Next Article in Journal
Molecular Insight into the Binding of Astilbin with Human Serum Albumin and Its Effect on Antioxidant Characteristics of Astilbin
Next Article in Special Issue
Immobilization of Penicillin G Acylase on Vinyl Sulfone-Agarose: An Unexpected Effect of the Ionic Strength on the Performance of the Immobilization Process
Previous Article in Journal
Prediction of pH Value of Aqueous Acidic and Basic Deep Eutectic Solvent Using COSMO-RS σ Profiles’ Molecular Descriptors
Previous Article in Special Issue
Development of a Hybrid Bioinorganic Nanobiocatalyst: Remarkable Impact of the Immobilization Conditions on Activity and Stability of β-Galactosidase
 
 
Search for Articles:
Title / Keyword
Author / Affiliation / Email
Journal
Article Type
 
 
Advanced Search
 
Section
Special Issue
Volume
Issue
Number
Page
 
Journals
Molecules
Volume 27
Issue 14
10.3390/molecules27144486
molecules-logo
Submit to this Journal Review for this Journal Propose a Special Issue
► Article Menu

Article Menu

share Share announcement Help format_quote Cite question_answer Discuss in SciProfiles thumb_up
...
Endorse textsms
...
Comment
first_page
settings
Order Article Reprints
Font Type:
Arial Georgia Verdana
Font Size:
Aa Aa Aa
Line Spacing:
Column Width:
Background:
Article

Tuning Immobilized Commercial Lipase Preparations Features by Simple Treatment with Metallic Phosphate Salts

by
José R. Guimarães
1,2,
Diego Carballares
1,
Paulo W. Tardioli
2,
Javier Rocha-Martin
3,* and
Roberto Fernandez-Lafuente
1,4,*
1
Departamento de Biocatálisis, ICP-CSIC, Campus UAM-CSIC, 28049 Madrid, Spain
2
Laboratory of Enzyme Technologies (LabEnz), Department of Chemical Engineering, Federal University of São Carlos (DEQ/UFSCar), Rod. Washington Luís, km 235, São Carlos 13565-905, Brazil
3
Department of Biochemistry and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Biology, Complutense University of Madrid, José Antonio Novais 12, 28040 Madrid, Spain
4
Center of Excellence in Bionanoscience Research, King Abdulaziz University, Jeddah 21589, Saudi Arabia
*
Authors to whom correspondence should be addressed.
Molecules 2022, 27(14), 4486; https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27144486
Submission received: 6 June 2022 / Revised: 7 July 2022 / Accepted: 12 July 2022 / Published: 13 July 2022
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Enzyme Immobilization Ⅳ)
Browse Figures
Versions Notes

Abstract

:
Four commercial immobilized lipases biocatalysts have been submitted to modifications with different metal (zinc, cobalt or copper) phosphates to check the effects of this modification on enzyme features. The lipase preparations were Lipozyme®TL (TLL-IM) (lipase from Thermomyces lanuginose), Lipozyme®435 (L435) (lipase B from Candida antarctica), Lipozyme®RM (RML-IM), and LipuraSelect (LS-IM) (both from lipase from Rhizomucor miehei). The modifications greatly altered enzyme specificity, increasing the activity versus some substrates (e.g., TLL-IM modified with zinc phosphate in hydrolysis of triacetin) while decreasing the activity versus other substrates (the same preparation in activity versus R- or S- methyl mandelate). Enantiospecificity was also drastically altered after these modifications, e.g., LS-IM increased the activity versus the R isomer while decreasing the activity versus the S isomer when treated with copper phosphate. Regarding the enzyme stability, it was significantly improved using octyl-agarose-lipases. Using all these commercial biocatalysts, no significant positive effects were found; in fact, a decrease in enzyme stability was usually detected. The results point towards the possibility of a battery of biocatalysts, including many different metal phosphates and immobilization protocols, being a good opportunity to tune enzyme features, increasing the possibilities of having biocatalysts that may be suitable for a specific process.

1. Introduction

Lipases are among the most utilized enzymes, both academically and industrially [1,2,3,4,5]. This is because they are very robust biocatalysts, able to perform a wide variety of reactions, such as hydrolysis, esterifications [6,7,8,9], transesterifications [10,11,12,13,14] or acidolysis [15,16]. They can be used in a wide variety of reaction media (aqueous medium, organic solvents [17,18], solvent-free [19], ionic liquid [20,21,22], deep eutectic solvents [23] and supercritical fluids [24,25,26,27]) and have a wide substrate specificity, accepting substrates that are very different structurally. However, this is in many instances bound to a high regioselectivity, enantiospecificity and selectivity [28,29,30,31,32,33,34].
In fact, they are one of the most successful examples of enzymes presenting promiscuous activities [1,35,36,37,38,39,40].
In homogeneous media, most lipases present a conformational equilibrium between a form where a polypeptide chain (lid) isolates its active center from the medium (closed form) and a form where this lid is shifted exposing the active center to the medium (open form) [41,42,43]. In the presence of insoluble drops of substrate, the open form of the lipase becomes adsorbed on the hydrophobic surface and becomes stabilized [42]. This can occur also on any other hydrophobic surface, such as the open form of other lipase molecule [44,45,46,47,48], a hydrophobic protein [49,50] or a hydrophobic matrix [51].
The use of immobilized enzymes permits enzyme recovery and their reuse, providing that the enzyme remains active [52,53,54,55,56,57,58,59]. This also enables a simpler control of the reaction and also the utilization of any reactor configuration [60]. Researchers have tried to couple this immobilization step in the design of industrial enzyme biocatalysts in a way to improve many enzyme features. That way, a proper immobilization may improve enzyme stability by different reasons (recently reviewed [61]), and in that way, increase the range of conditions where the enzyme may be utilized, increasing the prospect of success in the design of a bioprocess [62,63]. Furthermore, enzyme immobilization will alter enzyme selectivity, specificity and activity [28], may reduce inhibitions and, if adequately designed, enable the one step immobilization-purification of the target enzyme [64,65,66].
In the last decade, the production of hybrid enzyme nanoflowers proved to be an immobilization method able to improve some enzyme features, such as enzyme stability and activity [67,68,69,70,71,72,73,74]. In some cases, this technique has been applied to immobilize lipases [75,76,77,78,79,80,81,82,83,84,85,86,87,88,89].
However, the mechanical fragility of nanoflowers makes their use complex in most reactor configurations. One alternative to solve this problem in some instances is to trap the nanoflowers in solids with better mechanical performance or confer a magnetic character to the biocatalyst [67,76,78,86,90,91,92].
Recently, we tried to reproduce this strategy using immobilized enzymes [93]. We found that in some instances, the enzyme features (activity or stability) were significantly improved [93]. Although there was no evidence of the production of hybrid enzyme-lipase nanoflower structures, the modification of the enzyme nucleation sites with the metal phosphate was assumed to be the cause of these positive effects.
In this new research, we investigate if this simple immobilized enzyme treatment may improve some of the most utilized commercial immobilized lipase preparations. The lipase B from Candida antarctica immobilized on moderately hydrophobic Lewatit VP OC 1600 via interfacial activation [94], with commercial name Novozym® 435 [94], has been one of the used preparations. Additionally, the lipase from Rhizomucor miehei immobilized on Duolite ES 562, a weak anion-exchange resin based on phenol-formaldehyde copolymers (RML-IM), has been included in this study [95] and a new biocatalyst called LipuraSelect, with scarce information available on the preparation way (that is, the immobilization mechanism is unknown). Finally, the lipase from Thermomyces lanuginosus immobilized on a cationic silicate (TLL-IM) was included [96]. All these commercial preparations have been treated with phosphate and the chloride salts of Cu2+, Co2+ and Zn2+, and their functional properties have been analyzed.

2. Results and Discussion

2.1. Modification of Commercial Immobilized TLL (IM-TL)

IM-TL was modified as indicated in methods and the activities of the different biocatalysts versus diverse substrates were determined (Table 1). The modification with phosphate and Co2+ produced a significant decrease of the activity of IM-TL versus triacetin, almost by 50%. However, the activity significantly increased using Cu2+ (by a 40%) and even more significantly using Zn2+ (almost a 70%). However, all treatments produced a decrease in the activity versus both methyl mandelate isomers, more significant for the S-isomer. This means that the treatment alters both specificity versus the substrates and enantiospecificity. In the most significant cases, the activity ratio of activities between R-methyl mandelate and triacetin (which is initially just under 1.3) increases to 2 when the enzyme is modified using phosphate and Co2+, or to 0.6 using phosphate and Zn2+. The enantiospecificity for the isomers of methyl mandelate also changes, but not so significantly from the initial ratio of reaction rate using R/S isomer of almost 1.6, to almost 2 if the biocatalyst is modified with phosphate and Co2+. These changes suggested that the metal phosphate modification should produce quite large changes in the functional properties of the enzyme (very likely caused by enzyme conformational changes), as reported in many papers regarding the effects of the immobilization protocol [97,98,99,100,101,102,103,104,105,106] or the chemical or physical modification of the enzymes [107,108,109,110,111,112,113] on enzyme specificity or selectivity. The fact that an enzyme is immobilized did not mean that the enzyme mobility is fully suppressed, and chemical or physical modifications can induce conformational changes. For example, it has been shown that the blocking of TLL-octyl-vinyl sulfone biocatalyst with different reagents can fully alter the enzyme functionality as well as the enzyme structure [114].
Figure 1 shows the inactivation course of the different IM-TL biocatalysts. While Co2+/Cu2+ and phosphate treatment produced a drastic decrease in enzyme stability, the treatment with Zn2+ resulted in a biocatalyst that fully maintained the enzyme stability at pH 7. These results disagree with the results obtained using octyl-agarose-TLL [93], where stability was greatly improved after this treatment, while the activity (versus p-NPB) was slightly decreased. This suggested that the immobilization protocol could greatly alter the effect of the metal phosphate modification of the biocatalyst. This result agrees with previous reports that state that the immobilization protocol can alter the effect of the enzyme modification on enzyme features, either chemical or physical [112,113]. In the case of IM-TLL, the modification with phosphate and Zn2+ was permitted to increase the enzyme activity versus some substrates, altering enzyme specificity, while maintaining enzyme stability.

2.2. Modification of Commercial Immobilized CALB (L435)

Table 2 shows the effect of the modification of L435 with different metal phosphate on the enzyme activities versus different substrates. Using triacetin, Zn2+ and phosphate treatment produced a 25% increase of enzyme activity, while the other two salts have a marginal negative effect. Using both isomers of methyl mandelate, the decrease in activity was more significant, to 1/3 using phosphate and Co2+ for the R isomer, and 1/5 using the R isomer. This produced a great effect on enzyme specificity, while the activity versus triacetin/activity versus R isomer of the initial biocatalyst was 2.9 for the unmodified enzyme, this increased to 6.5 for the enzyme modified using Zn2+ and phosphate, 5.9 using Cu2+ or 8.5 using Co2+. Regarding the activity versus R/activity versus S isomers, they are in the range of 1.3–1.4 for the initial preparation or the biocatalysts treated with zinc phosphate, 1.9 if treated with copper phosphate and over 2 if treated using cobalt phosphate.
Figure 2 shows the inactivation courses, and it becomes obvious that all the modifications presented a similarly small negative effect on enzyme stability at pH 7. Using octyl-agarose-CALB, the results were again quite different, with some increase on enzyme stability and activity. Explanations for these results may be similar to those given in the case of TLL.

2.3. Modification of Commercial Immobilized RML (RM-IM and LS-IM)

In the case of RML, we have got two different commercial preparations, RM-IM and LS-IM. The activities of both biocatalysts (intact and metal phosphate modified) may be found in Table 3 (RM-IM) and Table 4 (LS-IM). First, we will compare the activities of both biocatalysts versus the different substrates used in this study. RM-IM was slightly more active versus triacetin than LS-IM; however, it was significantly more active (almost by a 10-fold factor) versus R-methyl mandelate. The hydrolysis of the R isomer was more rapid using RM-IM (1.15-fold) than using LS-IM, while LS-IM preferred the S-isomer (1.4-fold). That way, both RML biocatalysts presented a very different specificity and enantiospecificity, as has been reported in many other instances for RML immobilized on different supports [97,98,99,100,101,102].
When RM-IM was treated with the metal salts, the activity versus triacetin decreased much more than the activity versus the methyl mandelate esters. The activity versus triacetin decreased to 81% when the biocatalyst was modified with zinc or cobalt phosphates, but below 50% if using copper phosphate. The activity versus R-methyl mandelate decreased to around 10% in the more drastic case (when modified with zinc phosphate), while using the S-isomer the activity was maintained. That way, the activity versus triacetin/activity versus R methyl mandelate ratio was moved from 7.6 for the original biocatalyst to 3.7 for the enzyme modified with copper phosphate. The changes in the R/S methyl mandelate activity ratio were much smaller (from the original 1.15 to almost 1).
Results were very different using LS-IM. Activity versus triacetin decreased after the treatment, but it decreased more using zinc (below 70%), while the other two preparations maintained around 80% of the initial activity. In the case of methyl mandelate, the effects were very different using each of the isomers. The activity versus R methyl mandelate increased by 60% when treated with copper and by 20% using cobalt, while the use of zinc salts decreased the activity by 20%. However, the activity versus the R isomer decreased in all cases, more using zinc (to 50%) and less using cobalt (75%). This means some changes in enzyme specificity, going from an activity of 62 versus triacetin/S methyl mandelate (much higher than using RM-IM) to 82 (after modification with Zn), and more significant changes in the activity versus S/R methyl mandelate ratio. The unmodified biocatalyst presented an activity ratio of 1.4. All modified biocatalysts preferred the R isomer, giving a value around 0.6 when modified with copper. That way, for this preparation, the modification produced a more significant change in the enantiospecificity than in the specificity, in opposition with RM-IM.
The comparison between two biocatalysts of the same enzyme confirms that the effect of the modification with metal phosphate is greatly dependent on the immobilization protocol, as has been reported for other physical or chemical immobilized enzyme modifications [107,110,111,112,113,115].
Figure 3 shows the effect of the metal phosphate treatments on the stability of RM-IM. All the treatments had a scarce, but positive effect on enzyme stability. The comparison with Figure 4 shows that LS-IM is much more stable than RM-IM. The modification of LS-IM with zinc phosphate had no effect on enzyme stability, while the other two treatments produced a clear decrease on enzyme stability. Again, different enzyme preparations of the same enzyme exhibited a very different response to the treatment with metal phosphate.

3. Materials and Methods

3.1. Materials

In this study, we have employed different commercial immobilized lipase. Lipozyme®TL (TLL-IM), Lipozyme®435 (L435), Lipozyme®RM (RML-IM) and LipuraSelect (LS-IM) were kindly donated by Novozymes Spain (Madrid, Spain). Triacetin, (R)- and (S)-methyl mandelate, zinc chloride (ZnCl2), copper chloride (CuCl2), cobalt chloride (CoCl2), sodium chloride (NaCl) and acetonitrile for HPLC (gradient grade, ≥99.9%) were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (St. Louis, MO, USA). All other reagents were of analytical grade.

3.2. Methods

3.2.1. Modification of Immobilized Enzyme with Metallic Salt/Phosphate

TLL-IM, L435, RML-IM and LS-IM were modified with metallic salt/phosphate following the procedure described by Guimarães et al. [93]. A mass of 1 g of immobilized enzyme was suspended in 10 mL of saline buffer (10 mM sodium phosphate buffer and 125 mM NaCl) at pH 7.4 and, then, 400 µL of 230 mM of the corresponding metal salt was added. The enzyme treatment was conducted at room temperature under gentle stirring for 5 h in an orbital shaker at 550 rpm. After modification, the suspension was filtered and the biocatalysts were washed with distilled water (10 times with 10 volumes of water), and stored at 4 °C.

3.2.2. Thermal Inactivation of the Different Lipase Preparations

In a standard experiment, 1 g of immobilized biocatalyst was suspended in 10 mL of 10 mM Tris-HCl at pH 7.0 and incubated at different temperatures. Phosphate was discarded as medium to inactivate the immobilized enzymes, as it has been reported to be negative for enzyme stability. The low buffer concentration prevents risks of enzyme release for the biocatalysts based on ion exchange [116,117].
The temperatures were selected to ensure reliable but not too long half-lives of the unmodified immobilized enzymes (TLL-IM and L435: 75 °C; RML-IM and LS-IM: 60 °C). Periodically, samples of 0.3 mL of inactivation suspension were collected after homogenization using a pipette with a cut tip to determine their residual activities. Residual activities were defined as activity of the biocatalyst after the indicated inactivation time divided by its initial and expressed in percentage. The experiments were performed, employing triacetin as substrate for the immobilized biocatalyst.

3.2.3. Enzyme Activity Assays

One unit of activity (U) was defined as the amount of enzyme that hydrolyzes one µmol of substrate per minute under the described conditions.

Hydrolysis of Triacetin

A volume of 0.3 mL of immobilized enzyme suspension (166 mg/mL) was added to 3 mL of 50 mM of triacetin prepared in 50 mM of sodium phosphate buffer at pH 7.0. Hydrolysis was carried out at 25 °C under magnetic stirring (100 rpm). The hydrolytic activity in triacetin was quantified by detection of 1,2 and 1,3 diacetin (under these conditions, 1,2 diacetin suffers acyl migration, giving 1,3 diacetin) [118]. The degree of conversion was calculated by HPLC in a Waters 486 chromatograph (Waters, Millford, UK.) equipped with a UV/VIS detector (set to 230 nm) [118] using a Kromasil C18 column (15 cm × 0.46 cm) with a mobile phase composed of 15% (v/v) of water and 85% (v/v) of acetonitrile with a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The retention times were 4 min for 1,2 and 1,3 diacetins (under these conditions eluted at the same time) and 18 min for triacetin. Conversions of 15–20% were used to calculate enzyme activity [119].

Hydrolysis of R- or S-Methyl Mandelate

A mass of 0.05 g of commercial immobilized lipase were added to 3 mL of 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate in 50 mM sodium phosphate buffer solution at pH 7.0. Hydrolysis was carried out at 25 °C under magnetic stirring (100 rpm). The substrate and product concentrations were determined by HPLC using a Waters 486 chromatograph (Waters, Millford, UK) equipped with a UV/VIS detector (set to 230 nm) [114] using a Kromasil C18 column (15 cm × 0.46 cm) with a mobile phase composed of 10 mM ammonium acetate and acetonitrile (35–65% (v/v)) at pH 2.8 with a flow rate of 1 mL/min. The retention times were 2.5 min for mandelic acid and 4.2 min for the R- or S-methyl mandelate. Conversions of 15–25% were used to calculate enzyme activity [120].

4. Conclusions

The modification of commercial preparations of immobilized lipases with metal phosphate, in a treatment similar to the production of nanoflowers, alters enzyme specificity. These changes means that while the enzyme activity may increase for some substrates, it may decrease for some others. This also fully alters enzyme enantiospecificity. The best treatment is different for each enzyme, substrate and even for each immobilization protocol. The results in this paper point that the immobilization protocol can play a critical role on the effects of the treatment. Regarding the stability, a feature that was reported as much improved using octyl-agarose-lipase, using the commercial preparations show a moderate impact, usually even decreasing enzyme stability, or producing marginal stabilization (in the case of RM-IM). Although in this paper, we have focused on the effects of the modification on the functional properties of the immobilized enzymes, it seems very interesting to further investigate the mechanism of this modification. The fact that the metal crystals also grew on the naked supports makes this a very complex goal.
From the results of this paper, it is proposed that the modification of a biocatalyst with a battery of metals (not reducing the study to the ones used in this paper) may open new opportunities for tailoring the enzyme features, increasing the opportunities to find a biocatalyst with the optimal properties for a specific process.

Author Contributions

Conceptualization: J.R.-M. and R.F.-L.; formal analysis: J.R.G. and P.W.T.; investigation, D.C. and J.R.G.; writing—original draft preparation: all authors; writing—review and editing, all authors.; supervision, P.W.T., J.R.-M. and R.F.-L.; funding acquisition, P.W.T. and R.F.-L. All authors have read and agreed to the published version of the manuscript.

Funding

This research was funded by the Coordenação de Aperfeiçoamento de Pessoal de Nível Superior-Brasil (CAPES, Finance Code 001; CAPES-PRINT, number 88887.571985/2020-00), Agencia Estatal de Investigación-Spanish Government (PID2021-122398OB-I00). D.C. thanks the Ministerio de Ciencia e Innovación-Spanish Government for a FPI.

Institutional Review Board Statement

Not applicable.

Data Availability Statement

Not applicable.

Acknowledgments

The help and suggestions from Ángel Berenguer (Departamento de Química Inorgánica, Universidad de Alicante) are gratefully recognized.

Conflicts of Interest

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Sample Availability

Samples are available from the authors.

