Article

Stable metal-organic frameworks containing single-molecule traps for enzyme encapsulation

  • Nature Communications 6, Article number: 5979 (2015)
  • doi:10.1038/ncomms6979
  • Download Citation
Received:
Accepted:
Published online:

Abstract

Enzymatic catalytic processes possess great potential in chemical manufacturing, including pharmaceuticals, fuel production and food processing. However, the engineering of enzymes is severely hampered due to their low operational stability and difficulty of reuse. Here, we develop a series of stable metal-organic frameworks with rationally designed ultra-large mesoporous cages as single-molecule traps (SMTs) for enzyme encapsulation. With a high concentration of mesoporous cages as SMTs, PCN-333(Al) encapsulates three enzymes with record-high loadings and recyclability. Immobilized enzymes that most likely undergo single-enzyme encapsulation (SEE) show smaller Km than free enzymes while maintaining comparable catalytic efficiency. Under harsh conditions, the enzyme in SEE exhibits better performance than free enzyme, showing the effectiveness of SEE in preventing enzyme aggregation or denaturation. With extraordinarily large pore size and excellent chemical stability, PCN-333 may be of interest not only for enzyme encapsulation, but also for entrapment of other nanoscaled functional moieties.

Additional access options:

Already a subscriber?  Log in  now or  Register  for online access.

References

  1. 1.

    , & Introduction to metal–organic frameworks. Chem. Rev. 112, 673–674 (2012).

  2. 2.

    et al. A chromium terephthalate-based solid with unusually large pore volumes and surface area. Science 309, 2040–2042 (2005).

  3. 3.

    et al. Large-pore apertures in a series of metal-organic frameworks. Science 336, 1018–1023 (2012).

  4. 4.

    et al. Immobilization of MP-11 into a mesoporous metal-organic framework, MP-11@mesoMOF: a new platform for enzymatic catalysis. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 133, 10382–10385 (2011).

  5. 5.

    , & Proteins in mesoporous silicates. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 47, 8582–8594 (2008).

  6. 6.

    Immobilized enzymes and cells as practical catalysts. Science 219, 722–727 (1983).

  7. 7.

    , , & Regioselective monodeprotection of peracetylated carbohydrates. Nat. Protoc. 7, 1783–1796 (2012).

  8. 8.

    et al. Enzyme immobilization: an overview on techniques and support materials. Biotech. 3, 1–9 (2013).

  9. 9.

    et al. Co-immobilization of an enzyme and a metal into the compartments of mesoporous silica for cooperative tandem catalysis: an artificial metalloenzyme. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 52, 14006–14010 (2013).

  10. 10.

    et al. Porous materials with pre-designed single-molecule traps for CO2 selective adsorption. Nat. Commun. 4, 1538 (2013).

  11. 11.

    et al. Fast multipoint immobilized MOF bioreactor. Chem. Eur. J 20, 8923–8928 (2014).

  12. 12.

    et al. Novel trypsin–FITC@MOF bioreactor efficiently catalyzes protein digestion. J. Mater. Chem. B 1, 928–932 (2013).

  13. 13.

    et al. Ultrahigh porosity in metal-organic frameworks. Science 329, 424–428 (2010).

  14. 14.

    et al. Metal–organic framework materials with ultrahigh surface areas: Is the sky the limit? J. Am. Chem. Soc. 134, 15016–15021 (2012).

  15. 15.

    et al. An isoreticular series of metal–organic frameworks with dendritic hexacarboxylate ligands and exceptionally high gas-uptake capacity. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 49, 5357–5361 (2010).

  16. 16.

    , & A crystalline mesoporous coordination copolymer with high microporosity. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 47, 677–680 (2008).

  17. 17.

    et al. De novo synthesis of a metal–organic framework material featuring ultrahigh surface area and gas storage capacities. Nat. Chem. 2, 944–948 (2010).

  18. 18.

    et al. A route to high surface area, porosity and inclusion of large molecules in crystals. Nature 427, 523–527 (2004).

  19. 19.

    , , & The chemistry and applications of metal-organic frameworks. Science 341, 1230–1235 (2013).

  20. 20.

    et al. A hybrid solid with giant pores prepared by a combination of targeted chemistry, simulation, and powder diffraction. Angew. Chem. Int. Ed. 43, 6296–6301 (2004).

  21. 21.

    et al. Metal insertion in a microporous metal−organic framework lined with 2,2’-bipyridine. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 132, 14382–14384 (2010).

  22. 22.

    et al. Synthesis, structure determination and properties of MIL-53as and MIL-53ht: the first CrIII hybrid inorganic–organic microporous solids: CrIII(OH)·{O2C–C6H4–CO2}·{HO2C–C6H4–CO2H}x. Chem. Commun. 822–823 (2002).

  23. 23.

    et al. A new Al-MOF based on a unique column-shaped inorganic building unit exhibiting strongly hydrophilic sorption behaviour. Chem. Commun. 48, 9486–9488 (2012).

  24. 24.

    et al. Selectivity and direct visualization of carbon dioxide and sulfur dioxide in a decorated porous host. Nat. Chem. 4, 887–894 (2012).

  25. 25.

    et al. Role of solvent-host interactions that lead to very large swelling of hybrid frameworks. Science 315, 1828–1831 (2007).

