Advertisement

A comparative study on mesocellular foam silica with different template removal methods and their effects on enzyme immobilization

  • Nithi Thananukul
  • Angkana Phongphut
  • Seeroong Prichanont
  • Chanchana Thanachayanont
  • Sarah Fearn
  • Bralee Chayasombat
Article
  • 9 Downloads

Abstract

Mesocellular foam silica (MCF) was synthesized using Pluronic P-123 triblock copolymer as a template. Calcination and solvent extraction were employed to remove templates and compared. Through physical, chemical and functional characterization interesting results have been observed. Microstructures of the two MCFs were very different. Pore structure of the calcined MCF was found to be more ordered than that of the solvent extracted MCF. However, pores of the solvent extracted MCF seemed more defined and spongy under SEM observations. Surface functional groups and their concentrations characterized by ToF-SIMS were also found to be different. Surface silanol groups were found to be more concentrated in the calcined MCF. Each type of MCFs was subsequently grafted by an amine functional group, adsorbed by Au ion precursors, and reduced to form Au nanoparticles (AuNPs) on the MCF surfaces. These decorated MCF surfaces were immobilized with enzyme acetylcholinesterase (AChE), modified on screen-printed carbon electrodes and tested for electrochemical responses with acetylthiocholine. AuNPs were successfully distributed within the pores for both types of MCFs. Before the functional biosensor electrochemical tests, calcination seemed more promising than solvent extraction due to periodic structure of pores, high surface area, less contamination and higher concentration of surface silanol groups available for grafting of the amine functional group. However, after immobilization of the AuNPs for electron transport improvement and enzyme immobilization, a few observations of biosensing performances were noteworthy. Firstly, having AuNPs distributed throughout the MCF structure did not help the electron transport. Results of reduced response currents from both types of MCFs compared to MCFs without AuNPs indicated that MCF walls were too thick to allow electron transport. Secondly, the higher concentration of surface silanol groups in calcined MCFs resulted in Ostwald’s ripening of small AuNPs giving bigger AuNPs than the case of solvent extraction. Therefore, although the AuNPs in enzyme biosensors are expected to help electron transport and enzyme immobilization, this study showed that although the former did not occur, the latter was well demonstrated. The smaller AuNPs in the solvent extraction case resulted in higher surface area than the bigger AuNPs in the calcination case. This was the reason why the response current was higher for the solvent extracted MCFs compared to the calcined MCFs.

Keywords

Mesocellular foam silica Template removal Microstructure Surface chemistry Enzyme support 

Notes

Acknowledgements

Authors would like to thank National Metal and Materials Technology Center (Project No. P 1550990) and Chemical Engineering Research Unit for Value Added of Bioresources and the Graduate School of Chulalongkorn University (Grant No. GCUGR1225591009M) for financial support.

Supplementary material

10934_2018_705_MOESM1_ESM.docx (296 kb)
Supplementary material 1 (DOCX 295 KB)