References

  1. Sarmah, N.; Revathi, D.; Sheelu, G.; Yamuna Rani, K.; Sridhar, S.; Mehtab, V.; Sumana, C. Recent Advances on Sources and Industrial Applications of Lipases. Biotechnol. Prog. 2018, 34, 5–28. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  2. Soni, S. Trends in Lipase Engineering for Enhanced Biocatalysis. Biotechnol. Appl. Biochem. 2021, 69, 265–272. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  3. Almeida, F.L.C.; Castro, M.P.J.; Travália, B.M.; Forte, M.B.S. Trends in Lipase Immobilization: Bibliometric Review and Patent Analysis. Process Biochem. 2021, 110, 37–51. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  4. Borrelli, G.M.; Trono, D. Recombinant Lipases and Phospholipases and Their Use as Biocatalysts for Industrial Applications. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2015, 16, 20774–20840. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  5. de Miranda, A.S.; Miranda, L.S.M.; de Souza, R.O.M.A. Lipases: Valuable Catalysts for Dynamic Kinetic Resolutions. Biotechnol. Adv. 2015, 33, 372–393. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  6. Lima, P.C.; Gazoni, I.; de Carvalho, A.M.G.; Bresolin, D.; Cavalheiro, D.; de Oliveira, D.; Rigo, E. β-Galactosidase from Kluyveromyces lactis in Genipin-Activated Chitosan: An Investigation on Immobilization, Stability, and Application in Diluted UHT Milk. Food Chem. 2021, 349, 129050. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  7. Stergiou, P.Y.; Foukis, A.; Filippou, M.; Koukouritaki, M.; Parapouli, M.; Theodorou, L.G.; Hatziloukas, E.; Afendra, A.; Pandey, A.; Papamichael, E.M. Advances in Lipase-Catalyzed Esterification Reactions. Biotechnol. Adv. 2013, 31, 1846–1859. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  8. Yahya, A.R.; Anderson, W.A.; Moo-Young, M. Ester Synthesis in Lipase-Catalyzed Reactions. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 1998, 23, 438–450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  9. Hari Krishna, S.; Karanth, N.G. Lipases and Lipase-Catalyzed Esterification Reactions in Nonaqueous Media. Catal. Rev.-Sci. Eng. 2002, 44, 499–591. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  10. Narwal, S.K.; Gupta, R. Biodiesel Production by Transesterification Using Immobilized Lipase. Biotechnol. Lett. 2013, 35, 479–490. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  11. Moussavou Mounguengui, R.W.; Brunschwig, C.; Baréa, B.; Villeneuve, P.; Blin, J. Are Plant Lipases a Promising Alternative to Catalyze Transesterification for Biodiesel Production? Prog. Energy Combust. Sci. 2013, 39, 441–456. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  12. Toldrá-Reig, F.; Mora, L.; Toldrá, F. Developments in the Use of Lipase Transesterification for Biodiesel Production from Animal Fat Waste. Appl. Sci. 2020, 10, 5085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  13. Soumanou, M.M.; Pérignon, M.; Villeneuve, P. Lipase-Catalyzed Interesterification Reactions for Human Milk Fat Substitutes Production: A Review. Eur. J. Lipid Sci. Technol. 2013, 115, 270–285. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  14. Utama, Q.D.; Sitanggang, A.B.; Adawiyah, D.R.; Hariyadi, P. Lipase-Catalyzed Interesterification for the Synthesis of Medium-Long-Medium (MLM) Structured Lipids. Food Technol. Biotechnol. 2019, 57, 305–318. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  15. Sahin, N.; Akoh, C.C.; Karaali, A. Lipase-Catalyzed Acidolysis of Tripalmitin with Hazelnut Oil Fatty Acids and Stearic Acid to Produce Human Milk Fat Substitutes. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2005, 53, 5779–5783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  16. Fomuso, L.B.; Akoh, C.C. Lipase-Catalyzed Acidolysis of Olive Oil and Caprylic Acid in a Bench-Scale Packed Bed Bioreactor. Food Res. Int. 2002, 35, 15–21. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  17. Kumar, A.; Dhar, K.; Kanwar, S.S.; Arora, P.K. Lipase Catalysis in Organic Solvents: Advantages and Applications. Biol. Proced. Online 2016, 18, 2. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  18. Sharma, S.; Kanwar, S.S. Organic Solvent Tolerant Lipases and Applications. Sci. World J. 2014, 2014, 625258. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  19. Sousa, R.R.; Silva, A.S.A.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R.; Ferreira-Leitão, V.S. Solvent-Free Esterifications Mediated by Immobilized Lipases: A Review from Thermodynamic and Kinetic Perspectives. Catal. Sci. Technol. 2021, 11, 5696–5711. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  20. Elgharbawy, A.A.; Riyadi, F.A.; Alam, M.Z.; Moniruzzaman, M. Ionic Liquids as a Potential Solvent for Lipase-Catalysed Reactions: A Review. J. Mol. Liq. 2018, 251, 150–166. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  21. Fan, Y.; Qian, J. Lipase Catalysis in Ionic Liquids/Supercritical Carbon Dioxide and Its Applications. J. Mol. Catal. B Enzym. 2010, 66, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  22. Hernández-Fernández, F.J.; De Los Ríos, A.P.; Lozano-Blanco, L.J.; Godínez, C. Biocatalytic Ester Synthesis in Ionic Liquid Media. J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol. 2010, 85, 1423–1435. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  23. Tan, J.-N.; Dou, Y. Deep Eutectic Solvents for Biocatalytic Transformations: Focused Lipase-Catalyzed Organic Reactions. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2020, 104, 1481–1496. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  24. Lozano, P.; Nieto, S.; Serrano, J.; Perez, J.; Sanchez-Gomez, G.; García-Verdugo, E.; Luis, S. Flow Biocatalytic Processes in Ionic Liquids and Supercritical Fluids. Mini. Rev. Org. Chem. 2017, 14, 65–74. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  25. Sovová, H.; Pleskač, O.; Sajfrtová, M. Modeling of Lipase-Catalyzed Oil Hydrolysis in Supercritical CO2 in a Packed-Bed Reactor. J. Supercrit. Fluids 2022, 187, 105629. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  26. Li, F.; Wang, C.; Xu, Y.; Gao, X.; Xu, Y.; Xie, H.; Chen, P.; Wang, L. Lipase-Catalyzed Synthesis of Anthrone Functionalized Benzylic Amines via a Multicomponent Reaction in Supercritical Carbon Dioxide. ChemistrySelect 2022, 7, e202104517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  27. Hu, L.; Sun, L.; Li, J.; Qi, L.; Zhang, X.; Yu, D.; Walid, E.; Jiang, L. Lipase-Catalyzed Transesterification of Soybean Oil and Phytosterol in Supercritical CO2. Bioprocess Biosyst. Eng. 2015, 38, 2343–2347. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  28. Rodrigues, R.C.; Ortiz, C.; Berenguer-Murcia, Á.; Torres, R.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. Modifying Enzyme Activity and Selectivity by Immobilization. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2013, 42, 6290–6307. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  29. Carrière, F.; Withers-Martinez, C.; Van Tilbeurgh, H.; Roussel, A.; Cambillau, C.; Verger, R. Structural Basis for the Substrate Selectivity of Pancreatic Lipases and Some Related Proteins. Biochim. Biophys. Acta-Rev. Biomembr. 1998, 1376, 417–432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  30. Uppenberg, J.; Oehrner, N.; Norin, M.; Hult, K.; Kleywegt, G.J.; Patkar, S.; Waagen, V.; Anthonsen, T.; Jones, T.A. Crystallographic and Molecular-Modeling Studies of Lipase B from Candida antarctica Reveal a Stereospecificity Pocket for Secondary Alcohols. Biochemistry 1995, 34, 16838–16851. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  31. Miotti, R.H.; Cortez, D.V.; De Castro, H.F. Transesterification of Palm Kernel Oil with Ethanol Catalyzed by a Combination of Immobilized Lipases with Different Specificities in Continuous Two-Stage Packed-Bed Reactor. Fuel 2022, 310, 122343. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  32. Sun, J.; Zhu, H.; Yang, X.; Zheng, Y.; Sun, T.; Xu, H.; Meng, J.; Zhang, A. Carboxylesterase and Lipase-Catalyzed Degradation of Phthalate Esters in Soil and Water: Congener Structure Selectivity and Specificity. Environ. Technol. Innov. 2022, 28, 102571. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  33. Ahrari, F.; Yousefi, M.; Habibi, Z.; Mohammadi, M. Application of Undecanedicarboxylic Acid to Prepare Cross-Linked Enzymes (CLEs) of Rhizomucor miehei Lipase (RML); Selective Enrichment of Polyunsaturated Fatty Acids. Mol. Catal. 