4.6 Article

Robust and selective nano cavities for protein separation: An interpenetrating polymer network modified hierarchically protein imprinted hydrogel

期刊

JOURNAL OF CHROMATOGRAPHY A
卷 1345, 期 -, 页码 154-163

出版社

ELSEVIER SCIENCE BV
DOI: 10.1016/j.chroma.2014.04.030

关键词

Protein separation; Interpenetrating polymer network; Molecularly imprinted polymer; Mechanical strength

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the present work, we report a novel method for the reinforcement of hierarchically structured molecularly imprinted polymer (MIP) for the separation of human serum albumin (HSA) and immunoglobulin G (IgG) proteins under pressure driven flow conditions. The template proteins (HSA or IgG) were first physically adsorbed at their isoelectric point on the surface of wide pore silica particles. Thereafter, the pore system was filled with a monomer solution and polymerized to form a lightly crosslinked polyacrylamide network covering the protein template. In order to enhance the rigidity of the hydrogels, different type of crosslinkers such as ethylene glycol dimethacrylate (EGDMA), 3,4-dihydroxyphenethylamine (DA) and methylene-bis-acrylamide (MBA), at least partially interpenetrated into the initially made acrylamide base hydrogel leading to formation of an interpenetrating polymer network (IPN). Then the silica matrix was removed to leave highly porous and reinforced MIP. TGA together with FT-IR and TEM analysis supported the interpenetration of the secondary crosslinkers in the initially formed polymer matrix. The compression property of the modified hydrogels as a function of degree of swelling was in the following order: DA > EGDMA > MBA-IPN-modified hydrogel. Batch binding assay verified the capability of the IPN modified MIPs to capture the target proteins. Moreover, solid phase extraction, HPLC and SOS-PAGE revealed that the EGDMA modified MIP could selectively capture and separate the proteins from human serum or fermentation broth. (C) 2014 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.6
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据