. Du, L. Li, J. Li, C. Yang, N. Frenkel, A. Welle, S. Heissler,
A. Nefedov, M. Grunze, P. A. Levkin, Adv. Mater. 2014, 26, 8029.
[38] Z. Nie, E. Kumacheva, Nat. Mater. 2008, 7, 277.
[39] F. Behboodi-Sadabad, H. Zhang, V. Trouillet, A. Welle, N. Plumeré,
P. A. Levkin, Adv. Funct. Mater. 2017, 1700127.
[40] X. Yu, H. Fan, L. Wang, Z. Jin, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2014, 53,
12600.
[41] K. Kang, S. Lee, R. Kim, I. S. Choi, Y. Nam, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2012, 51, 13101.
[42] A. He, C. Zhang, Y. Lv, Q.-Z. Zhong, X. Yang, Z.-K. Xu, Macromol.
Rapid Commun. 2016, 37, 1460.
[43] Z. Wang, C. Xu, Y. Lu, G. Wei, G. Ye, T. Sun, J. Chen, Polym. Chem.
2017, 8, 4388.
[44] P. Glass, H. Chung, N. R. Washbum, M. Sitti, Langmuir 2009, 25,
6607.
[45] L. Q. Xu, J. C. Chen, R. Wang, K.-G. Neoh, E.-T. Kang, G. D. Fu,
RSC Adv. 2013, 3, 25204.
[46] Y. Zhang, B. Thingholm, K. N. Goldie, R. Ogaki, B. Städler,
Langmuir 2012, 28, 17585.
[47] Y. Liu, C.-P. Chang, T. Sun, Langmuir 2014, 30, 3118.
[48] R. Huang, X. Liu, H. Ye, R. Su, W. Qi, L. Wang, Z. He, Langmuir
2015, 31, 12061.
[49] M. Mateescu, M.-H. Metz-Boutigue, P. Bertani, V. Ball, J. Colloid
Interface Sci. 2016, 469, 184.
[50] C.-C. Chang, K. W. Kolewe, Y. Li, I. Kosif, B. D. Freeman,
K. R. Carter, J. D. Schiffman, T. Emrick, Adv. Mater. Interfaces 2016,
3, 1500521.
[51] R. Zhou, P.-F. Ren, H.-C. Yang, Z.-K. Xu, J. Membr. Sci. 2014, 466,
18.
[52] P.-F. Ren, H.-C. Yang, H.-Q. Liang, X.-L. Xu, L.-S. Wan, Z.-K. Xu,
Langmuir 2015, 31, 5851.
[53] C.-C. Chang, K. W. Kolewe, Y. Li, I. Kosif, B. D. Freeman,
K. R. Carter, J. D. Schiffman, T. Emrick, Adv. Mater. Interfaces 2016,
3, 1500521.
[54] C. Zhang, H.-N. Li, Y. Du, M.-Q. Ma, Z.-K. Xu, Langmuir 2017, 33,
1210.
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (13 of 14)
www.afm-journal.de
[55] H.-C. Yang, M.-B. Wu, Y.-J. Li, Y.-F. Chen, L.-S. Wan, Z.-K. Xu,
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2016, 133, 43792.
[56] Z. Wang, X. Jiang, X. Cheng, C. H. Lau, L. Shao, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2015, 7, 9534.
[57] Z.-X. Wang, C.-H. Lau, N.-Q. Zhang, Y.-P. Bai, L. Shao, J. Mater.
Chem. A 2015, 3, 2650.
[58] Z. Wang, Y. Xu, Y. Liu, L. Shao, J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3, 12171.
[59] L.-S. Wan, Z.-M. Liu, Z.-K. Xu, Soft Matter 2009, 5, 1775.
[60] B. Zhu, S. Edmondson, Polymer 2011, 52, 2141.
[61] J.-L. Shi, L.-F. Fang, H. Li, H. Zhang, B.-K. Zhu, L.-P. Zhu,
J. Membr. Sci. 2013, 437, 160.
[62] Y. Sui, X. Gao, Z. Wang, C. Gao, J. Membr. Sci. 2012, 394–395, 107.
[63] J. Jiang, P. Zhang, L. Zhu, B. Zhu, Y. Xu, J. Mater. Chem. B 2015,
3, 7698.
[64] W. Sheng, B. Li, X. Wang, B. Dai, B. Yu, X. Jia, F. Zhou, Chem. Sci.
2015, 6, 2068.
[65] W. Sheng, W. Li, B. Li, C. Li, Y. Xu, X. Guo, F. Zhou, X. Jia,
Macromol. Rapid Commun. 2015, 36, 1640.
