4.8 Review

Recent Advances in Emerging Metal- and Covalent-Organic Frameworks for Enzyme Encapsulation

期刊

ACS APPLIED MATERIALS & INTERFACES
卷 13, 期 48, 页码 56752-56776

出版社

AMER CHEMICAL SOC
DOI: 10.1021/acsami.1c13408

关键词

metal-organic frameworks (MOFs); covalent-organic frameworks (COFs); enzyme encapsulation; pore size and structure

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [51802152]
  2. Natural Science Foundation of Jiangsu for Excellent Youth Fund [BK20211590]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Enzyme catalysis can be mimicked using biomimetic approaches, with metal-organic frameworks and covalent-organic frameworks being popular enzyme carrier platforms due to their tunability and surface modification capabilities. These platforms protect enzymes under harsh conditions and enhance selective diffusion of guest molecules.
Enzyme catalysis enables complex biotransformation to be imitated. This biomimetic approach allows for the application of enzymes in a variety of catalytic processes. Nevertheless, enzymes need to be shielded by a support material under challenging catalytic conditions due to their intricate and delicate structures. Specifically, metal-organic frameworks and covalent-organic frameworks (MOFs and COFs) are increasingly popular for use as enzyme-carrier platforms because of their excellent tunability in structural design as well as remarkable surface modification. These porous organic framework capsules that host enzymes not only protect the enzymes against harsh catalytic conditions but also facilitate the selective diffusion of guest molecules through the carrier. This review summarizes recent progress in MOF-enzyme and COF-enzyme composites and highlights the pore structures tuned for enzyme encapsulation. Furthermore, the critical issues associated with interactions between enzymes and pore apertures on MOF- and COF-enzyme composites are emphasized, and perspectives regarding the development of high-quality MOF and COF capsules are presented.

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