4.8 Article

Coagulation of peptides and proteins produced by Microcystis aeruginosa: Interaction mechanisms and the effect of Fe-peptide/protein complexes formation

期刊

WATER RESEARCH
卷 46, 期 17, 页码 5583-5590

出版社

PERGAMON-ELSEVIER SCIENCE LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.watres.2012.07.040

关键词

Cellular organic matter (COM); Binding capacity; Coagulation; Fe-peptide/protein complexes; Microcystis aeruginosa

资金

  1. Czech Science Foundation [P105/11/0247]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This paper focuses on elucidation of the mechanisms involved in the coagulation of peptides and proteins contained in cellular organic matter (COM) of cyanobacterium Microcystis aeruginosa by ferric coagulant. Furthermore, coagulation inhibition due to the formation of Fe-peptide/protein surface complexes was evaluated. The results of coagulation testing imply that removability of peptides and proteins is highly dependent on pH value which determines charge characteristics of coagulation system compounds and therefore the mechanisms of interactions between them. The highest peptide/protein removal was obtained in the pH range of 4-6 owing to charge neutralization of peptide/protein negative surface by positively charged hydrolysis products of ferric coagulant. At low COM/Fe ratio (COM/Fe <0.33), adsorption of peptides/proteins onto ferric oxide-hydroxide particles, described as electrostatic patch model, enables the coagulation at pH 6-8. On the contrary, steric stabilization reduces coagulation at pH 6-8 if the ratio COM/Fe is high (COM/Fe >0.33). Coagulation of peptides and proteins is disturbed at pH 6-7 as a consequence of Fe-peptide/protein complexes formation. The maximum ability of peptides/proteins to form soluble complexes with Fe was found just at pH 6, when peptides/proteins bind 1.38 mmol Fe per 1 g of peptide/protein DOC. Complex forming peptides and proteins of relative molecular weights of 1, 2.8, 6, 8, 8.5, 10 and 52 kDa were isolated by affinity chromatography. (C) 2012 Elsevier Ltd. 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

4.8
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