References

  1. 1.
    K. Holmberg, J. Colloid Interface Sci. 274(2), 355–364 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. Palmqvist, Curr. Opin. Colloid Interface Sci. 8(2), 145–155 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    G. Lu, X. Zhao, T. Wei, Nanoporous Materials: Science and Engineering, vol. 4 (Imperial College Press, London, 2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Y. Yang, L.-H. Li, Y. Li, J. Rooke, C. Sanchez, B. Su, Chem. Soc. Rev. 45, 481–558 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    T. Maschmeyer, F. Rey, G. Sankar, J.M. Thomas, Nature 378, 159–162 (1995)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    S.H. Joo, J.Y. Park, C.-K. Tsung, Y. Yamada, P. Yang, G.A. Somorjai, Nat. Mater. 8, 126–131 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Y. Han, J.Y. Ying, J. Chromatogr. A 1217, 4337–4343 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    M. Yao, Y. Dong, X. Feng, X. Hu, A. Jia, G. Xie, G. Hu, J. Lu, M. Luo, M. Fan, Fuel 123, 66–72 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. Knofel, M. Lutecki, C. Martin, M. Martens, V. Hornebecq, P. Llewellyn, Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 128, 26–33 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    P. Schmidt-Winkel, W. Lukens, D. Zhao, P. Yang, B. Chemelka, G. Stucky, J. Am. Chem. Soc. 121, 254–255 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Y. Han, J. Watsan, G. Stucky, A. Butler, J. Mol. Catal. B 17, 1–8 (2002)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    P. Schmidt-Winkel, W. Lukens, P. Yang, D. Margolese, J. Lettow, J. Ying, Chem. Mater. 12, 686–696 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    I. Lynch, K.A. Dawson, Nanotoday 3(1–2), 40–47 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    S.A. Ansari, Q. Husain, Biotechnol. Adv. 30, 512–523 (2012)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    M. Schumacher, M. Grun, K. Unger, Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 27, 201–206 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    J. Kim, S. Kim, R. Ryoo, Chem. Commun. 2, 259–260 (1998)Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    W. Gomes, L. Cardoso, A. Gonzala, L. Aguilar, H. Andrade, Mater. Chem. Phys. 93(1), 133–137 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    A. Marcilla, M. Beltran, A. Gomez-Siurana, I. Martinez, D. Berenguer, Chem. Eng. Res. Des. 89, 2330–2343 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    P. Benjelloun, P. Van Der Voort, Cool, E. Vansant, Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 3, 127–131 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    J. Xiao, H. Li, Jin, R. Xu, Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 96, 413–418 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    A. Doyle, B. Hodnett, Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 58, 255–261 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Y. Han, S. Lee, J. Ying, Chem. Mater. 19, 2292–2298 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Z. Li, C. Kubel, V. Parvulescu, R. Richards, ACS Nano 2(6), 1205–1212 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    W. Lukens, P. Schmidt-Winkel, D. Zhao, J. Feng, G. Stucky, Langmuir 15, 5403–5409 (1999)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    N.A. Jamalluddin, A.Z. Abdullah, Appl. Catal. A 483, 1–9 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    D. Zhao, J. Feng, Q. Huo, N. Melosh, G. Fredrickson, B. Chmelka, G. Stucky, Science 279(5350), 548–552 (1998)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    M. Thommes, K. Kaneko, A.V. Neimark, J.P. Oliveier, F. Rodriguez-Reinoso, J. Rouquerol, K.S. Sing, Pure Appl. Chem. 87(9–10), 1051–1069 (2015)Google Scholar
  28. 28.
    E.W. Ping, K. Venkatasubbaiah, T.F. Fuller, C.W. Jones, Top. Catal. 53, 1048–1054 (2010)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    F. Ojeda, I. Montero, F. Abel, J. Albella, Chem. Mater. 13, 3986–3992 (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    N. Hiyoshi, K. Yogo, T. Yashima, Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 84, 357–365 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    X. Wang, J. Chan, Y. Tseng, S. Cheng, Microporous Mesoporous Mater. 95, 57–65 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    A. D’Souza, C. Pantano, J. Vac. Sci. Technol. A 15(3), 526–531 (1997)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    S. Takeda, M. Fukawa, Thin Solid Films 444, 153–157 (2003)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    L.T. Zhuravlev, Colloids Surf. A 173, 1–38 (2000)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    L. Gutierrez, S. Hamoudi, K. Belkacemi, Catalysts 1(1), 97–154 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    E. Milkani, C.R. Lambert, G. McGimpsey, Anal. Biochem. 408(2), 212–219 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    D. Giljohann, D. Seferos, P. Patel, J. Millstone, N. Rosi, C. Mirkin, Nano Lett. 7(12), 3818–3821 (2007)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    H. Qiu, C. Xu, X. Huang, Y. Ding, Y. Qu, P. Gao, Phys. Chem. C 113(6), 2521–2525 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    L. Wang, R.T. Yang, Phys. Chem. C 115, 21264–21272 (2011)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media, LLC, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Nithi Thananukul
    • 1
  • Angkana Phongphut
    • 1
  • Seeroong Prichanont
    • 1
  • Chanchana Thanachayanont
    • 2
  • Sarah Fearn
    • 3
  • Bralee Chayasombat
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Chemical Engineering, Faculty of EngineeringChulalongkorn UniversityBangkokThailand
  2. 2.National Metal and Materials Technology CenterPathumthaniThailand
  3. 3.Department of Materials, Faculty of EngineeringImperial CollegeLondonUK

Personalised recommendations