Rohit Varshney1, Shubhra Sharma2, Bhanu Prakash1, Joydev K Laha2, Debabrata Patra1. 1. Habitat Centre, Institute of Nano Science and Technology, Phase-10, Sector-64, Mohali, Punjab 160062, India. 2. Department of Pharmaceutical Technology (Process Chemistry), National Institute of Pharmaceutical Education and Research, S. A. S. Nagar, Mohali, Punjab 160062, India.
Abstract
Enzyme immobilization is an essential prerequisite for biocatalysis. In this context, emulsion provides an excellent template for assembling enzymes at the oil-water interface. A microfluidic approach has been adopted to produce oil-in-water-type emulsions stabilized by gold nanoparticle-catalase conjugates. In situ ring-opening polymerization of the oil phase produces solid core enzyme-immobilized microcapsules (MCs). These resultant MCs exhibited a K m value of 42 mM and shows 1.1-fold higher activity compared to free enzymes. Finally, the robust MCs showed excellent recyclability, which can meet the demand of industrial biotechnological applications.
Enzyme immobilization is an essential prerequisite for biocatalysis. In this context, emulsion provides an excellent template for assembling enzymes at the oil-water interface. A microfluidic approach has been adopted to produce oil-in-water-type emulsions stabilized by gold nanoparticle-catalase conjugates. In situ ring-opening polymerization of the oil phase produces solid core enzyme-immobilized microcapsules (MCs). These resultant MCs exhibited a K m value of 42 mM and shows 1.1-fold higher activity compared to free enzymes. Finally, the robust MCs showed excellent recyclability, which can meet the demand of industrial biotechnological applications.
Exploration
for suitable catalysts has been expanded significantly
from the last few decades because of the increasing demand of environmental
friendly production in the industry. In this quest, biocatalysts have
much to offer because of their ease of production, substrate specificity,
and green chemistry. Progress in biotechnology has paved the way for
the widespread application of biocatalysis in industrial organic synthesis.[1−3] An example includes the production of high-fructosecorn syrup by
xylose isomerase that catalyzes the isomerization of d-glucose
to d-fructose.[4] In another instance,
peroxidases are used to catalyze the synthesis of phenolic resins
and replaced the use of conventional phenol formaldehydes.[5] Despite the great potential of enzymes, their
industrial applications have been restricted because of long-term
stability; for example, denaturation or inactivation of enzymes by
heat, proteolysis, or action of organic solvents. Furthermore, the
recovery of enzymes and difficulty in reusability limit their application
in the industry.[6]To overcome these
limitations, enzymes have been immobilized on
various solid supports. Immobilization provides certain benefits—(i)
storage and operational stability, (ii) easy and safer handling of
enzymes, (iii) easy recovery, and (iv) reusability. In many instances,
immobilization of enzymes also improves activity, selectivity, specificity,
and resistance to inhibitors.[7−11] Various methods have been developed in past decades to immobilize
enzymes and can be summarized into following categories—support
binding,[12,13] cross-linking,[14] and entrapment.[15] In the case of carrier
binding, it is important to have optimum interactions of enzymes with
the support materials. Strong binding prevents enzyme leaching from
carrier surfaces, but often times, it irreversibly deactivates the
enzymes. On the other hand, weak binding cannot prevent enzyme leaching
from the support materials during the operational process, thus hampering
the reusability.[16] An optimum binding can
be achieved by self-assembly between enzymes and carriers through
noncovalent interactions.[17] To date, a
variety of synthetic scaffolds have been used for enzyme immobilization
through noncovalent interactions including nanoparticles,[18] gels,[19] macromolecules,[20,21] and nanoreactors.[22] In this context,
emulsion is an attractive candidate for enzyme immobilization because
of its ease of preparation and large-scale production. Recent studies
by Rotello et al. have shown that emulsions can be used as a template
for enzyme immobilization at the oil–water interface.[23] A thin layer of enzyme–nanoparticle conjugates
was assembled on the emulsion droplets, and the resulting microcapsules
(MCs) showed high enzymatic activity. In their next approach, solidification
of the core was achieved by cross-linking the oil phase to attain
reusability.[24] In both cases, synthesis
of polydisperse emulsions limits their practical applications because
many important properties such as enzyme kinetics, rheology, interparticle
interactions, and shelf life largely depend on the size of the emulsions.We address the limitation using a microfluidic device which can
produce monodisperse emulsion in a simple way with high frequency.