[66] Y. Lv, H.-C. Yang, H.-Q. Liang, L.-S. Wan, Z.-K. Xu, J. Membr. Sci.
2015, 476, 50.
[67] W.-Z. Qiu, Y. Lv, Y. Du, H.-C. Yang, Z.-K. Xu, RSC Adv. 2016, 6,
34096.
[68] Y. Lv, Y. Du, W.-Z. Qiu, Z.-K. Xu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2017,
9, 2966.
[69] J. Zhu, A. Uliana, J. Wang, S. Yuan, J. Li, M. Tian, K. Simoens,
A. Volodin, J. Lin, K. Bernaerts, Y. Zhang, B. Van der Bruggen,
J. Mater. Chem. A 2016, 4, 13211.
[70] C. Zhang, Y. Lv, W.-Z. Qiu, A. He, Z.-K. Xu, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2017, 9, 14437.
[71] J. Wang, J. Zhu, M. T. Tsehaye, J. Li, G. Dong, S. Yuan, X. Li,
Y. Zhang, J. Liu, B. Van der Bruggen, J. Mater. Chem. A 2017, 5,
14847.
[72] Y. Du, Y. Lv, W.-Z. Qiu, J. Wu, Z.-K. Xu, Chem. Commun. 2016, 52,
8589.
[73] Y. Du, W.-Z. Qiu, Y. Lv, J. Wu, Z.-K. Xu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces
2016, 8, 29696.
[74] Z. Wang, D. Wang, S. Zhang, L. Hu, J. Jin, Adv. Mater. 2016, 28,
3399.
[75] W. Zhang, Y. Ying, J. Ma, X. Guo, H. Huang, D. Liu, C. Zhong,
J. Membr. Sci. 2017, 527, 8.
[76] L. Cao, F. Lv, Y. Liu, W. Wang, Y. Huo, X. Fu, R. Sun, Z. Lu, Chem.
Commun. 2015, 51, 4364.
[77] Z. Rao, K. Feng, B. Tang, P. Wu, J. Membr. Sci. 2017, 533, 160.
[78] Q. Liu, N. Wang, J. Caro, A. Huang, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2013, 135,
17679.
[79] A. Huang, Q. Liu, N. Wang, Y. Zhu, J. Caro, J. Am. Chem. Soc.
2014, 136, 14686.
[80] N. Wang, Y. Liu, Z. Qiao, L. Diestel, J. Zhou, A. Huang, J. Caro,
J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3, 4722.
[81] Y. Xiao, X. Guo, H. Huang, Q. Yang, A. Huang, C. Zhong, RSC Adv.
2015, 5, 7253.
[82] C. Yuan, Q. Liu, H. Chen, A. Huang, RSC Adv. 2014, 4, 41982.
[83] M. Zhou, J. Li, M. Zhang, H. Wang, Y. Lan, Y.-N. Wu, F. Li, G. Li,
Chem. Commun. 2015, 51, 2706.
[84] E. Shamsaei, X. Lin, L. Wan, Y. Tong, H. Wang, Chem. Commun.
2016, 52, 13764.
[85] S. Zhang, Z. Wang, H. Ren, F. Zhang, J. Jin, J. Mater. Chem. A
2017, 5, 1962.
[86] H.-C. Yang, J. Hou, V. Chen, Z.-K. Xu, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016,
55, 13398.
[87] L. Mi, J. Yu, F. He, L. Jiang, Y. Wu, L. Yang, X. Han, Y. Li, A. Liu,
W. Wei, Y. Zhang, Y. Tian, S. Liu, L. Jiang, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2017,
139, 10441.
[88] J. Hou, C. Ji, G. Dong, B. Xiao, Y. Yea, V. Chen, J. Mater. Chem. A
2015, 3, 17032.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
www.advancedsciencenews.com
[89] Z. Wang, Y. Wang, G. Liu, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 1291.
[90] Z. Wang, G. Liu, S. Huang, Angew. Chem,. Int. Ed. 2016, 55, 14610.
[91] H.-C. Yang, J. Hou, L.-S. Wan, V. Chen, Z.-K. Xu, Adv. Mater. Inter-
faces 2016, 3, 1500774.
[92] M.-B. Wu, H.-C. Yang, J.-J. Wang, G.-P. Wu, Z.-K. Xu, ACS Appl.
Mater. Interfaces 2017, 9, 5062.
[93] H.-C. Yang, W. Zhong, J. Hou, V. Chen, Z.-K. Xu, J. Membr. Sci.
2017, 523, 1.
[94] Z. Wang, X. Yang, Z. Cheng, Y. Liu, L. Shao, L. Jiang, Mater. Horiz.
