We investigate the dynamic adsorption of anionic surfactant C14 - 16 alpha olefin sulfonate on Berea sandstone cores with different surface wettability and redox states under high temperature that represents reservoir conditions. Surfactant adsorption levels are determined by analyzing the effluent history data with a dynamic adsorption model assuming Langmuir isotherm. A variety of analyses, including surface chemistry, ionic composition, and chromatography, is performed. It is found that the surfactant breakthrough in the neutral-wet core is delayed more compared to that in the water-wet core because the deposited crude oil components on the rock surface increase the surfactant adsorption via hydrophobic interactions. As the surfactant adsorption is satisfied, the crude oil components are solubilized by surfactant micelles and some of the adsorbed surfactants are released from the rock surface. The released surfactant dissolves in the flowing surfactant solution, thereby resulting in an overshoot of the produced surfactant concentration with respect to the injection value. Furthermore, under water-wet conditions, changing the surface redox potential from an oxidized to a reduced state decreases the surfactant adsorption level by 40%. We find that the decrease in surfactant adsorption is caused not only by removing the iron oxide but also by changing the calcium concentration after the core restoration process (calcite dissolution and ion exchange as a result of using EDTA). Findings from this study suggest that laboratory surfactant adsorption tests need to be conducted by considering the wettability and redox state of the rock surface while recognizing how core restoration methods could significantly alter the ionic composition during surfactant flooding.
In 2008, we published the first set of guidelines for standardizing research in autophagy. Since then, this topic has received increasing attention, and many scientists have entered the field. Our knowledge base and relevant new technologies have also been expanding. Thus, it is important to formulate on a regular basis updated guidelines for monitoring autophagy in different organisms. Despite numerous reviews, there continues to be confusion regarding acceptable methods to evaluate autophagy, especially in multicellular eukaryotes. Here, we present a set of guidelines for investigators to select and interpret methods to examine autophagy and related processes, and for reviewers to provide realistic and reasonable critiques of reports that are focused on these processes. These guidelines are not meant to be a dogmatic set of rules, because the appropriateness of any assay largely depends on the question being asked and the system being used. Moreover, no individual assay is perfect for every situation, calling for the use of multiple techniques to properly monitor autophagy in each experimental setting. Finally, several core components of the autophagy machinery have been implicated in distinct autophagic processes (canonical and noncanonical autophagy), implying that genetic approaches to block autophagy should rely on targeting two or more autophagy-related genes that ideally participate in distinct steps of the pathway. Along similar lines, because multiple proteins involved in autophagy also regulate other cellular pathways including apoptosis, not all of them can be used as a specific marker for bona fide autophagic responses. Here, we critically discuss current methods of assessing autophagy and the information they can, or cannot, provide. Our ultimate goal is to encourage intellectual and technical innovation in the field.