Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
In this work, two kinds of monolith-based immobilized enzyme microreactors (IMER) were compared in terms of monolith properties and digestion performance. Two monoliths were prepared involving poly (tetraethoxysiLane-co-3-aminopropyltriethoxysilane) (poly (TEOS-co-APTES)) monolith and poly (N-acryloxysuccinimide-co-acrylamide-co-ethylene dimethacrylate) (poly (NAS-co-AA-co-EDMA)) monolith for covalent trypsin immobilization. A higher chromatographic permeability constant 66.7 was obtained from the poly (TEOS-co-APTES) monolith in comparison with only 4.37 for poly (NAS-co-AA-co-EDMA) monolith, and the porous property of monolith measured by N2 adsorption/desorption and mercury intrusion porosimetry also indicated that poly (TEOS-co-APTES) monolith has more pores than poly (NAS-co-AA-co-EDMA) monolith. On the other hand, the digestion results demonstrated that the more efficient IMER was obtained by immobilizing trypsin on the poly (TEOS-co-APTES) monolith even if a less amount of immobilized trypsin determined by the Bradford method than poly (NAS-co-AA-co-EDMA) monolith. Therefore, the capacity of trypsin immobilization of monolith was not the exclusive factor to determine the digestion performance of IMER. Physical properties-penetrability and pore distribution of monolith showed a crucial effect on the digestion performance of IMER.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Han et al. (2018) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 10 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: