See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/230812891

Stabilization of the Cellulase Enzyme Complex as Enzyme Nanoparticle

Article  in  Applied Biochemistry and Biotechnology · September 2012

DOI: 10.1007/s12010-012-9863-9 · Source: PubMed

CITATIONS READS

22 1,132

3 authors:

Imre Hegedüs Jenő Hancsók

Semmelweis University University of Pannonia, Veszprém
53 PUBLICATIONS   187 CITATIONS    969 PUBLICATIONS   2,493 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE SEE PROFILE

Endre Nagy
University of Pannonia, Veszprém
190 PUBLICATIONS   1,619 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

Analysis of mass transfer through biocatalytic membrane reactor View project

Study of catalytic decarboxylation, deoxygenation View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Endre Nagy on 03 January 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383
DOI 10.1007/s12010-012-9863-9

Stabilization of the Cellulase Enzyme Complex

as Enzyme Nanoparticle

Imre Hegedüs & Jenő Hancsók & Endre Nagy

Received: 13 April 2012 / Accepted: 21 August 2012 /

Published online: 7 September 2012
# Springer Science+Business Media, LLC 2012

Abstract The native Celluclast BG cellulase enzyme complex consists of different enzymes
which can also degrade great substrate molecules as native celluloses. This enzyme complex
has been covered by a very thin, a few nanometers thick, polymer layer, in order to improve
its stability. It has been proved that the polymer layer around the enzyme molecules does not
hinder the digestion as great substrates as crystalline cellulose polymer. The stability of the
prepared enzyme nanoparticles (PE) could significantly be increased comparing to that of
the native one what was proved by results of the total cellulose activity measured. The
pretreated enzyme complex holds its activity often a few magnitudes of orders longer in time
than that of the native enzyme complex (enzyme without pretreatment). It retains its activity
at least ten times longer than that of the native one, at a temperature range between 20 and
37 °C. The pretreated enzyme complex can have about 50 % of its original activity during
12 h of incubation at even 80 °C, while the native cellulase one totally lost it during 6 h
incubation time. The activity of PE has not been significantly reduced even at extreme pH
values, namely in the pH range of 1.5 to 12.

Keywords Enzyme activity . Enzyme stabilization . Single enzyme nanoparticle . Enzyme

complex . Cellulase

Abbreviations
AOT Sodium bis(2-ethylhexyl) sulfosuccinate or aerosol OT
MAPS 3-(trimethoxysilyl)propyl methacrylate
NE Natural Celluclast BG enzyme complex (Novozymes)
PE Pretreated Celluclast BG enzyme complex

I. Hegedüs : E. Nagy (*)

Research Institute of Chemical and Process Engineering, FIT, University of Pannonia, Egyetem út. 10,
8200 Veszprém, Hungary
e-mail: [email protected]

J. Hancsók
Department of MOL Hydrocarbon and Coal Processing, University of Pannonia, Egyetem út. 10,
8200 Veszprém, Hungary
Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383 1373

SEN Single enzyme nanoparticle

TEM Transmission electron microscope

Introduction

The enzymatic degradation of cellulose or lignocellulosic biomass to glucose under indus-

