4.7 Article

Preparation of magnetic chitosan and graphene oxide-functional guanidinium ionic liquid composite for the solid-phase extraction of protein

期刊

ANALYTICA CHIMICA ACTA
卷 861, 期 -, 页码 36-46

出版社

ELSEVIER
DOI: 10.1016/j.aca.2015.01.004

关键词

Functional guanidinium ionic liquid; Magnetic chitosan and graphene oxide-ionic liquid; Protein; Magnetic solid-phase extraction; Regeneration

资金

  1. National Natural Science Foundation of China [21175040, 21375035, J1210040]
  2. Foundation for Innovative Research Groups of NSFC [21221003]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

A series of novel cationic functional hexaalkylguanidinium ionic liquids and anionic functional tetraalkylguanidinium ionic liquids have been synthesized, and then magnetic chitosan graphene oxide (MCGO) composite has been prepared and coated with these functional guanidinium ionic liquids to extract protein by magnetic solid-phase extraction. MCGO-functional guanidinium ionic liquid has been characterized by vibrating sample magnetometer, field emission scanning electron microscopy, X-ray diffraction spectrometer and Fourier transform infrared spectrometer. After extraction, the concentrations of protein were determined by measuring the absorbance at 278 nm using an ultra violet visible spectrophotometer. The advantages of MCGO-functional guanidinium ionic liquid in protein extraction were compared with magnetic chitosan, graphene oxide, MCGO and MCGO-ordinary imidazolium ionic liquid. The proposed method has been applied to extract trypsin, lysozyme, ovalbumin and bovine serum albumin. A comprehensive study of the adsorption conditions such as the concentration of protein, the amount of MCGO-functional guanidinium ionic liquid, the pH, the temperature and the extraction time were also presented. Moreover, the MCGO-functional guanidinium ionic liquid can be easily regenerated, and the extraction capacity was about 94% of the initial one after being used three times. (C) 2015 Elsevier B. V. All rights reserved.

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

4.7
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