  26. 26.

    et al. Metal-adeninate vertices for the construction of an exceptionally porous metal-organic framework. Nat. Commun. 3, 604 (2012).

  27. 27.

    et al. Stepwise ligand exchange for the preparation of a family of mesoporous MOFs. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 135, 11688–11691 (2013).

  28. 28.

    et al. Synthesis and bio-adsorptive properties of large-pore periodic mesoporous organosilica rods. Chem. Mater. 17, 6172–6176 (2005).

  29. 29.

    , , & Mechanistic and structural features of protein adsorption onto mesoporous silicates. J. Phys. Chem. B 106, 7340–7347 (2002).

  30. 30.

    et al. Catalytic activity in organic solvents and stability of immobilized enzymes depend on the pore size and surface characteristics of mesoporous silica. Chem. Mater. 12, 3301–3305 (2000).

  31. 31.

    Cytochrome c as a biocatalyst. J. Mol. Catal. B: Enzym. 7, 241–249 (1999).

  32. 32.

    , , & Effect of water-miscible organic solvents on the catalytic activity of cytochrome c. Enzyme Microb. Technol. 15, 936–943 (1993).

Download references

Acknowledgements

This work was supported as a part of the Methane Opportunities for Vehicular Energy (MOVE) Program under the Award Number DE-AR0000249, as part of the Center for Clean-Energy-Related Gas Separation, an Energy Frontier Research Center funded by the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE), Office of Science, Office of Basic Energy Sciences and as part of N000141310753 supported by the Office of Naval Research. Use of the Advanced Photon Source, an Office of Science User Facility operated for the U. S. Department of Energy (DOE) Office of Science by Argonne National Laboratory, was supported by the U. S. DOE under Contract No. DE-AC02-06CH11357. The structure characterization by PXRD and TEM was supported by the Swedish Research Council (VR), the Swedish Governmental Agency for Innovation Systems (VINNOVA) and the Knut & Alice Wallenberg Foundation through a grant for purchasing the TEM and the project grant 3DEM-NATUR. We also thank Zhenggang Xu and Dr Qian Peng from the Supercomputing Facility at Texas A&M University and Laboratory for Molecular Simulation for offering access to computing time and valuable discussions; Dr Hung-Jue Sue and Dr Peng Liu from Mechanical Engineering at Texas A&M University for Thermogravimetric analysis; Dr Hansoo Kim in the Microscopy and Imaging Center at Texas A&M University for the TEM-DEX elemental mapping; Lizzie West for organizing other manuscript related works.

Author information

Author notes

    • Dawei Feng
    •  & Tian-Fu Liu

    These authors contributed equally to this work

Affiliations

  1. Department of Chemistry, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77843-3255, USA

    • Dawei Feng
    • , Tian-Fu Liu
    • , Mathieu Bosch
    • , Zhangwen Wei
    • , Ying-Pin Chen
    • , Xuan Wang
    • , Kecheng Wang
    • , Xizhen Lian
    • , Zhi-Yuan Gu
    • , Jihye Park
    •  & Hong-Cai Zhou
  2. Berzelii Centre EXSELENT on Porous Materials and Inorganic and Structural Chemistry, Department of Materials and Environmental Chemistry, Stockholm University, 106 91 Stockholm, Sweden

    • Jie Su
    • , Wei Wan
    •  & Xiaodong Zou
  3. State Key Laboratory of Structural Chemistry, Fujian Institute of Research on the Structure of Matter, Chinese Academy of Sciences, Fujian, Fuzhou 350002, P. R. China

    • Daqiang Yuan
  4. Department of Materials Science and Engineering, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas 77842, USA

    • Ying-Pin Chen
    •  & Hong-Cai Zhou

Authors

  1. Search for Dawei Feng in:

  2. Search for Tian-Fu Liu in:

  3. Search for Jie Su in:

  4. Search for Mathieu Bosch in:

  5. Search for Zhangwen Wei in:

  6. Search for Wei Wan in:

  7. Search for Daqiang Yuan in:

  8. Search for Ying-Pin Chen in:

  9. Search for Xuan Wang in:

  10. Search for Kecheng Wang in:

  11. Search for Xizhen Lian in:

  12. Search for Zhi-Yuan Gu in:

  13. Search for Jihye Park in:

  14. Search for Xiaodong Zou in:

  15. Search for Hong-Cai Zhou in:

Contributions

D.F., T.-F.L and H.-C.Z. planned and executed the synthesis and characterization. J.S., W.W. and X.Z. performed the structure characterization. M.B., Z.W., Y.-P.C., X.W., K.W., X.L., Z.-Y.G., J.P. and D.Y. participated in the preparation of the manuscript.

Competing interests

The authors declare no competing financial interests.

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Hong-Cai Zhou.

Supplementary information

PDF files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Information

    Supplementary Figures 1-74, Supplementary Tables 1-2, Supplementary Methods and Supplementary References.

Zip files

  1. 1.

    Supplementary Data 1

    Crystallographic Information Files for PCN-332 and PCN-333.

Comments

By submitting a comment you agree to abide by our Terms and Community Guidelines. If you find something abusive or that does not comply with our terms or guidelines please flag it as inappropriate.