Advertisement

Frontiers of Chemical Science and Engineering

, Volume 13, Issue 1, pp 120–132 | Cite as

Fabrication of high-capacity cation-exchangers for protein adsorption: Comparison of grafting-from and grafting-to approaches

  • Ming Zhao
  • Run Liu
  • Jian Luo
  • Yan Sun
  • Qinghong ShiEmail author
Research Article
  • 33 Downloads

Abstract

In this work, we have synthesized two polymer-grafted cation exchangers: one via the grafting-from approach, in which sulfopropyl methacrylate (SPM) is grafted through atom transfer radical polymerization onto Sepharose FF (the thus resulting exchanger is referred as Sep-g-SPM), and another via the grafting-to approach, in which the polymer of SPM is directly coupled onto Sepharose FF (the thus resulting exchanger is called as Sep-pSPM). Protein adsorption on these two cation exchangers have been also investigated. At the same ligand density, Sep-g-SPM has a larger accessible pore radius and a smaller depth of polymer layer than SeppSPM, due to the controllable introduction of polymer chains with the regular distribution of the ligand. Therefore, high-capacity adsorption of lysozyme and γ-globulin could be achieved simultaneously in Sep-g-SPM with an ionic capacity (IC) of 308 mmol$L–1. However, Sep-pSPM has an irregular chain distribution and different architecture of polymer layer, which lead to more serious repulsive interaction to proteins, and thus Sep-pSPM has a lower adsorption capacity for γ-globulin than Sep-g-SPM with the similar IC. Moreover, the results from protein uptake experiments indicate that the facilitated transport of adsorbed γ-globulin occurs only in Sep-pSPM and depends on the architecture of polymer layers. Our research provides a clear clue for the development of high-performance protein chromatography.

Keywords

polymer-grafted ionic exchanger grafting technique protein adsorption atom transfer radical polymerization γ-globulin 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work was supported by grants from the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant Nos. 21476166 and 21236005), the Open Funding Project of the State Key Laboratory of Biochemical Engineering (No. 2014KF-03) and the Tianjin Natural Science Foundation (15JCYBJC48500).

