4.6 Article

Influence of phosphate anions on the stability of immobilized enzymes. Effect of enzyme nature, immobilization protocol and inactivation conditions

期刊

PROCESS BIOCHEMISTRY
卷 95, 期 -, 页码 288-296

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.procbio.2020.02.025

关键词

Immobilized enzyme stability; Buffers and enzyme stability; Tuning enzyme stability by immobilization; Lipase interfacial activation; Enzyme destabilization

资金

  1. Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovacion from Spanish Government [CTQ201786170-R]
  2. FPU fellowship (Ministerio de Cultura y Deporte)
  3. Algerian Ministry of Higher Education and Scientific Research

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A destabilizing effect at pH 7 of sodium phosphate on several lipases immobilized via interfacial activation is shown in this work. This paper investigates if this destabilizing effect is extended to other inactivation conditions, immobilization protocols or even other immobilized enzymes (ficin, trypsin, beta-galactosidase, beta-glucosidase, lactase, glucose oxidase and catalase). As lipases, those from Candida antarctica (A and B), Candida rugosa and Rhizomucor miehei have been used. Results confirm the very negative effect of 100 mM sodium phosphate at pH 7.0 for the stability of all studied lipases immobilized on octyl agarose, while using glutaraldehyde-support the effect is smaller (still very significant using CALA) and in some cases the effect disappeared (e.g., using CALB). The change of the pH to 5.0 or 9.0, or the addition of 1 M NaCl reduced the negative effect of the phosphate in some instances (e.g., at pH 5.0, this negative effect is only relevant for CALB). Regarding the other enzymes, only the monomeric beta-galactosidase from Aspergillus oryzae is strongly destabilized by the phosphate buffer. This way, the immobilization protocol and the inactivation conditions strongly modulate the negative effect of sodium phosphate on the stability of immobilized lipases, and this effect is not extended to other enzymes.

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