Advertisement

NanoBiotechnology

, Volume 4, Issue 1–4, pp 9–17 | Cite as

Ultrasonic Processing of Single-Walled Carbon Nanotube–Glucose Oxidase Conjugates: Interrelation of Bioactivity and Structure

  • Anthony Guiseppi-Elie
  • Sung-Ho Choi
  • Kurt E. Geckeler
  • Balakrishnan Sivaraman
  • Robert A. Latour
Article

Abstract

Supramolecular conjugates of single-walled carbon nanotubes and glucose oxidase were prepared in aqueous solution using ultrasonication processing and then isolated by high-speed centrifugation. The conjugates of the single-walled carbon nanotubes and the pristine glucose oxidase, serving as control, were investigated for their enzymatic bioactivity. In addition, the effect of the extent of ultrasonication was studied. The conjugates were also characterized by UV–VIS and circular dichroism spectroscopy as well as by high-resolution transmission electron microscopic and thermogravimetric analysis. Ultrasonication is shown to reduce catalytic activity by ca. 30% (10 min) and that prolonged ultrasonication (up to 60 min) further reduces V max by 40%. However, most of this decrease arises from ultrasonication itself. The presence of carbon nanotubes (CNTs), while not eliminating changes in catalytic activity, mitigates the magnitude of these changes and is effectively de-bundled by the presence of the surfactant properties of the protein. The enzymatic activity and conformation were found to be predominantly retained after the supramolecular conjugation process assisted by ultrasonication in the presence of the CNTs.

Keywords

SWNT–enzyme conjugates ultrasonication glucose oxidase enzyme activity 

Notes

Acknowledgments

This work was supported by the US Department of Defense (DoDPRMRP) grant PR023081/DAMD17-03-1-0172 and by the Consortium of the Clemson University Center for Bioelectronics, Biosensors and Biochips. KEG thanks the Clemson C3B for a Visiting Professorship and SHC for a transient graduate studentship as well as support from the Dasan Global Explorer Program (GIST, South Korea).

References

  1. 1.
    Loiseau A, et al. Understanding carbon nanotubes from basics to applications. Lecture notes in physics. Heidelberg: Springer; 2006.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Geckeler KE, Rosenberg E. Functional nanomaterials. Valencia: American Scientific; 2006.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dodziuk H. Cyclodextrins and their complexes. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2006.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Steed JW, Turner DR, Wallace KJ. Core concepts in supramolecular chemistry and nanochemistry. West Sussex: Wiley; 2007.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kumar CSSR. Nanomaterials for biosensors. Nanotechnologies for the life sciences. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2007.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Kim D, Nepal D, Geckeler KE. Individualization of single-walled carbon nanotubes: is the solvent important? Small. 2005;1(11):1117–24. doi: 10.1002/smll.200500167.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    O'Connell MJ, et al. Band gap fluorescence from individual single-walled carbon nanotubes. Science. 2002;297(5581):593–6. doi: 10.1126/science.1072631.PubMedCrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kovtyukhova NI, et al. Individual single-walled nanotubes and hydrogels made by oxidative exfoliation of carbon nanotube ropes. J Am Chem Soc. 2003;125(32):9761–9. doi: 10.1021/ja0344516.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Kumar CSSR. Biofunctionalization of nanomaterials. In: Kumar CSSR, editor. Nanotechnologies for the life sciences. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2006.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Guiseppi-Elie A, Lei C, Baughman RH. Direct electron transfer of glucose oxidase on carbon nanotubes. Nanotechnology. 2002;13(5):559–64. doi: 10.1088/0957-4484/13/5/303.CrossRefADSGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Patolsky F, et al. C60-mediated bioelectrocatalyzed oxidation of glucose with glucose oxidase. J Electroanal Chem. 1998;454(1–2):9–13. doi: 10.1016/S0022-0728(98)00257-5.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Davis JJ, Coleman KS, Azamian BR, Baqshaw CB, Green ML. Chemical and biochemical sensing with modified single walled carbon nanotubes. Chem Eur J. 2003;9(16):3732–9. doi: 10.1002/chem.200304872.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Liang W, Zhuobin Y. Direct electrochemistry of glucose oxidase at a gold electrode modified with single-wall carbon nanotubes. Sensors. 2003;3(3):544–54. doi: 10.3390/s31200544.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Cai C, Chen J. Direct electron transfer of glucose oxidase promoted by carbon nanotubes. Anal Biochem. 2004;332(1):75–83. doi: 10.1016/j.ab.2004.05.057.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Liu Y, et al. The direct electron transfer of glucose oxidase and glucose biosensor based on carbon nanotubes/chitosan matrix. Biosens Bioelectron. 2005;21(6):984–8. doi: 10.1016/j.bios.2005.03.003.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Geckeler KE. Advanced macromolecular and supramolecular materials and processes. New York: Kluwer; 2003.Google Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mason TJ, Lorimer JP. Applied sonochemistry: uses of power ultrasound in chemistry and processing. Weinheim: Wiley-VCH; 2002.Google Scholar
  18. 18.
    Dhriti Nepal KG. pH-sensitive dispersion and debundling of single-walled carbon nanotubes: lysozyme as a tool. Small. 2006;2(3):406–12. doi: 10.1002/smll.200500351.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Dhriti Nepal KG. Proteins and carbon nanotubes: close encounter in water. Small. 2007;3(7):1259–65. doi: 10.1002/smll.200600511.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Bergmeyer HU, Gawehn K, Grassl M. Methods of enzymatic analysis. New York: Academic; 1974. p. 457–458.Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Yang JT, Wu CS, Martinez HM. Calculation of protein conformation from circular dichroism. Methods Enzymol. 1986;130:208–269.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Kim JB, Premkumar T, Giani O, Robin J-J, Schue F, Geckeler KE. A mechanochemical approach to nanocomposites using single-wall carbon nanotubes and polyL-lysine. Macromol Rapid Commun. 2007;28(6):767–71. doi: 10.1002/marc.200600802.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Denslow ND, Wingfield PT, Rose K. Overview of the characterization of recombinant proteins. Current Protocols in Protein Science 1994;7.1.1–7.1.13Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bateman RC Jr, Evans JA. Using the glucose oxidase/peroxidase system in enzyme kinetics. J Chem Educ. 1995;72(12):A240–1.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Simpson C, et al. Isolation, purification and characterization of a novel glucose oxidase from Penicillium sp. CBS 120262 optimally active at neutral pH. Protein Expr Purif. 2007;51(2):260–6. doi: 10.1016/j.pep.2006.09.013.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Shah S, Solanki K, Gupta M. Enhancement of lipase activity in non-aqueous media upon immobilization on multi-walled carbon nanotubes. Chemistry Central Journal. 2007;1(1):30. doi: 10.1186/1752-153X-1-30.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Humana Press Inc. 2009

Authors and Affiliations

  • Anthony Guiseppi-Elie
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • Sung-Ho Choi
    • 1
    • 4
  • Kurt E. Geckeler
    • 1
    • 4
  • Balakrishnan Sivaraman
    • 3
  • Robert A. Latour
    • 3
  1. 1.Center for Bioelectronics, Biosensors and Biochips (C3B)Clemson UniversityAndersonUSA
  2. 2.Department of Chemical and Biomolecular EngineeringClemson UniversityClemsonUSA
  3. 3.Department of BioengineeringClemson UniversityClemsonUSA
  4. 4.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringGwangju Institute of Science and Technology (GIST)GwangjuSouth Korea

Personalised recommendations