4.4 Article

Continuous Flow Biocatalytic Reductive Amination by Co-Entrapping Dehydrogenases with Agarose Gel in a 3D-Printed Mould Reactor

期刊

CHEMBIOCHEM
卷 23, 期 22, 页码 -

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/cbic.202200549

关键词

3D-printing; amine dehydrogenases; biocatalysis; flow chemistry; reductive amination

资金

  1. European Research Council (ERC) [638271]
  2. NWO Sector Plan for Physics and Chemistry
  3. European Research Council (ERC) [638271] Funding Source: European Research Council (ERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study demonstrates how the merger of biocatalysis with flow chemistry, aided by 3D-printing technologies, can facilitate organic synthesis. The researchers immobilized amine dehydrogenase and formate dehydrogenase in a continuous flow micro-reactor for the reductive amination of benzaldehyde. Entrapment of the enzymes in an agarose hydrogel proved to be the most promising solution for this biocatalytic reaction.
Herein, we show how the merge of biocatalysis with flow chemistry aided by 3D-printing technologies can facilitate organic synthesis. This concept was exemplified for the reductive amination of benzaldehyde catalysed by co-immobilised amine dehydrogenase and formate dehydrogenase in a continuous flow micro-reactor. For this purpose, we investigated enzyme co-immobilisation by covalent binding, or ion-affinity binding, or entrapment. Entrapment in an agarose hydrogel turned out to be the most promising solution for this biocatalytic reaction. Therefore, we developed a scalable and customisable approach whereby an agarose hydrogel containing the co-entrapped dehydrogenases was cast in a 3D-printed mould. The reactor was applied to the reductive amination of benzaldehyde in continuous flow over 120 h and afforded 47 % analytical yield and a space-time yield of 7.4 g L day(-1) using 0.03 mol% biocatalysts loading. This work also exemplifies how rapid prototyping of enzymatic reactions in flow can be achieved through 3D-printing technology.

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

4.4
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