2022, 520, 112172. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  34. Xu, Z.; Cao, Q.; Manyande, A.; Xiong, S.; Du, H. Analysis of the Binding Selectivity and Inhibiting Mechanism of Chlorogenic Acid Isomers and Their Interaction with Grass Carp Endogenous Lipase Using Multi-Spectroscopic, Inhibition Kinetics and Modeling Methods. Food Chem. 2022, 382, 132106. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  35. Kapoor, M.; Gupta, M.N. Lipase Promiscuity and Its Biochemical Applications. Process Biochem. 2012, 47, 555–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  36. Hult, K.; Berglund, P. Enzyme Promiscuity: Mechanism and Applications. Trends Biotechnol. 2007, 25, 231–238. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  37. O’Brien, P.J.; Herschlag, D. Catalytic Promiscuity and the Evolution of New Enzymatic Activities. Chem. Biol. 1999, 6, R91–R105. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  38. Patti, A.; Sanfilippo, C. Stereoselective Promiscuous Reactions Catalyzed by Lipases. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 2675. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  39. Verma, S.; Choudhary, R.N.; Kanadje, A.P.; Banerjee, U.C. Diversifying Arena of Drug Synthesis: In the Realm of Lipase Mediated Waves of Biocatalysis. Catalysts 2021, 11, 1328. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  40. Carballares, D.; Morellon-Sterling, R.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Design of Artificial Enzymes Bearing Several Active Centers: New Trends, Opportunities and Problems. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 5304. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  41. Brady, L.; Brzozowski, A.M.; Derewenda, Z.S.; Dodson, E.; Dodson, G.; Tolley, S.; Turkenburg, J.P.; Christiansen, L.; Huge-Jensen, B.; Norskov, L.; et al. A Serine Protease Triad Forms the Catalytic Centre of a Triacylglycerol Lipase. Nature 1990, 343, 767. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  42. Verger, R. ‘Interfacial Activation’ of Lipases: Facts and Artifacts. Trends Biotechnol. 1997, 15, 32–38. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  43. Miled, N.; Beisson, F.; de Caro, J.; de Caro, A.; Arondel, V.; Verger, R. Interfacial Catalysis by Lipases. J. Mol. Catal. B. Enzym. 2001, 11, 165–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  44. Wilson, L.; Palomo, J.M.; Fernández-Lorente, G.; Illanes, A.; Guisán, J.M.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. Effect of Lipase-Lipase Interactions in the Activity, Stability and Specificity of a Lipase from Alcaligenes sp. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2006, 39, 259–264. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  45. Palomo, J.M.; Fuentes, M.; Fernández-Lorente, G.; Mateo, C.; Guisan, J.M.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. General Trend of Lipase to Self-Assemble Giving Bimolecular Aggregates Greatly Modifies the Enzyme Functionality. Biomacromolecules 2003, 4, 1–6. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  46. Palomo, J.M.; Ortiz, C.; Fernández-Lorente, G.; Fuentes, M.; Guisán, J.M.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. Lipase-Lipase Interactions as a New Tool to Immobilize and Modulate the Lipase Properties. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2005, 36, 447–454. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  47. Palomo, J.M.; Ortiz, C.; Fuentes, M.; Fernandez-Lorente, G.; Guisan, J.M.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Use of Immobilized Lipases for Lipase Purification via Specific Lipase-Lipase Interactions. J. Chromatogr. A 2004, 1038, 267–273. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  48. Fernández-Lorente, G.; Palomo, J.M.; Fuentes, M.; Mateo, C.; Guisán, J.M.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. Self-Assembly of Pseudomonas fluorescens Lipase into Bimolecular Aggregates Dramatically Affects Functional Properties. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2003, 82, 232–237. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  49. Palomo, J.M.; Peñas, M.M.; Fernández-Lorente, G.; Mateo, C.; Pisabarro, A.G.; Fernández-Lafuente, R.; Ramírez, L.; Guisán, J.M. Solid-Phase Handling of Hydrophobins: Immobilized Hydrophobins as a New Tool to Study Lipases. Biomacromolecules 2003, 4, 204–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  50. Wang, P.; He, J.; Sun, Y.; Reynolds, M.; Zhang, L.; Han, S.; Liang, S.; Sui, H.; Lin, Y. Display of Fungal Hydrophobin on the Pichia pastoris Cell Surface and Its Influence on Candida antarctica Lipase B. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2016, 100, 5883–5895. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  51. Rodrigues, R.C.; Virgen-Ortíz, J.J.; dos Santos, J.C.S.; Berenguer-Murcia, Á.; Alcantara, A.R.; Barbosa, O.; Ortiz, C.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Immobilization of Lipases on Hydrophobic Supports: Immobilization Mechanism, Advantages, Problems, and Solutions. Biotechnol. Adv. 2019, 37, 746–770. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  52. Sheldon, R.A.; van Pelt, S. Enzyme Immobilisation in Biocatalysis: Why, What and How. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2013, 42, 6223–6235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  53. Mateo, C.; Palomo, J.M.; Fernandez-Lorente, G.; Guisan, J.M.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Improvement of Enzyme Activity, Stability and Selectivity via Immobilization Techniques. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2007, 40, 1451–1463. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  54. Garcia-Galan, C.; Berenguer-Murcia, Á.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R.; Rodrigues, R.C. Potential of Different Enzyme Immobilization Strategies to Improve Enzyme Performance. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2011, 353, 2885–2904. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  55. Iyer, P.V.; Ananthanarayan, L. Enzyme Stability and Stabilization-Aqueous and Non-Aqueous Environment. Process Biochem. 2008, 43, 1019–1032. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  56. Bommarius, A.S.; Paye, M.F. Stabilizing Biocatalysts. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2013, 42, 6534–6565. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  57. Liese, A.; Hilterhaus, L. Evaluation of Immobilized Enzymes for Industrial Applications. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2013, 42, 6236–6249. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  58. Di Cosimo, R.; Mc Auliffe, J.; Poulose, A.J.; Bohlmann, G. Industrial Use of Immobilized Enzymes. Chem. Soc. Rev. 2013, 42, 6437–6474. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  59. Klibanov, A.M. Enzyme Stabilization by Immobilization. Anal. Biochem. 1979, 93, 1–25. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  60. Eş, I.; Vieira, J.D.G.; Amaral, A.C. Principles, Techniques, and Applications of Biocatalyst Immobilization for Industrial Application. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2015, 99, 2065–2082. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  61. Rodrigues, R.C.; Berenguer-Murcia, Á.; Carballares, D.; Morellon-Sterling, R.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Stabilization of Enzymes via Immobilization: Multipoint Covalent Attachment and Other Stabilization Strategies. Biotechnol. Adv. 2021, 52, 107821. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  62. Del Arco, J.; Alcántara, A.R.; Fernández-Lafuente, R.; Fernández-Lucas, J. Magnetic Micro-Macro Biocatalysts Applied to Industrial Bioprocesses. Bioresour. Technol. 2021, 322, 124547. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  63. Nadeem, F.; Mehmood, T.; Anwar, Z.; Saeed, S.; Bilal, M.; Meer, B. Optimization of Bioprocess Steps through Response Surface Methodology for the Production of Immobilized Lipase Using Chaetomium globosum via Solid-State Fermentation. Biomass Convers. Biorefinery 2021, in press. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  64. Dos Santos, J.C.S.; Barbosa, O.; Ortiz, C.; Berenguer-Murcia, A.; Rodrigues, R.C.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Importance of the Support Properties for Immobilization or Purification of Enzymes. ChemCatChem 2015, 7, 2413–2432. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  65. Nilsson, J.; Ståhl, S.; Lundeberg, J.; Uhlén, M.; Nygren, P.Å. Affinity Fusion Strategies for Detection, Purification, and Immobilization of Recombinant Proteins. Protein Expr. Purif. 1997, 11, 1–16. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  66. Nilsson, B.; Abrahmsén, L.; Uhlén, M. Immobilization and Purification of Enzymes with Staphylococcal Protein A Gene Fusion Vectors. EMBO J. 1985, 4, 1075–1080. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  67. Zhang, M.; Zhang, Y.; Yang, C.; Ma, C.; Tang, J. Enzyme-Inorganic Hybrid Nanoflowers: Classification, Synthesis, Functionalization and Potential Applications. Chem. Eng. J. 2021, 415, 129075. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  68. Wu, X.; Hou, M.; Ge, J. Metal-Organic Frameworks and Inorganic Nanoflowers: A Type of Emerging Inorganic Crystal Nanocarrier for Enzyme Immobilization. Catal. Sci. Technol. 2015, 5, 5077–5085. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  69. Altinkaynak, C.; Tavlasoglu, S.; Özdemir, N.; Ocsoy, I. A New Generation Approach in Enzyme Immobilization: Organic-Inorganic Hybrid Nanoflowers with Enhanced Catalytic Activity and Stability. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2016, 93–94, 105–112. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  70. Cui, J.; Jia, S. Organic–Inorganic Hybrid Nanoflowers: A Novel Host Platform for Immobilizing Biomolecules. Coord. Chem. Rev. 2017, 352, 249–263. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  71. Shende, P.; Kasture, P.; Gaud, R.S. Nanoflowers: The Future Trend of Nanotechnology for Multi-Applications. Artif. Cells Nanomed. Biotechnol. 2018, 46, 413–422. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  72. Zhu, J.; Wen, M.; Wen, W.; Du, D.; Zhang, X.; Wang, S.; Lin, Y. Recent Progress in Biosensors Based on Organic-Inorganic Hybrid Nanoflowers. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2018, 120, 175–187. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  73. Negahdary, M.; Heli, H. Applications of Nanoflowers in Biomedicine. Recent Pat. Nanotechnol. 2018, 12, 22–33. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  74. Liu, Y.; Ji, X.; He, Z. Organic-Inorganic Nanoflowers: From Design Strategy to Biomedical Applications. Nanoscale 2019, 11, 17179–17194. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  75. Escobar, S.; Velasco-Lozano, S.; Lu, C.-H.; Lin, Y.-F.; Mesa, M.; Bernal, C.; López-Gallego, F. Understanding the Functional Properties of Bio-Inorganic Nanoflowers as Biocatalysts by Deciphering the Metal-Binding Sites of Enzymes. J. Mater. Chem. B 2017, 5, 4478–4486. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  76. Fu, M.; Xing, J.; Ge, Z. Preparation of laccase-loaded magnetic nanoflowers and their recycling for efficient degradation of bisphenol A. Sci. Total Environ. 2019, 651, 2857–2865. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  77. Bilal, M.; Iqbal, H.M.N. Armoring Bio-Catalysis via Structural and Functional Coordination between Nanostructured Materials and Lipases for Tailored Applications. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 166, 818–838. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  78. Jia, B.; Liu, C.; Qi, X. Selective Production of Ethyl Levulinate from Levulinic Acid by Lipase-Immobilized Mesoporous Silica Nanoflowers Composite. Fuel Process. Technol. 2020, 210, 106578. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  79. Altinkaynak, C.; Gulmez, C.; Atakisi, O.; Özdemir, N. Evaluation of Organic-Inorganic Hybrid Nanoflower’s Enzymatic Activity in the Presence of Different Metal Ions and Organic Solvents. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 164, 162–171. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  80. Wang, A.; Chen, X.; Yu, J.; Li, N.; Li, H.; Yin, Y.; Xie, T.; Wu, S.G. Green Preparation of Lipase@Ca3(PO4)2 Hybrid Nanoflowers Using Bone Waste from Food Production for Efficient Synthesis of Clindamycin Palmitate. J. Ind. Eng. Chem. 2020, 89, 383–391. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  81. Zhong, L.; Feng, Y.; Wang, G.; Wang, Z.; Bilal, M.; Lv, H.; Jia, S.; Cui, J. Production and Use of Immobilized Lipases in/on Nanomaterials: A Review from the Waste to Biodiesel Production. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2020, 152, 207–222. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  82. Li, C.; Zhao, J.; Zhang, Z.; Jiang, Y.; Bilal, M.; Jiang, Y.; Jia, S.; Cui, J. Self-Assembly of Activated Lipase Hybrid Nanoflowers with Superior Activity and Enhanced Stability. Biochem. Eng. J. 2020, 158, 107582. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  83. Ke, C.; Fan, Y.; Chen, Y.; Xu, L.; Yan, Y. A New Lipase–Inorganic Hybrid Nanoflower with Enhanced Enzyme Activity. RSC Adv. 2016, 6, 19413–19416. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  84. Naapuri, J.M.; Losada-Garcia, N.; Deska, J.; Palomo, J.M. Synthesis of Silver and Gold Nanoparticles-Enzyme-Polymer Conjugate Hybrids as Dual-Activity Catalysts for Chemoenzymatic Cascade Reactions. Nanoscale 2022, 14, 5701–5715. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  85. Meena, J.; Gupta, A.; Ahuja, R.; Singh, M.; Panda, A.K. Recent Advances in Nano-Engineered Approaches Used for Enzyme Immobilization with Enhanced Activity. J. Mol. Liq. 2021, 338, 116602. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  86. Mohammadi-Mahani, H.; Badoei-dalfard, A.; Karami, Z. Synthesis and Characterization of Cross-Linked Lipase-Metal Hybrid Nanoflowers on Graphene Oxide with Increasing the Enzymatic Stability and Reusability. Biochem. Eng. J. 2021, 172, 108038. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  87. Zhong, L.; Jiao, X.; Hu, H.; Shen, X.; Zhao, J.; Feng, Y.; Li, C.; Du, Y.; Cui, J.; Jia, S. Activated Magnetic Lipase-Inorganic Hybrid Nanoflowers: A Highly Active and Recyclable Nanobiocatalyst for Biodiesel Production. Renew. Energy 2021, 171, 825–832. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  88. Bilal, M.; Fernandes, C.D.; Mehmood, T.; Nadeem, F.; Tabassam, Q.; Ferreira, L.F.R. Immobilized Lipases-Based Nano-Biocatalytic Systems-A Versatile Platform with Incredible Biotechnological Potential. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 175, 108–122. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  89. Liu, Y.; Shao, X.; Kong, D.; Li, G.; Li, Q. Immobilization of Thermophilic Lipase in Inorganic Hybrid Nanoflower through Biomimetic Mineralization. Colloids Surf. B Biointerfaces 2021, 197, 111450. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  90. Fotiadou, R.; Patila, M.; Hammami, M.A.; Enotiadis, A.; Moschovas, D.; Tsirka, K.; Spyrou, K.; Giannelis, E.P.; Avgeropoulos, A.; Paipetis, A.; et al. Development of Effective Lipase-Hybrid Nanoflowers Enriched with Carbon and Magnetic Nanomaterials for Biocatalytic Transformations. Nanomaterials 2019, 9, 808. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  91. Du, Y.; Gao, J.; Kong, W.; Zhou, L.; Ma, L.; He, Y.; Huang, Z.; Jiang, Y. Enzymatic Synthesis of Glycerol Carbonate Using a Lipase Immobilized on Magnetic Organosilica Nanoflowers as a Catalyst. ACS Omega 2018, 3, 6642–6650. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
