Journal of Materials Science

, Volume 43, Issue 16, pp 5618–5625 | Cite as

Evaluation of hydroxyapatite microspheres made from a borate glass to separate protein mixtures

  • Xue HanEmail author
  • Ming Du
  • Yinfa Ma
  • Delbert E. Day


A hydroxyapatite (HA, Ca10(PO4)6(OH)2), transformed from a calcium-containing borate glass, has been investigated for its protein adsorption and chromatographic characteristics. Microspheres of the borate glass were transformed into HA by reacting them with a 0.25 M phosphate (K2HPO4) solution for 24 h at 37 °C (pH 9.0). The HA microspheres with a diameter of 45–90 μm were hand packed into a steel column (4.6 mm × 80 mm) and used to separate a binary protein mixture of bovine serum albumin (BSA) and lysozyme. HA microspheres, with a diameter <45 μm, were used for separating a protein mixture of BSA, myoglobin, and lysozyme. These microspheres had a diameter that was 20–30 times larger than commercial HA column packing spherical particles, 2–3 μm, but these microspheres had a six times larger surface area and a more uniform spherical shape. These advantages compensated for their larger size and the separation results were comparable to those commercially available HA columns in the separation of the proteins studied. These unique HA microspheres, made from microspheres of a borate glass, are considered to be useful as packing materials for protein separation in chromatography.


High Performance Liquid Chromatography Lysozyme Phosphate Solution Protein Mixture Glass Particle 



The financial support from the UMR Graduate Center for Materials Research is gratefully acknowledged.


  1. 1.
    Hench LL, Wilson J (1993) An introduction to bioceramics. World Scientific Publishing Co. Pte. Ltd.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Hench LL (1998) J Am Ceram Soc 81(7):1705CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Shinto Y, Uchida A, Korkusuz F, Araki N, Ono K (1992) J Bone Joint Surg 74-B:600CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Paul W, Sharma CP (1999) J Mater Res Mater Med 10:383. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Rfichert J, Binner JGP (1996) J Mater Sci 31:1231. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Deutsch et al (1994) US Patent 5,344,640, 6 September 1994Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Deusch et al (1995) US Patent 5,468,465, 21 November 1995Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kato Y, Nakamura K, Hashimoto T (1987) J Chromatogr A 398:340. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kobayashi M, Akazawa T, Kanno T, Horiuchi J (2001) Key Eng Mater 192–195:23Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Ducheyne P, Qiu Q (1990) Biomaterials 20:2287. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Tiselius A, Hjerten S, Levin O (1956) Arch Biochem Biophys 65:132. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Bernardi G (1971) Methods Enzymol 21:95. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bernardi G (1971) Methods Enzymol 22:325. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Bernardi G (1973) Methods Enzymol 27:471. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Kawasaki T, Takashashi S, Ikeda K (1985) Eur J Biochem 152:361. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Gorbunoff MJ (1985) Methods Enzymol 117:370. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kadoya T, Ogawa T, Kuwahara H, Okuyama T (1988) J Liq Chromatogr 11(14):2951. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Zhou XD, Zhang SC, Hubner W, Ownby PO (2001) J Mater Sci 36:3759. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Kadoya T, Isobe T, Ebihara M, Ogawa T, Sumita M, Kuwahara H et al (1986) J Liq Chromatogr 9:3543. doi: CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2008

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of ChemistryMissouri University of Science and TechnologyRollaUSA
  3. 3.Graduate Center for Materials Research and Ceramic Engineering DepartmentMissouri University of Science and TechnologyRollaUSA

Personalised recommendations