Herein, we report one-step fabrication of enzyme-immobilized polymeric
MCs on a microfluidic platform. The micron-size oil-in-water emulsions
were stabilized by gold nanoparticle–catalase conjugates, and
simultaneously, the solidification of the oil core was achieved by
the polymerization reaction using the Grubbs catalyst and dicyclopentadiene
(DCPD) monomer. Later, we have demonstrated that the solidified scaffold
retained high enzymatic activity as well as provided excellent recyclability.
To the best of our knowledge, this is the first microfluidic synthesis
of enzyme–nanoparticle-stabilized solid core MCs.
Experimental Section
Materials
Gold(III)
chloride trihydrate
(≥99.9% trace metal basis), catalase from bovine liver (lyophilized
powder, 2000–5000 units/mg protein), Grubbs catalyst, DCPD,
and 1,2,4-trichlorobenzene (TCB) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich.
Hydrogen peroxide (H2O2, 30%) was purchased
from RANKEM. Millipore water (18.2 MΩ·cm at 25 °C)
was used in all experiments. SU-8 2035 photoresist and developer solution
were purchased from MicroChem for fabricating the silica master with
designed microchannels. The polydimethylsiloxane (PDMS; SYLGARD 184)
package was purchased from Dow corning corporation and used for fabricating
the microfluidic chip.
Synthesis of Trimethylammonium
Tetraethylene
Glycol-Functionalized Au Nanoparticles
Cationic Au nanoparticles
were prepared through a two-step process reported earlier.[25] In brief, 100 mg of thiol ligand, that is, HS-C11-tetra(ethylene glycol)lyated trimethylammonium bromide,
in 3 mL of dichloromethane was added to 20 mg of hydrophobic Au nanoparticles
dispersed in 15 mL of dichloromethane. The resulting mixture was stirred
in an oil bath at 35 °C for 2 days forming black precipitation.
The black precipitate was then washed three times with dichloromethane
and finally dissolved in Millipore water.
Microfluidic
Device Fabrication
Microfluidic
devices were fabricated using soft lithography.[26] First, the master template was designed using AutoCAD software.
Then, a negative photoresist SU-8 2035 was spin-coated onto a 4 ×
4 silicon wafer, and the design was transferred on the wafers using
maskless photolithography (X-pert SF100, Intelligent Instruments).
The next step involves dipping the surface in the propylene glycol
monomethyl ether acetate developer and rinsing by 2-propanol. Finally,
the patterned surface was baked for 2 min to stabilize the structure. Figure S1a represents the structure of the master
on silicon wafers. Next, PDMS 184 SYLGARD with a curing agent in a
ratio of 10:1(w/w) was poured onto the wafer and degassed in a vacuum
desiccator until the trapped air bubbles disappeared. The unit was
placed in an oven at 60 °C for 1 h. Once cured, the microchannels
imprinted on the PDMS mold were peeled from the wafer and punched
with a biopsy punch with a diameter of 2.5 mm. PDMS was then plasma-bonded
to a glass slide with oxygen plasma treatment in a radio frequency
plasma cleaner system for 60 s. Finally, the device was placed in
a 70 °C oven for 5 h and cooled to room temperature for further
use.
Preparation of Polymerized Core Catalytic
MCs
MCs were produced in a flow focusing microchannel device
with one horizontal-Y inlet and one vertical-Y inlet channel. The channel dimension was 100 μm
in depth and 200 μm in width with an aqueous solution flow rate
of 200 μL/min and an oil-phase flow rate of 50 μL/min,
respectively. Figure S1b represents a typical
microfluidic channel used for this experiment. The aqueous phases
consisted of the solution of cationic Au NPs (2 μM) and catalase
(2 μM) in phosphate-buffered saline (PBS) buffer (pH 7.4). The
oil phase comprised a Grubbs catalyst in toluene (1 mg/mL) and DCPD
in TCB (2:3 v/v). The flow was controlled by syringe infusion pumps
(Harvard Apparatus, catalog no. 703009) and was connected to the device
by silicone tubing (inner diameter, 0.8 mm). Figure S2 represents the size distribution of enzyme-immobilized MCs.