2017, 4, 701.
[95] L. Hu, S. Gao, Y. Zhu, F. Zhang, L. Jiang, J. Jin, J. Mater. Chem. A
2015, 3, 23477.
[96] K.-Y. Ju, Y. Lee, S. Lee, S. B. Park, J.-K. Lee, Biomacromolecules
2011, 12, 625.
[97] L. Panzella, G. Fentile, G. D’Errico, N. F. D. Vecchia, M. E. Errico,
A. Napolitano, C. Carfagna, M. d’Ischia, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed.
2013, 52, 12684.
[98] H.-C. Yang, J. Hou, V. Chen, Z.-K. Xu, J. Mater. Chem. A 2016, 4,
9716.
[99] S. S. Chin, K. Chiang, A. G. Fane, J. Membr. Sci. 2006, 275, 202.
[100] K. Feng, L. Hou, B. Tang, P. Wu, J. Membr. Sci. 2015, 490, 120.
[101] H. Wu, Y. Liu, L. Mao, C. Jiang, J. Ang, X. Lu, J. Membr. Sci. 2017,
532, 20.
[102] C. Zhang, H.-C. Yang, L.-S. Wan, H.-Q. Liang, H. Li, Z.-K. Xu,
ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2015, 7, 11567.
[103] Y. Lv, C. Zhang, A. He, S.-J. Yang, G.-P. Wu, S. B. Darling, Z.-K. Xu,
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2017, 27, 1700251.
[104] N. M. Dimitrijevic, E. Rozhkova, T. Rajh, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2009,
131, 2893.
[105] L. Feng, Z. Zhang, Z. Mai, Y. Ma, B. Liu, L. Jiang, D. Zhu,
Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2004, 43, 2012.
[106] Z. Xue, S. Wang, L. Lin, L. Chen, M. Liu, L. Feng, L. Jiang,
Adv. Mater. 2011, 23, 4270.
[107] Y. Xiang, F. Liu, L. Xue, J. Membr. Sci. 2015, 476, 321.
[108] Y. Cao, N. Liu, W. Zhang, L. Feng, Y. Wei, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2016, 8, 3333.
[109] H. Shi, Y. He, Y. Pan, H. Di, G. Zeng, L. Zhang, C. Zhang,
J. Membr. Sci. 2016, 506, 60.
[110] X. Yang, Y. He, G. Zeng, X. Chen, H. Shi, D. Qing, F. Li, Q. Chen,
Chem. Eng. J. 2017, 321, 245.
[111] S. J. Gao, Y. Z. Zhu, F. Zhang, J. Jin, J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3,
2895.
[112] Z. Xu, K. Miyazaki, T. Hori, Appl. Surf. Sci. 2016, 370, 243.
[113] H. C. Yang, J. K. Pi, K. J. Liao, H. Huang, Q. Y. Wu, X. J. Huang,
Z. K. Xu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2014, 6, 12566.
[114] H.-C. Yang, Y.-F. Chen, C. Ye, Y.-N. Jin, H. Li, Z.-K. Xu, Chem.
Commun. 2015, 51, 12779.
[115] J. Zhang, L. Wu, Y. Zhang, A. Wang, J. Mater. Chem. A 2015, 3,
18475.
[116] J. Fan, J. Luo, X. Chen, Y. Wan, J. Chromatogr. A 2016, 1448,
121.
[117] J. Fan, J. Luo, W. Song, Y. Wan, J. Membr. Sci. 2017, 528, 155.
[118] J. Fan, J. Luo, Y. Wan, J. Membr. Sci. 2017, 538, 68.
[119] J. Fan, J. Luo, X. Chen, Y. Wan, J. Chromatogr. A 2017, 1490, 54.
[120] J. Fan, J. Luo, Y. Wan, Chem. Eng. J. 2017, 327, 1011.
[121] Y. Wu, M. Yan, X. Liu, P. Lv, J. Cui, M. Meng, J. Dai, Y. Yan, C. Li,
Green Chem. 2015, 17, 3338.
[122] Y. Wu, J. Lu, M. Meng, J. Dai, X. Lin, J. Gao, C. Li, Y. Yan, Chem.
Eng. J. 2017, 309, 263.
Adv. Funct. Mater. 2018, 1705327 1705327 (14 of 14)
www.afm-journal.de
[123] Y. Wu, X. Liu, M. Meng, P. Lv, M. Yan, X. Wei, H. Li, Y. Yan, C. Li,
J. Membr. Sci. 2015, 490, 169.
[124] Y. Wu, M. Yan, J. Lu, C. Wang, J. Zhao, J. Cui, C. Li, Y. Yan, Chem.
