Directing filtration to optimize enzyme immobilization in reactive membranes

Journal of Membrane Science

Volumn 459, Issue , 2014, Pages 1-11

  Luo, Jianquan ^a   Marpani, Fauziah ^a   Brites, Rita ^a   Frederiksen, Lisbeth ^a   Meyer, Anne S ^a   Jonsson, Gunnar ^a   Pinelo, Manuel ^a  

^a TECHNICAL UNIVERSITY OF DENMARK   (Denmark)

Author keywords

Catalysis; Enzymatic membrane reactor; Enzyme immobilization; Membrane fouling; Ultrafiltration

Indexed keywords

ALCOHOL DEHYDROGENASE; CAKE LAYER FORMATION; ELECTROSTATIC ADSORPTION; ELECTROSTATIC REPULSION; ENZYMATIC MEMBRANE REACTORS; ENZYME CONCENTRATIONS; IRREVERSIBLE FOULING; ISO-ELECTRIC POINTS;

CATALYSIS; ELECTROSTATICS; HYDROGEN BONDS; MEMBRANE FOULING; MEMBRANES; MICROFILTRATION; STABILITY; ULTRAFILTRATION;

ENZYME IMMOBILIZATION;

ALCOHOL DEHYDROGENASE;

ARTICLE; BIOCATALYSIS; ENZYME ACTIVITY; ENZYME IMMOBILIZATION; ENZYME STABILITY; FOULING CONTROL; HYDROGEN BOND; HYDROPHILICITY; ISOELECTRIC POINT; MEMBRANE FILTER; MEMBRANE PERMEABILITY; MEMBRANE REACTOR; MEMBRANE RESISTANCE; MEMBRANE TRANSPORT; MOLECULAR WEIGHT; NONHUMAN; PH; PRIORITY JOURNAL; ULTRAFILTRATION;