Activity Assay
The enzymatic activity
of the MCs was determined spectrophotometrically by using the hydrogen
peroxide decomposition assay. In brief, 900 μL of hydrogen peroxide
(10 mM) was added to solid core MCs, and decomposition was monitored
for 80 s at 240 nm. The same experiment was also performed with the
free enzyme. The assays were implemented in triplicates, and averages
were reported.
Results and Discussion
The enzyme-immobilized MCs were consisted of enzymes, nanoparticles,
and a polymerized oil core. Catalase from bovine liver was used as
an enzyme component with a negative zeta potential of −6.1
± 0.24 at pH 7.4 (pI = 5.4). The trimethylammonium tetraethyleneglycol-functionalized
Au nanoparticles (Figure a) of approx. 4 nm of diameter with a positive zeta potential
of 50.86 ± 3.20 were synthesized in order to bind with enzymes
as well as to minimize the denaturation of enzymes upon binding.[27] The solidified oil core was prepared via ring-opening
metathesis polymerization by mixing the DCPD monomer with the first-generation
Grubbs catalyst in TCB oil. To stabilize the oil-in-water emulsions,
formation of low-valent enzyme–nanoparticle conjugates is highly
desired.[23] The reduction in interfacial
tension by low-valent conjugates was evaluated using pendant drop
tensiometry, with TCB as the major phase and water as the minor phase
(Figure a). In a typical
experiment, a drop of aqueous phase was introduced in TCB solution
using a J-shaped needle and the interfacial tension between two fluids
was measured for 1200 s.[28] The interfacial
tension of the water–TCB biphasic system was 49 mN/m. A small
reduction in interfacial tension was observed when Au NPs (39 mN/m)
were used as a surfactant to stabilize the emulsions. The lowest interfacial
tension (12.4 mN/m) was observed for enzymes because of their low
surface charges and their ability to form a viscoelastic film around
the emulsion, providing stability to the droplets. Unlike NPs, the
enzyme–NP conjugates exhibited a very low interfacial tension
of 16.7 mN/m because of the formation of low-valent conjugates.
Figure 1
(a) Chemical
structure of (i) trimethylammonium tetraethyleneglycol-functionalized
Au nanoparticles, (ii) catalase from bovine liver, (iii) first-generation
Grubbs catalyst, and (iv) DCPD monomer. (b) Schematic illustration
for one-step synthesis of enzyme–nanoparticle-immobilized MCs using a microfluidic device. (c)
Cross-sectional view of polymer core oil-in-water emulsions stabilized
by enzyme–nanoparticle conjugates at the interface.
Figure 2
(a) Pendant drop tensiometry measurement of interfacial
tension
of the aqueous droplet in TCB. The interfacial assembly of Au NPs,
enzymes, and enzyme–NP conjugates reduced the surface tension.
Microscopy images of emulsions. (b) OM image of enzyme–NP-stabilized
oil-in-water emulsion, (c) fluorescence microscopy image of Nile dye-encapsulated
oil-in-water emulsion, (d) low-resolution TEM image of the emulsion,
and (e) high-resolution TEM image of the emulsion shell.
(a) Chemical
structure of (i) trimethylammonium tetraethyleneglycol-functionalized
Au nanoparticles, (ii) catalase from bovine liver, (iii) first-generation
Grubbs catalyst, and (iv) DCPD monomer. (b) Schematic illustration
for one-step synthesis of enzyme–nanoparticle-immobilized MCs using a microfluidic device. (c)
Cross-sectional view of polymer core oil-in-water emulsions stabilized
by enzyme–nanoparticle conjugates at the interface.(a) Pendant drop tensiometry measurement of interfacial
tension
of the aqueous droplet in TCB. The interfacial assembly of Au NPs,
enzymes, and enzyme–NP conjugates reduced the surface tension.