Eng. J. 2017, 309, 98.
[125] J. Cui, Y. Wu, M. Meng, J. Lu, C. Wang, J. Zhao, Y. Yan, J. Appl.
Polym. Sci. 2016, 133.
[126] Y. Wu, J. Cui, M. Meng, M. Yan, Y. Yan, C. Li, RSC Adv. 2015, 5,
46146.
[127] Y. Wu, J. Zhao, C. Wang, J. Lu, M. Meng, X. Dai, Y. Yan, C. Li,
Chem. Eng. J. 2016, 306, 492.
[128] M. Huang, Y. Chen, C.-H. Huang, P. Sun, J. Crittenden, Chem. Eng.
J. 2015, 279, 904.
[129] H. M. Hegab, A. ElMekawy, T. G. Barclay, A. Michelmore, L. Zou,
C. P. Saint, M. Ginic-Markovic, Desalination 2016, 385, 126.
[130] X. Song, L. Wang, C. Y. Tang, Z. Wang, C. Gao, Desalination 2015,
369, 1.
[131] X. Liu, S. L. Ong, N. How Yong, J. Membr. Sci. 2016, 511, 40.
[132] Y. Huang, H. Jin, H. Li, P. Yu, Y. Luo, RSC Adv. 2015, 5, 106113.
[133] F. Li, Q. Cheng, Q. Tian, B. Yang, Q. Chen, Bioresour. Technol.
2016, 211, 751.
[134] S. Zhang, Y. Zhang, T.-S. Chung, ACS Sustainable Chem. Eng. 2016,
4, 1154.
[135] D. Zhao, G. Qiu, X. Li, C. Wan, K. Lu, T.-S. Chung, Water Res. 2016,
104, 389.
[136] E. Yang, K.-J. Chae, A. B. Alayande, K.-Y. Kim, I. S. Kim, J. Membr.
Sci. 2016, 513, 217.
[137] Z. Yang, Y. Wu, J. Wang, B. Cap, C. Y. Tang, Environ. Sci. Technol.
2016, 50, 9543.
[138] Z. Liu, Y. Hu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2016, 8, 21666.
[139] L. Huang, S. Zhao, Z. Wang, J. Wu, J. Wang, S. Wang, J. Membr.
Sci. 2016, 499, 269.
[140] P. Li, Z. Wang, W. Li, Y. Liu, J. Wang, S. Wang, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2015, 7, 15481.
[141] M. Fang, H. Zhang, J. Chen, T. Wang, J. Liu, X. Li, J. Li, X. Cao,
J. Membr. Sci. 2016, 499, 290.
[142] X. Zhang, Y. Lv, H.-C. Yang, Y. Du, Z.-K. Xu, ACS Appl. Mater.
Interfaces 2016, 8, 32512.
[143] X. Yang, Y. Du, X. Zhang, A. He, Z.-K. Xu, Langmuir 2017, 33,
2318.
[144] H. Ejima, J. J. Richardson, K. Liang, J. Best, M. P. Koeverden,
G. K. Such, J. Cui, F. Caruso, Science 2013, 341, 154.
[145] T. S. Sileika, D. G. Barrett, R. Zhang, K. H. A. Lau,
P. B. Messersmith, Angew. Chem., Int. Ed. 2013, 52, 10766.
[146] D. G. Barrett, T. S. Sileika, P. B. Messersmith, Chem. Commun.
2014, 50, 7265.
[147] H. Wang, J. Wu, C. Cai, J. Guo, H. Fan, C. Zhu, H. Dong, N. Zhao,
J. Xu, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2014, 6, 5602.
[148] W.-Z. Qiu, H.-C. Yang, L.-S. Wan, Z.-K. Xu, J. Mater. Chem. A 2015,
3, 14438.
[149] L. Pan, H. Wang, C. Wu, C. Liao, L. Li, ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces
2015, 7, 16003.
[150] Y. Zhang, Y. Su, J. Peng, X. Zhao, J. Liu, J. Zhao, Z. Jiang, J. Membr.
Sci. 2013, 429, 235.
[151] L. P.-Manríquez, P. Neelakanda, K.-V. Peinemann, J. Membr. Sci.
2017, 541, 137.
[152] J. Zhao, F. Pan, P. Li, C. Zhao, Z. Jiang, P. Zhang, X. Cao,
ACS Appl. Mater. Interfaces 2013, 5, 13275.
[153] F. You, Y. Xu, X. Yang, Y. Zhang, L. Shao, Chem. Commun. 2017,
53, 6128.
© 2018 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim