4.5 Article

Boronate affinity monolithic column incorporated with graphene oxide for the in-tube solid-phase microextraction of glycoproteins

期刊

JOURNAL OF SEPARATION SCIENCE
卷 41, 期 13, 页码 2767-2773

出版社

WILEY-V C H VERLAG GMBH
DOI: 10.1002/jssc.201701417

关键词

glycoproteins; graphene oxide; monolithic columns; solid-phase microextraction

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [81573384, 21375101]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A poly(vinylphenylboronic acid-ethylene glycol dimethacrylate) monolithic material incorporated with graphene oxide was synthesized inside a poly(ether ether ketone) tube. This tube with boronate affinity monolith was coupled with a high-performance liquid chromatography system through a six-port valve to construct an online solid-phase microextraction with high-performance liquid chromatography system. The performance of this solid-phase microextraction with high-performance liquid chromatography system was demonstrated by standard glycoprotein in aqueous samples, namely, horseradish peroxidase. Some parameters that affect the extraction performance were investigated, including sampling rate, pH of sample solution, and sampling volume. Under the optimized conditions, the developed method showed high extraction efficiency toward horseradish peroxidase. The addition of graphene oxide greatly increased the extraction efficiency of boronate affinity monolith for horseradish peroxidase. The limit of detection of the proposed method was as low as 0.01 mu g/mL by using ultraviolet detection. The recognition specificity was also evaluated by analyzing the mixture of bovine serum albumin (nonglycoprotein) and horseradish peroxidase. The results showed that this material could selectively extract horseradish peroxidase from the mixture, indicating its good specificity toward glycoproteins. The proposed method was further applied for analyzing rat plasma samples spiked with horseradish peroxidase. Good recovery and repeatability were obtained.

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

4.5
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