Microscopy images of emulsions. (b) OM image of enzyme–NP-stabilized
oil-in-water emulsion, (c) fluorescence microscopy image of Nile dye-encapsulated
oil-in-water emulsion, (d) low-resolution TEM image of the emulsion,
and (e) high-resolution TEM image of the emulsion shell.In the current study, the enzyme–nanoparticle
complex was
formed inside the microchannel of a microfluidic device. The double Y-shaped microfluidic channel was fabricated in PDMS following
a traditional soft lithography technique. The width and depth of the
microchannel are 200 and 100 μm, respectively. It consisted
of a horizontal-Y-shaped inlet, a vertical-Y-shaped inlet, and an outlet channel. The aqueous solution
of Au NPs and enzyme (PBS buffer, pH 7.4) was passed through two arms
of the horizontal-Y inlet channel with a flow rate
of 200 μL/min. Simultaneously, TCB oil was passed through both
arms of the vertical-Y inlet channel with a flow
rate of 50 μL/min. We hypothesized that upon injection of nanoparticles
and the enzyme through the horizontal-Y channel,
low-valent complexes were formed through electrostatic interaction.[29] As the oil phase sheared off the aqueous phase,
the oil droplets were formed and concomitantly the low-valent complexes
migrated to the oil–water interface, providing stabilization
to the MCs.The freshly prepared MCs exhibited a high level
of monodispersity
when examined under an optical microscope), as indicated by the narrow
size distribution with a mean diameter of 742 ± 3.0 μm
(Figure b). No MCs
were formed when only NPs were passed through the horizontal Y-inlet channel. It proves that the formation of the low-valent
enzyme–nanoparticle complex is the key for stabilization of
emulsions. Figure c shows Nile red (oil soluble)-encapsulated fluorescent MCs which
confirm the formation of oil-in-water-type emulsions. To investigate
the nanoscopic structure, the emulsions were drop-cast on a transmission
electron microscopy (TEM) grid, and the low-resolution TEM image (Figure d) showed the formation
of a wrinkle upon drying of MCs. It revealed a membrane-like structure
which was possibly formed because of extended cross-linking of nanoparticle–enzyme
conjugates at the oil–water interface. The high-resolution
TEM image in Figure e confirmed that the membrane is composed of closely packed Au nanoparticles.After establishing the protocol, the next step was to synthesize
the oil-in-water emulsions with a polymerized oil core. It was achieved
by a co-flowing Grubbs catalyst and DCPD monomer in two different
arms of the vertical-Y-shaped channel simultaneously.
Upon mixing, polymerization occurred within 5 min, and polymerized
MCs were collected in the Eppendorf tube for further characterization.
The optical microscopy (OM) image in Figure a represented the formation of monodisperse
MCs with an average diameter of 580 ± 10.0 μm (see the Supporting Information, Figure S2). It is clearly
evident that the size of the polymerized MCs was reduced upon polymerization
of the liquid core compared to nonpolymerized MCs. The fluorescence
microscopy image (Figure b) showed the encapsulation of Nile red dye inside the solid
core. The polymerized MCs were also examined under a scanning electron
microscope, and the representative image in Figure c demonstrated the uniform size particles
with an average diameter of 562 ± 12 μm. When a single
MC was sectioned into pieces and examined under a scanning electron
microscope, it clearly revealed the formation of a solid core upon
polymerization (Figure d). The polymerization was further confirmed by IR spectroscopy as
shown in Figure .
The peak at 1570 and 1613 cm–1 is attributed to
the C=C stretching frequency of the monomer, but a new broad
peak appeared at 1700 cm–1 corresponded to the C=C
stretching frequency of the ring-opened product. Similarly, the =C–H
stretching frequency shifted from 939 to 971 cm–1 in the polymerized product.
Figure 3
(a) OM image of the MCs with a polymerized core.
(b) Fluorescence
microscopy image of MCs. (c) Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image
of dried polymerized core MCs. (d) Cross-sectional SEM image of polymerized
MCs.
Figure 4
IR spectrum of DCPD and enzyme-immobilized polymerized
MCs.
(a) OM image of the MCs with a polymerized core.