References

  1. 1.
    Savina I, NGalaev I Y, Mattiasson B. Ion-exchange macroporous hydrophilic gel monolith with grafted polymer brushes. Journal of Molecular Recognition, 2006, 19(4): 313–321CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Perez-Almodovari E X, Wu Y, Carta G. Multicomponent adsorption of monoclonal antibodies on macroporous and polymer grafted cation exchangers. Journal of Chromatography A, 2012, 1264: 48–56CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Basconi J E, Carta G, Shirts M R. Multiscale modeling of protein adsorption and transport in macroporous and polymer-grafted ion exchangers. AIChE Journal. American Institute of Chemical Engineers, 2014, 60(11): 3888–3901CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Lenhoff A M. Protein adsorption and transport in polymerfunctionalized ion-exchangers. Journal of Chromatography A, 2011, 1218(49): 8748–8759CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Stone M C, Carta G. Protein adsorption and transport in agarose and dextran-grafted agarose media for ion exchange chromatography. Journal of Chromatography A, 2007, 1146(2): 202–215CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wang H Y, Sun Y, Zhang S L, Luo J, Shi Q H. Fabrication of high-capacity cation-exchangers for protein chromatography by atom transfer radical polymerization. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 2016, 113: 19–29CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Bowes B D, Koku H, Czymmek K J, Lenhoff A M. Protein adsorption and transport in dextran-modified ion-exchange media. I: Adsorption. Journal of Chromatography A, 2009, 1216(45): 7774–7784PubMedGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Yu L L, Tao S P, Dong X Y, Sun Y. Protein adsorption to poly (ethylenimine)-modified Sepharose FF: I. A critical ionic capacity for drastically enhanced capacity and uptake kinetics. Journal of Chromatography A, 2013, 1305: 76–84PubMedGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Shi Q H, Jia G D, Sun Y. Dextran-grafted cation exchanger based on superporous agarose gel: Adsorption isotherms, uptake kinetics and dynamic protein adsorption performance. Journal of Chromatography A, 2010, 1217(31): 5084–5091CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Tao Y, Carta G, Ferreira G, Robbins D. Adsorption of deamidated antibody variants on macroporous and dextran-grafted cation exchangers: I. Adsorption equilibrium. Journal of Chromatography A, 2011, 1218(11): 1519–1529CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Zhang S L, Zhao M, Yang W, Luo J, Sun Y, Shi Q H. A novel polymer-grafted cation exchanger for high-capacity protein chromatography: The role of polymer architecture. Biochemical Engineering Journal, 2017, 128: 218–227CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Unsal E, Elmas B, Caglayan B, Tuncel M, Patir S, Tuncel A. Preparation of an ion-exchange chromatographic support by a “grafting from” strategy based on atom transfer radical polymerization. Analytical Chemistry, 2006, 78(16): 5868–5875CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Yu L L, Sun Y. Protein adsorption to poly(ethylenimine)-modified Sepharose FF: II. Effect of ionic strength. Journal of Chromatography A, 2013, 1305: 85–93CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Chang C, Lenhoff A M. Comparison of protein adsorption isotherms and uptake rates in preparative cation-exchange materials. Journal of Chromatography A, 1998, 827(2): 281–293CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Staby A, Jensen I H, Mollerup I. Comparison of chromatographic ion-exchange resins I. Strong anion-exchange resins. Journal of Chromatography A, 2000, 897(1–2): 99–111PubMedGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Bowes B D, Lenhoff A M. Protein adsorption and transport in dextran-modified ion-exchange media. II. Intraparticle uptake and column breakthrough. Journal of Chromatography A, 2011, 1218 (29): 4698–4708PubMedGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Bowes B D, Lenhoff A M. Protein adsorption and transport in dextran-modified ion-exchange media. III. Effects of resin charge density and dextran content on adsorption and intraparticle uptake. Journal of Chromatography A, 2011, 1218(40): 7180–7188PubMedGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Ubiera A R, Carta G. Radiotracer measurements of protein mass transfer: Kinetics in ion exchange media. Biotechnology Journal, 2006, 1(6): 665–674CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dismer F, Petzold M, Hubbuch J. Effects of ionic strength and mobile phase pH on the binding orientation of lysozyme on different ion-exchange adsorbents. Journal of Chromatography A, 2008, 1194(1): 11–21CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Hubbuch J, Linden T, Knieps E, Ljunglof A, Thommes J, Kula MR. Mechanism and kinetics of protein transport in chromatographic media studied by confocal laser scanning microscopy. Part I. The interplay of sorbent structure and fluid phase conditions. Journal of Chromatography A, 2003, 1021(1–2): 93–104PubMedGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Chan J W, Huang A, Uhrich K E. Self-assembled amphiphilic macromolecule coatings: Comparison of grafting-from and graftingto approaches for bioactive delivery. Langmuir, 2016, 32(20): 5038–5047CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Reznik C, Landes C F. Transport in supported polyelectrolyte brushes. Accounts of Chemical Research, 2012, 45(11): 1927–1935CrossRefPubMedPubMedCentralGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Hansson S, Trouillet V, Tischer T, Goldmann A S, Carlmark A, Barner-Kowollik C, Malmstrom E. Grafting efficiency of synthetic polymers onto biomaterials: A comparative study of grafting-from versus grafting-to. Biomacromolecules, 2013, 14(1): 64–74CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Minko S. Grafting on solid surfaces: “Grafting to” and “grafting from” methods. In: Stamm M, ed. Polymer Surfaces and Interfaces: Characterization, Modification and Applications. Berlin: Springer Berlin Heidelberg, 2008, 215–234Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wang Z G, Wan L S, Xu Z K. Surface engineerings of polyacrylonitrile-based asymmetric membranes towards biomedical applications: An overview. Journal of Membrane Science, 2007, 304(1–2): 8–23CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Yu L L, Shi Q H, Sun Y. Effect of dextran layer on protein uptake to dextran-grafted adsorbents for ion-exchange and mixed-mode chromatography. Journal of Separation Science, 2011, 34(21): 2950–2959CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Shi Q H, Zhou X, Sun Y. A novel superporous agarose medium for high-speed protein chromatography. Biotechnology and Bioengineering, 2005, 92(5): 643–651CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Weaver L E, Carta G. Protein adsorption on cation exchangers: Comparison of macroporous and gel-composite media. Biotechnology Progress, 1996, 12(3): 342–355CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Dephillips P, Lenhoff A M. Pore size distributions of cationexchange adsorbents determined by inverse size-exclusion chromatography. Journal of Chromatography A, 2000, 883(1–2): 39–54CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Li Q, Imbrogno J, Belfort G, Wang X L. Making polymeric membranes antifouling via “grafting from” polymerization of zwitterions. Journal of Applied Polymer Science, 2015, 132(21): n/aGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Dismer F, Hubbuch J. A novel approach to characterize the binding orientation of lysozyme on ion-exchange resins. Journal of Chromatography A, 2007, 1149(2): 312–320CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Koshari S H S, Wagner N J, Lenhoff A M. Effects of resin architecture and protein size on nanoscale protein distribution in ionexchange media. Langmuir, 2018, 34(2): 673–684CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Yang H, Gurgel P V, Carbonell R G. Purification of human immunoglobulin G via Fc-specific small peptide ligand affinity chromatography. Journal of Chromatography A, 2009, 1216(6): 910–918CrossRefPubMedGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fair B D, Jamieson A M. Studies of protein adsorption on polystyrene latex surfaces. Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 1980, 77(2): 525–534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Luo J, Wan Y. Effect of highly concentrated salt on retention of organic solutes by nanofiltration polymeric membranes. Journal of Membrane Science, 2011, 372(1–2): 145–153CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    CYoshikawa A, Goto Y, Tsujii T, Fukuda T, Kimura K, Yamamoto A, Kishida. Protein repellency of well-defined, concentrated poly(2-hydroxyethyl methacrylate) brushes by the size-exclusion effect. Macromolecules, 2006, 39(6): 2284–2290CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Higher Education Press and Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany, part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • Ming Zhao
    • 1
  • Run Liu
    • 1
  • Jian Luo
    • 3
  • Yan Sun
    • 1
    • 2
  • Qinghong Shi
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.Department of Biochemical Engineering, School of Chemical Engineering and TechnologyTianjin UniversityTianjinChina
  2. 2.Key Laboratory of Systems Bioengineering (Ministry of Education)Tianjin UniversityTianjinChina
  3. 3.State Key Laboratory of Biochemical Engineering, Institute of Process EngineeringChinese Academy of SciencesBeijingChina

Personalised recommendations