EID: 84896867676     PISSN: 03767388     EISSN: 18733123     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/j.memsci.2014.01.065     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Le-Clech P., Chen V., Fane T.A.G. Fouling in membrane bioreactors used in wastewater treatment. J. Membr. Sci. 2006, 284:17-53.
2. Fane A.G., Fell C.J.D. A review of fouling and fouling control in ultrafiltration. Desalination 1987, 62:117-136.
3. Drews A. Membrane fouling in membrane bioreactors-characterisation, contradictions, cause and cures. J. Membr. Sci. 2010, 363:1-28.
4. Giorno L., Drioli E. Biocatalytic membrane reactors: applications and perspectives. Trends Biotechnol. 2000, 18:339-349.
5. Rios G.M., Belleville M.P., Paolucci D., Sanchez J. Progress in enzymatic membrane reactors-a review. J. Membr. Sci. 2004, 242:189-196.
6. Paolucci-Jeanjean D., Belleville M.P., Rios G.M., Zakhia N. The effect of enzyme concentration and space time on the performance of a continuous recycle membrane reactor for one-step starch hydrolysis. Biochem. Eng. J. 2000, 5:17-22.
7. Nilsson J.L. Protein fouling of uf membranes: causes and consequences. J. Membr. Sci. 1990, 52:121-142.
8. Guo W., Ngo H.-H., Li J. A mini-review on membrane fouling. Bioresour.Technol. 2012, 122:27-34.
9. Wang Y.-N., Tang C.Y. Protein fouling of nanofiltration, reverse osmosis, and ultrafiltration membranes-the role of hydrodynamic conditions, solution chemistry, and membrane properties. J. Membr. Sci. 2011, 376:275-282.
10. Jochems P., Satyawali Y., Diels L., Dejonghe W. Enzyme immobilization on/in polymeric membranes: status, challenges and perspectives in biocatalytic membrane reactors (BMRs). Green Chem. 2011, 13:1609-1623.
11. Hou J., Dong G., Ye Y., Chen V. Laccase immobilization on titania nanoparticles and titania-functionalized membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2014, 452:229-240.
12. Sen D., Sarkar A., Gosling A., Gras S.L., Stevens G.W., Kentish S.E., Bhattacharya P.K., Barber A.R., Bhattacharjee C. Feasibility study of enzyme immobilization on polymeric membrane: A case study with enzymatically galacto-oligosaccharides production from lactose. J. Membr. Sci. 2011, 378:471-478.
13. Giorno L., Drioli E., Carvoli G., Cassano A., Donato L. Study of an enzyme membrane reactor with immobilized fumarase for production of l-malic acid. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2001, 72:77-84.
14. Luo J., Meyer A.S., Jonsson G., Pinelo M. Enzyme immobilization by fouling in ultrafiltration membranes: impact of membrane configuration and type on flux behavior and biocatalytic conversion efficacy. Biochem. Eng. J. 2014, 83:79-89.
15. Chen V., Kim K.J., Fane A.G. Effect of membrane morphology and operation on protein deposition in ultrafiltration membranes. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1995, 47:174-180.
16. Ghosh R., Cui Z.F. Fractionation of BSA and lysozyme using ultrafiltration: effect of pH and membrane pretreatment. J. Membr. Sci. 1998, 139:17-28.
17. Jones K.L., O'Melia C.R. Protein and humic acid adsorption onto hydrophilic membrane surfaces: effects of pH and ionic strength. J. Membr. Sci. 2000, 165:31-46.
18. Chan R., Chen V. The effects of electrolyte concentration and pH on protein aggregation and deposition: critical flux and constant flux membrane filtration. J. Membr. Sci. 2001, 185:177-192.
19. Chan R., Chen V., Bucknall M.P. Ultrafiltration of protein mixtures: measurement of apparent critical flux, rejection performance, and identification of protein deposition. Desalination 2002, 146:83-90.
20. Priyananda P., Chen V. Flux decline during ultrafiltration of protein-fatty acid mixtures. J. Membr. Sci. 2006, 273:58-67.
21. She Q., Tang C.Y., Wang Y.-N., Zhang Z. The role of hydrodynamic conditions and solution chemistry on protein fouling during ultrafiltration. Desalination 2009, 249:1079-1087.
22. Lim Y.P., Mohammad A.W. Effect of solution chemistry on flux decline during high concentration protein ultrafiltration through a hydrophilic membrane. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2010, 159:91-97.
23. Pinelo M., Ferrer C., Meyer A.S., Jonsson G. Controlling the rejection of protein during membrane filtration by adding selected polyelectrolytes. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2012, 85:54-60.
24. Susanto H., Ulbricht M. Influence of ultrafiltration membrane characteristics on adsorptive fouling with dextrans. J. Membr. Sci. 2005, 266:132-142.
25. Leberknight J., Wielenga B., Lee-Jewett A., Menkhaus T.J. Recovery of high value protein from a corn ethanol process by ultrafiltration and an exploration of the associated membrane fouling. J. Membr. Sci. 2011, 366:405-412.
26. Obert R., Dave B.C. Enzymatic conversion of carbon dioxide to methanol: enhanced methanol production in silica sol-gel matrices. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1999, 121:12192-12193.
27. Nyström M., Pihlajamäki A., Ehsani N. Characterization of ultrafiltration membranes by simultaneous streaming potential and flux measurements. J. Membr. Sci. 1994, 87:245-256.
28. Nyström M., Zhu H. Characterization of cleaning results using combined flux and streaming potential methods. J. Membr. Sci. 1997, 131:195-205.
29. Hermia J. Constant pressure blocking filtration laws-application to power-law non-newtonian fluids. Trans. Inst. Chem. Eng. 1982, 60:183-187.
30. Vela M.C.V., Blanco S.Á., García J.L., Rodríguez E.B. Analysis of membrane pore blocking models applied to the ultrafiltration of PEG. Sep. Purif. Technol. 2008, 62:489-498.
31. Affandy A., Keshavarz-Moore E., Versteeg H.K. Application of filtration blocking models to describe fouling and transmission of large plasmids DNA in sterile filtration. J. Membr. Sci. 2013, 437:150-159.
32. Luo J., Zhu Z., Ding L., Bals O., Wan Y., Jaffrin M.Y., Vorobiev E. Flux behavior in clarification of chicory juice by high-shear membrane filtration: evidence for threshold flux. J. Membr. Sci. 2013, 435:120-129.
33. Luo J., Wan Y. Effects of pH and salt on nanofiltration-a critical review. J. Membr. Sci 2013, 438:18-28.
34. van Voorthuizen E.M., Ashbolt N.J., Schäfer A.I. Role of hydrophobic and electrostatic interactions for initial enteric virus retention by MF membranes. J. Membr. Sci. 2001, 194:69-79.
35. Hadidi M., Zydney A.L. Fouling behavior of zwitterionic membranes: impact of electrostatic and hydrophobic interactions. J. Membr. Sci. 2014, 452:97-103.
36. Semião A.J.C., Schäfer A.I. Removal of adsorbing estrogenic micropollutants by nanofiltration membranes. Part A-experimental evidence. J. Membr. Sci. 2013, 431:244-256.
37. André J., Borneman Z., Wessling M. Enzymatic conversion in ion-exchange mixed matrix hollow fiber membranes. Ind. Eng. Chem. Res. 2013, 52:8635-8644.