  92. Ren, W.; Li, Y.; Wang, J.; Li, L.; Xu, L.; Wu, Y.; Wang, Y.; Fei, X.; Tian, J. Synthesis of Magnetic Nanoflower Immobilized Lipase and Its Continuous Catalytic Application. New J. Chem. 2019, 43, 11082–11090. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  93. Guimarães, J.R.; Carballares, D.; Rocha-Martin, J.; Tardioli, P.W.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Stabilization of Immobilized Lipases by Treatment with Metallic Phosphate Salts. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2022, 213, 43–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  94. Ortiz, C.; Ferreira, M.L.; Barbosa, O.; dos Santos, J.C.S.; Rodrigues, R.C.; Berenguer-Murcia, Á.; Briand, L.E.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Novozym 435: The “Perfect” Lipase Immobilized Biocatalyst? Catal. Sci. Technol. 2019, 9, 2380–2420. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  95. Rodrigues, R.C.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Lipase from Rhizomucor miehei as an Industrial Biocatalyst in Chemical Process. J. Mol. Catal. B Enzym. 2010, 64, 1–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  96. Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Lipase from Thermomyces lanuginosus: Uses and Prospects as an Industrial Biocatalyst. J. Mol. Catal. B Enzym. 2010, 62, 197–212. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  97. Palomo, J.M.; Fernandez-Lorente, G.; Mateo, C.; Ortiz, C.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R.; Guisan, J.M. Modulation of the Enantioselectivity of Lipases via Controlled Immobilization and Medium Engineering: Hydrolytic Resolution of Mandelic Acid Esters. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2002, 31, 775–783. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  98. Fernández-Lorente, G.; Palomo, J.M.; Cabrera, Z.; Guisán, J.M.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. Specificity Enhancement towards Hydrophobic Substrates by Immobilization of Lipases by Interfacial Activation on Hydrophobic Supports. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2007, 41, 565–569. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  99. Palomo, J.M.; Muñoz, G.; Fernández-Lorente, G.; Mateo, C.; Fuentes, M.; Guisan, J.M.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. Modulation of Mucor miehei Lipase Properties via Directed Immobilization on Different Hetero-Functional Epoxy Resins. J. Mol. Catal. B Enzym. 2003, 21, 201–210. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  100. Fernández-Lorente, G.; Terreni, M.; Mateo, C.; Bastida, A.; Fernández-Lafuente, R.; Dalmases, P.; Huguet, J.; Guisán, J.M. Modulation of Lipase Properties in Macro-Aqueous Systems by Controlled Enzyme Immobilization: Enantioselective Hydrolysis of a Chiral Ester by Immobilized Pseudomonas Lipase. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2001, 28, 389–396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  101. Galarneau, A.; Mureseanu, M.; Atger, S.; Renard, G.; Fajula, F. Immobilization of Lipase on Silicas. Relevance of Textural and Interfacial Properties on Activity and Selectivity. New J. Chem. 2006, 30, 562. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  102. Chaubey, A.; Parshad, R.; Koul, S.; Taneja, S.C.; Qazi, G.N. Enantioselectivity Modulation through Immobilization of Arthrobacter Sp. Lipase: Kinetic Resolution of Fluoxetine Intermediate. J. Mol. Catal. B Enzym. 2006, 42, 39–44. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  103. Urrutia, P.; Arrieta, R.; Alvarez, L.; Cardenas, C.; Mesa, M.; Wilson, L. Immobilization of Lipases in Hydrophobic Chitosan for Selective Hydrolysis of Fish Oil: The Impact of Support Functionalization on Lipase Activity, Selectivity and Stability. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2018, 108, 674–686. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  104. Calero, J.; Verdugo, C.; Luna, D.; Sancho, E.D.; Luna, C.; Posadillo, A.; Bautista, F.M.; Romero, A.A. Selective Ethanolysis of Sunflower Oil with Lipozyme RM IM, an Immobilized Rhizomucor Miehei Lipase, to Obtain a Biodiesel-like Biofuel, Which Avoids Glycerol Production through the Monoglyceride Formation. New Biotechnol. 2014, 31, 596–601. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  105. Lee, C.-H.; Parkin, K.L. Effect of Water Activity and Immobilization on Fatty Acid Selectivity for Esterification Reactions Mediated by Lipases. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2001, 75, 219–227. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  106. Mohammadi, M.; Habibi, Z.; Dezvarei, S.; Yousefi, M.; Samadi, S.; Ashjari, M. Improvement of the Stability and Selectivity of Rhizomucor Miehei Lipase Immobilized on Silica Nanoparticles: Selective Hydrolysis of Fish Oil Using Immobilized Preparations. Process Biochemi. 2014, 49, 1314–1323. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  107. Palomo, J.M.; Fernández-Lorente, G.; Guisán, J.M.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. Modulation of Immobilized Lipase Enantioselectivity via Chemical Amination. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2007, 349, 1119–1127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  108. Barbosa, O.; Ruiz, M.; Ortiz, C.; Fernández, M.; Torres, R.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Modulation of the Properties of Immobilized CALB by Chemical Modification with 2,3,4-Trinitrobenzenesulfonate or Ethylendiamine. Advantages of Using Adsorbed Lipases on Hydrophobic Supports. Process Biochem. 2012, 47, 867–876. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  109. Ashjari, M.; Mohammadi, M.; Badri, R. Chemical Amination of Rhizopus oryzae Lipase for Multipoint Covalent Immobilization on Epoxy-Functionalized Supports: Modulation of Stability and Selectivity. J. Mol. Catal. B Enzym. 2015, 115, 128–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  110. López-Gallego, F.; Abian, O.; Guisán, J.M. Altering the Interfacial Activation Mechanism of a Lipase by Solid-Phase Selective Chemical Modification. Biochemistry 2012, 51, 7028–7036. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  111. dos Santos, J.C.S.; Garcia-Galan, C.; Rodrigues, R.C.; de Sant’ Ana, H.B.; Gonçalves, L.R.B.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Improving the Catalytic Properties of Immobilized Lecitase via Physical Coating with Ionic Polymers. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2014, 60, 1–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
  112. Garcia-Galan, C.; Dos Santos, J.C.S.; Barbosa, O.; Torres, R.; Pereira, E.B.; Corberan, V.C.; Gonçalves, L.R.B.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Tuning of Lecitase Features via Solid-Phase Chemical Modification: Effect of the Immobilization Protocol. Process Biochem. 2014, 49, 604–616. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  113. Dos Santos, J.C.S.; Garcia-Galan, C.; Rodrigues, R.C.; De Sant’Ana, H.B.; Gonçalves, L.R.B.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Stabilizing Hyperactivated Lecitase Structures through Physical Treatment with Ionic Polymers. Process Biochem. 2014, 49, 1511–1515. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  114. Paiva Souza, P.M.; Carballares, D.; Lopez-Carrobles, N.; Gonçalves, L.R.B.; Lopez-Gallego, F.; Rodrigues, S.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Enzyme-Support Interactions and Inactivation Conditions Determine Thermomyces lanuginosus Lipase Inactivation Pathways: Functional and Florescence Studies. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 191, 79–91. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  115. Rodrigues, R.C.; Barbosa, O.; Ortiz, C.; Berenguer-Murcia, Á.; Torres, R.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Amination of enzymes to improve biocatalyst performance: Coupling genetic modification and physicochemical tools. RSC Adv. 2014, 4, 38350–38374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  116. Kornecki, J.F.; Carballares, D.; Morellon-Sterling, R.; Siar, E.H.; Kashefi, S.; Chafiaa, M.; Arana-Peña, S.; Rios, N.S.; Gonçalves, L.R.B.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Influence of Phosphate Anions on the Stability of Immobilized Enzymes. Effect of Enzyme Nature, Immobilization Protocol and Inactivation Conditions. Process Biochem. 2020, 95, 288–296. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  117. Zaak, H.; Fernandez-Lopez, L.; Velasco-Lozano, S.; Alcaraz-Fructuoso, M.T.; Sassi, M.; Lopez-Gallego, F.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Effect of High Salt Concentrations on the Stability of Immobilized Lipases: Dramatic Deleterious Effects of Phosphate Anions. Process Biochem. 2017, 62, 128–134. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  118. Hernandez, K.; Garcia-Verdugo, E.; Porcar, R.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Hydrolysis of Triacetin Catalyzed by Immobilized Lipases: Effect of the Immobilization Protocol and Experimental Conditions on Diacetin Yield. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2011, 48, 510–517. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
