LOGIN TO YOUR ACCOUNT

Username
Password
Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Or use your Academic/Social account:

Congratulations!

You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.

Important!

Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message

CREATE AN ACCOUNT

Name:
Username:
Password:
Verify Password:
E-mail:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
El-Sharif, HF; Phan, QT; Reddy, Subrayal M (2014)
Publisher: Elsevier
Languages: English
Types: Article
Subjects:
We have investigated the effect of buffer solution composition and pH during the preparation, washing and re-loading phases within a family of acrylamide-based molecularly imprinted polymers (MIPs) for bovine haemoglobin (BHb), equine myoglobin (EMb) and bovine catalyse (BCat). We investigated water, phosphate buffer saline (PBS), tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane (Tris) buffer and succinate buffer. Throughout the study MIP selectivity was highest for acrylamide, followed by N-hydroxymethylacrylamide, and then N-iso-propylacrylamide MIPs. The selectivity of the MIPs when compared with the NIPs decreased depending on the buffer conditions and pH in the order of Tris>PBS>succinate. The Tris buffer provided optimum imprinting conditions at 50mM and pH 7.4, and MIP selectivities for the imprinting of BHb in polyacrylamide increased from an initial 8:1 to a 128:1 ratio. It was noted that the buffer conditions for the re-loading stage was important for determining MIP selectivity and the buffer conditions for the preparation stage was found to be less critical. We demonstrated that once MIPs are conditioned using Tris or PBS buffers (pH7.4) protein reloading in water should be avoided as negative effects on the MIP's imprinting capability results in low selectivities of 0.8:1. Furthermore, acidifying the pH of the buffer solution below pH 5.9 also has a negative impact on MIP selectivity especially for proteins with high isoelectric points. These buffer conditioning effects have also been successfully demonstrated in terms of MIP efficiency in real biological samples, namely plasma and serum.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] M.E. Byrne, K. Park, N.A. Peppas, Adv Drug Deliver Rev 54 (2006) 149-161.
    • [2] K. Haupt, Chem Commun 34 (2003) 171-178.
    • [3] X. Liu, J.S. Dordick, Journal of Polymer Science Part A: Polymer Chemistry 37 (1998) 1665-1671.
    • [4] J.M. González-Sáiz, M.A. Fernádez-Torroba, C. Pizarro, Eur Polym J 33 (1997) 475-485.
    • [5] X. Pang, G. Cheng, R. Li, S. Lu, Y. Zhang, Anal Chim Acta 550 (2005) 13-17.
    • [6] D.M. Hawkins, D. Stevenson, S.M. Reddy, Anal Chim Acta 542 (2005) 61-65.
    • [7] Y. Xia, T. Guo, M. Song, B. Zhang, B. Zhang, Biomacromolecules 6 (2005) 2601-2606.
    • [8] J.L. Liao, Y. Wang, S. Hjerten, Chromatographia 42 (1996) 259-262.
    • [9] S.H. Ou, M.C. Wu, T.C. Chou, C.C. Liu, Anal Chim Acta 504 (2004) 163-166.
    • [10] T.Y. Guo, Y.Q. Xia, G.J. Hao, M.D. Song, B.H. Zhang, Biomaterials 25 (2004) 5905- 5912.
    • [11] L.I. Andersson, J Chromatography B 739 (2000) 163-173.
    • [12] L.I. Andersson, Anal Chem 68 (1996) 111-117.
    • [13] D.E. Hansen, Biomaterials 28 (2007) 4178-4191.
    • [14] K. Mosbach, Molecular imprinting. Trends Biochem, Sci. 19 (1994) 9.
    • [15] T. Wei, S. Kaewtathip, K. Shing. J. Phys.Chem. C 113 (2009) 2053-2062.
    • [16] Q. Gai, F.Qu and Y. Zhang, Separation Science and Technology 45 (2010) 2394-2399.
    • [17] G. Wulff, Angewandte Chemie Int. Ed. Engl. 341 (995) 1812.
    • [18] Y.D. Livney, O.Ramon, E. Kesselman, U. Cogan, S. Mizrahi and Y. Cohen, Journal of Polymer Science: Part B: Polymer Physics, 39 (2001) 2740-2750.
    • [19] S.M. Reddy, D.M. Hawkins, Q.T. Phan, D. Stevenson, K. Warriner, Sensors Actuators B: Chem., 176 (2013) 190-197.
    • [20] J.N. Patton, A.F. Palmer, Langmuir 22 (2006) 2212-2221.
    • [21] A. Uysal, G. Demirel, E. Turan, T. Caykara, Anal Chim Acta 625 (2008) 110-115.
    • [22] T. Takeuchi, D. Goto and H. Shinmori, Analyst 132 (2007) 101-103.
    • [23] N.W. Turner, C.W. Jeans, K.R. Brain, C.J. Allender, V. Hlady and D.W. Britt, Biotechnol Prog 22 (2006) 1474.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Funded by projects

  • RCUK | Smart Materials: Developme...

Cite this article