4.6 Review

Nanozyme's catching up: activity, specificity, reaction conditions and reaction types

期刊

MATERIALS HORIZONS
卷 8, 期 2, 页码 336-350

出版社

ROYAL SOC CHEMISTRY
DOI: 10.1039/d0mh01393e

关键词

-

资金

  1. Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada (NSERC)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Nanozymes aim to mimic enzyme activities by enhancing catalytic efficiency and specificity through specific substrate binding, surface modification, etc. Efforts are being made to close the gap between nanozymes and enzymes, with challenges remaining in further improving nanozymes and achieving impactful applications.
Nanozymes aim to mimic enzyme activities. In addition to catalytic activity, nanozymes also need to have specificity and catalyze biologically relevant reactions under physiological conditions to fit in the definition of enzyme and to set nanozymes apart from typical inorganic catalysts. Previous discussions in the nanozyme field mainly focused on the types of reactions or certain analytical, biomedical or environmental applications. In this article, we discuss efforts made to mimic enzymes. First, the catalytic cycles are compared, where a key difference is specific substrate binding by enzymes versus non-specific substrate adsorption by nanozymes. We then reviewed efforts to engineer and surface-modify nanomaterials to accelerate reaction rates, strategies to graft affinity ligands and molecularly imprinted polymers to achieve specific catalysis, and methods to bring nanozyme reactions to neutral pH and ambient temperature. Most of the current nanozyme reactions used a few model chromogenic substrates of no biological relevance. Therefore, we also reviewed efforts to catalyze the conversion of biomolecules and biopolymers using nanozymes. By the efforts to close the gaps between nanozymes and enzymes, we believe nanozymes are catching up rapidly. Still, challenges exist in materials design to further improve nanozymes as true enzyme mimics and achieve impactful applications.

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