(b) Fluorescence
microscopy image of MCs. (c) Scanning electron microscopy (SEM) image
of dried polymerized core MCs. (d) Cross-sectional SEM image of polymerized
MCs.IR spectrum of DCPD and enzyme-immobilized polymerized
MCs.Next, the assessment of catalytic
activity of enzyme-immobilized
polymerized MCs was carried out using a standard protocol. The immobilization
of catalase on MCs was quantified by the Coomassie (Bradford) protein
assay, and the amount of residual enzymes in the supernatant solution
was measured after the formation of MCs. The catalytic performance
of catalase immobilized on MCs was determined by the decomposition
of hydrogen peroxide in an aqueous medium.[30] The activity of immobilized catalase was 1.1-fold higher compared
to free enzymes in solution, with no detectable autodegradation of
hydrogen peroxide (Figure a,b). This observation clearly demonstrated that the polymerization
of the oil core has no adverse effect on catalytic activity. The slight
enhancement in enzymatic activity might be due to the presence of
hydrophobic environment.[31] We have further
evaluated the decomposition kinetics of H2O2 in the presence of polymerized MCs. Initial rates of H2O2 decomposition (see the Supporting Information, Figure S3) were obtained for various concentrations
of H2O2 solution for MCs. Km, that is, affinity of the enzymes toward the substrate,
was found to be 42.39 mM from the Lineweaver–Burk plot (Figure c) for the enzyme-immobilized
solid core MCs prepared by the microfluidic device.
Figure 5
(a) Activity assay of
enzyme-immobilized MCs and free enzymes in
hydrogen peroxide (10 mM). (b) Relative activity of free enzymes vs
immobilized enzymes. (c) Lineweaver–Burk plot of the enzyme-immobilized
MC rate as a function of hydrogen peroxide concentration.
(a) Activity assay of
enzyme-immobilized MCs and free enzymes in
hydrogen peroxide (10 mM). (b) Relative activity of free enzymes vs
immobilized enzymes. (c) Lineweaver–Burk plot of the enzyme-immobilized
MC rate as a function of hydrogen peroxide concentration.The important feature of any heterogeneous catalyst
is its ability
to perform catalysis in multiple cycles without much compromising
the activity. The recyclability of the MCs was examined through repeated
identical enzymatic activity assays. As shown in Figure , the microparticles exhibited
>95% retention of activity even after eight reaction cycles. The
polymerization
of the oil core trapped by the enzyme–nanoparticle conjugates
at the emulsion interface and prevents the enzyme leaching during
repetitive cycles.
Figure 6
Reusability test of the MCs. The activity remains similar
after
eight catalytic cycles.
Reusability test of the MCs. The activity remains similar
after
eight catalytic cycles.
Conclusions
In summary, we have presented
a microfluidic approach that enables
one-step fabrication of enzyme-immobilized MCs through core polymerization
of enzyme-nanoparticle-stabilized emulsions. The resulting monodisperse
MCs retained their activity after multiple catalytic cycles. The extension
of this approach for various biocatalytic applications is currently
being explored.
Supporting Informationback
Digital image of master
on a silicon wafer and a double Y-shaped microfluidic
chip, droplet size distribution of
polymerized MCs, and characterization details (PDF)
Authors: Chang-Cheng You; Oscar R Miranda; Basar Gider; Partha S Ghosh; Ik-Bum Kim; Belma Erdogan; Sai Archana Krovi; Uwe H F Bunz; Vincent M Rotello Journal: Nat Nanotechnol Date: 2007-04-22 Impact factor: 39.213
Authors: Bappaditya Samanta; Xiao-Chao Yang; Yuval Ofir; Myoung-Hawn Park; Debabrata Patra; Sarit S Agasti; Oscar R Miranda; Zhi-Hong Mo; Vincent M Rotello Journal: Angew Chem Int Ed Engl Date: 2009 Impact factor: 15.336
Authors: Samudra Sengupta; Krishna K Dey; Hari S Muddana; Tristan Tabouillot; Michael E Ibele; Peter J Butler; Ayusman Sen Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2013-01-22 Impact factor: 15.419
Authors: Rui Hong; Nicholas O Fischer; Ayush Verma; Catherine M Goodman; Todd Emrick; Vincent M Rotello Journal: J Am Chem Soc Date: 2004-01-28 Impact factor: 15.419