  119. Arana-Peña, S.; Lokha, Y.; Fernández-Lafuente, R. Immobilization on Octyl-Agarose Beads and Some Catalytic Features of Commercial Preparations of Lipase a from Candida antarctica (Novocor ADL): Comparison with Immobilized Lipase B from Candida Antarctica. Biotechnol. Prog. 2019, 35, e2735. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [Green Version]
  120. dos Santos, J.C.S.; Rueda, N.; Gonçalves, L.R.B.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Tuning the Catalytic Properties of Lipases Immobilized on Divinylsulfone Activated Agarose by Altering Its Nanoenvironment. Enzym. Microb. Technol. 2015, 77, 1–7. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
Molecules 27 04486 g001 550
Figure 1. Inactivation courses of TLL-IM unmodified and modified with metallic salt/sodium phosphate. The inactivation was performed with 10 mM Tris buffer at pH 7.0 and 75 °C. Other specifications are described in the Methods section. Unmodified TLL-IM (open squares and dotted line); TLL-IM modified with ZnCl2/sodium phosphate (solid squares); CuCl2/sodium phosphate (solid circles); CoCl2/sodium phosphate (solid triangles).
Figure 1. Inactivation courses of TLL-IM unmodified and modified with metallic salt/sodium phosphate. The inactivation was performed with 10 mM Tris buffer at pH 7.0 and 75 °C. Other specifications are described in the Methods section. Unmodified TLL-IM (open squares and dotted line); TLL-IM modified with ZnCl2/sodium phosphate (solid squares); CuCl2/sodium phosphate (solid circles); CoCl2/sodium phosphate (solid triangles).
Molecules 27 04486 g001
Molecules 27 04486 g002 550
Figure 2. Inactivation courses of L435 unmodified and modified with metallic salt/sodium phosphate. The inactivation was performed with 10 mM Tris buffer at pH 7.0 and 75 °C. Other specifications are described in the Methods section. Unmodified L435 (open squares and dotted line); L435 modified with ZnCl2/sodium phosphate (solid squares); CuCl2/sodium phosphate (solid circles); CoCl2/sodium phosphate (solid triangles).
Figure 2. Inactivation courses of L435 unmodified and modified with metallic salt/sodium phosphate. The inactivation was performed with 10 mM Tris buffer at pH 7.0 and 75 °C. Other specifications are described in the Methods section. Unmodified L435 (open squares and dotted line); L435 modified with ZnCl2/sodium phosphate (solid squares); CuCl2/sodium phosphate (solid circles); CoCl2/sodium phosphate (solid triangles).
Molecules 27 04486 g002
Molecules 27 04486 g003 550
Figure 3. Inactivation courses of RM-IM unmodified and modified with metallic salt/sodium phosphate. The inactivation was performed with 10 mM Tris buffer at pH 7.0 and 60 °C. Other specifications are described in the Methods section. Unmodified RM-IM (open squares and dotted line); RM-IM modified with ZnCl2/sodium phosphate (solid squares); CuCl2/sodium phosphate (solid circles); CoCl2/sodium phosphate (solid triangles).
Figure 3. Inactivation courses of RM-IM unmodified and modified with metallic salt/sodium phosphate. The inactivation was performed with 10 mM Tris buffer at pH 7.0 and 60 °C. Other specifications are described in the Methods section. Unmodified RM-IM (open squares and dotted line); RM-IM modified with ZnCl2/sodium phosphate (solid squares); CuCl2/sodium phosphate (solid circles); CoCl2/sodium phosphate (solid triangles).
Molecules 27 04486 g003
Molecules 27 04486 g004 550
Figure 4. Inactivation courses of LS-IM unmodified and modified with metallic salt/sodium phosphate. The inactivation was performed with 10 mM Tris buffer at pH 7.0 and 60 °C. Other specifications are described in the Methods section. Unmodified LS-IM (open squares and dotted line); LS-IM modified with ZnCl2/sodium phosphate (solid squares); CuCl2/sodium phosphate (solid circles); CoCl2/sodium phosphate (solid triangles).
Figure 4. Inactivation courses of LS-IM unmodified and modified with metallic salt/sodium phosphate. The inactivation was performed with 10 mM Tris buffer at pH 7.0 and 60 °C. Other specifications are described in the Methods section. Unmodified LS-IM (open squares and dotted line); LS-IM modified with ZnCl2/sodium phosphate (solid squares); CuCl2/sodium phosphate (solid circles); CoCl2/sodium phosphate (solid triangles).
Molecules 27 04486 g004
Table
Table 1. Specific activity of different biocatalysts with 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate (pH 7, 25 °C) and 50 mM of triacetin (pH 7, 25 °C). Experiments were performed as described in the Methods section.
Table 1. Specific activity of different biocatalysts with 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate (pH 7, 25 °C) and 50 mM of triacetin (pH 7, 25 °C). Experiments were performed as described in the Methods section.
BiocatalystsActivity (U/g)
TriacetinR MandelateS Mandelate
TLL-IM7.73 ± 0.359.90 ± 0.496.33 ± 0.57
TLL-IM-ZnP13.02 ± 0.647.88 ± 0.275.31 ± 0.18
TLL-IM-CuP10.80 ± 0.448.77 ± 0.375.12 ± 0.26
TLL-IM-CoP4.08 ± 0.198.09 ± 0.404.18 ± 0.32
Table
Table 2. Specific activity of different biocatalysts with 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate (pH 7, 25 °C) and 50 mM of triacetin (pH 7, 25 °C). Experiments were performed as described in the Methods section.
Table 2. Specific activity of different biocatalysts with 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate (pH 7, 25 °C) and 50 mM of triacetin (pH 7, 25 °C). Experiments were performed as described in the Methods section.
BiocatalystsActivity (U/g)
TriacetinR MandelateS Mandelate
L435119.0 ± 5.242.6 ± 1.831.2 ± 1.6
L435-ZnP149.9 ± 7.823.1 ± 0.917.3 ± 0.9
L435-CuP113.9 ± 5.919.4 ± 1.011.5 ± 0.6
L435-CoP116.2 ± 6.913.3 ± 0.66.4 ± 0.4
Table
Table 3. Specific activity of different biocatalysts with 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate and 50 mM of triacetin (pH 7, 25 °C). Experiments were performed as described in the Methods section.
Table 3. Specific activity of different biocatalysts with 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate and 50 mM of triacetin (pH 7, 25 °C). Experiments were performed as described in the Methods section.
BiocatalystsActivity (U/g)
TriacetinR MandelateS Mandelate
RML-IM86.2 ± 4.711.3 ± 0.89.8 ± 0.5
RML-IM-ZnP70.00 ± 3.79.9 ± 0.69.8 ± 0.4
RML-IM-CuP38.4 ± 1.910.2 ± 0.69.8 ± 0.4
RML-IM-CoP69.9 ± 3.810.1 ± 0.59.9 ± 0.2
Table
Table 4. Specific activity of different biocatalysts with 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate and 50 mM of triacetin (pH 7, 25 °C). Experiments were performed as described in the Methods section.
Table 4. Specific activity of different biocatalysts with 50 mM R- or S-methyl mandelate and 50 mM of triacetin (pH 7, 25 °C). Experiments were performed as described in the Methods section.
BiocatalystsActivity (U/g)
TriacetinR MandelateS Mandelate
LS-IM80.5 ± 4.90.92 ± 0.041.29 ± 0.06
LS-IM-ZnP54.9 ± 3.00.73 ± 0.040.67 ± 0.03
LS-IM-CuP63.8 ± 3.31.50 ± 0.090.88 ± 0.06
LS-IM-CoP63.7 ± 3.91.10 ± 0.070.99 ± 0.05
Publisher’s Note: MDPI stays neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Share and Cite

MDPI and ACS Style

Guimarães, J.R.; Carballares, D.; Tardioli, P.W.; Rocha-Martin, J.; Fernandez-Lafuente, R. Tuning Immobilized Commercial Lipase Preparations Features by Simple Treatment with Metallic Phosphate Salts. Molecules 2022, 27, 4486. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27144486

AMA Style

Guimarães JR, Carballares D, Tardioli PW, Rocha-Martin J, Fernandez-Lafuente R. Tuning Immobilized Commercial Lipase Preparations Features by Simple Treatment with Metallic Phosphate Salts. Molecules. 2022; 27(14):4486. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27144486

Chicago/Turabian Style

Guimarães, José R., Diego Carballares, Paulo W. Tardioli, Javier Rocha-Martin, and Roberto Fernandez-Lafuente. 2022. "Tuning Immobilized Commercial Lipase Preparations Features by Simple Treatment with Metallic Phosphate Salts" Molecules 27, no. 14: 4486. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules27144486

Article Metrics

Back to TopTop