trial conditions is a crucial point in industrial bioethanol production [1]. The utilization of
the lignocellulosic biomass is important to get more renewable sources for biofuel produc-
tion [2]. These techniques are intensively investigated worldwidely to elaborate an economic
technology for it [3]. The enzyme stabilization techniques could essentially contribute to this
goal. Cellulose is a very stable, renewable natural polymer that is present in all plants and
algae. Cellulose is derived from D-glucose units, which condense through β(1→4)-glyco-
sidic bonds [4]. Cellulase enzyme complex comprises of three types of enzymes: endoglu-
canase, which cleave internal β-1,4-glucosidic bonds; exoglucanase, which processively
acts on the reducing and non-reducing ends of cellulose chains to release short-chain cello-
oligosaccharides; and β-glucosidase, which hydrolyze soluble cello-oligosaccharides (e.g.,
cellobiose) to glucose. The cooperative action of the three enzymes is required to achieve
efficient enzymatic hydrolysis of lignocellulosic biomass [1–3, 5]. This complex is a
functional unit, where different enzymes work at a strict molar ratio. There is often covalent
interaction between the enzyme molecules of cellulase enzyme complexes producing cellu-
losome [6].
Celluclast BG enzyme complex, extracted from Trichoderma reesei, investigated in both
its native and pretreated forms in this work, does not build up as cellulosome, but the
enzymes are working synergetically during the cellulose degradation. Each individual
enzyme has a well-defined spatial order [7]; this self-arranged supramolecular unit is one
type of hyperstructure [8]. A hyperstructure is a large, spatial association of cellular
constituents (e.g., enzymes) that performs a particular function because the constituents
are associated with one another [8].
Improvement in enzyme stability is an important goal of practical applications of
enzymes for digestion of the lignocellulosic biomass. Classical techniques for improving
the stability of the enzymes are enzyme immobilization to the surface or inner cavity of a
carrier, modification of the surface of the enzyme, protein engineering, reaction medium
engineering, and cross-linked enzyme crystals [9]. Recently, growing interest is being seen
in using nanoparticles as carriers to achieve enzyme immobilization in order to increase
enzyme stability. Two main routes [A) and B)] can be distinguished in synthesizing nano-
sized enzyme carriers [10]. The route A, the so-called grafting onto method, involves two
main steps. The first one is the synthesis of a nanocarrier material (Fig. 1a). Wide range of
particles can serve as a carrier, such as silica nanoparticle [11], metal nanoparticle [12], or
different types of magnetic nanoparticles [13–21], mesoporous materials such as mesopo-
rous organosilica [22], hollowed metal or silica nano-sphere [23, 24], magnetic mesoporous
carbon [25], hyperbranched polymer [26], or dendrimer [27, 28]. As second step, enzyme
molecules are attached to the surfaces or onto the inner cavities of the carrier materials. The
route B, the “grafting from” modification, means in situ growth of carrier material from the
surface of the enzyme molecules [10]. Nanostructure formation and attachment of this
structure to the enzyme are integrated into a single step (Fig. 1b). The nanostructure can
be an inorganic layer (e.g., mesoporous silica [29], magnetic nanolayer [30]), or polymer gel
(organic [31] or an organic/inorganic hybrid polymer [32, 33]; Fig. 1b).
Single enzyme nanoparticles (abbreviated as PE, pretreated enzyme) applied in this work
are prepared by the “grafting from” method [32–34]. Single enzyme nanoparticles means
1374 Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383

A) Enzymes immobilized onto structures B) In situ synthesis from the enzyme surface
(„grafting onto”) („grafting from”)
a) Nanoparticles as b) Immobiloization on Single enzyme nanoparticles: individual
enzyme carriers nano-sized carriers enzyme molecules with nano-layer
With inorganic layer With polymer layer
E E E E E
E E E
CdS Au E E
E E
E E E E
E E E E E
Fe O
E E
3

4
Metal nanoparticles [12]
Polymer gel Mesoporous Superpara- Hybrid (organic/
structure [10] silica [29] magnetic Acryl
E inorganic) copolymer
E E E clusters [30]
E polymer [31]
Fe3O4 E E E
E E E [32, 33]
E
E

E E

Magnetic Hollowed Hyperbranched E = enzyme molecule

nanoparticles sphere polymers [26]
[13-21] [23, 24] = kovalent linkage

Fig. 1 Nanotechnological methods for enzyme stabilization. The new approach is the reduction of the size of
the enzyme carriers using (1) a metal or b magnetic nanoparticles as carriers, (2) encapsulation into a
hyperbranched polymers and b dendrimers. (3) Single enzyme nanoparticles means single enzyme molecules
encapsulated with a polymer network [α) organic/inorganic hybrid polymer or β) nanogel] b inorganic layer
[(α) hollow metal sphere, (β) mesoporous silica, or (γ) magnetic nanolayer]

encapsulation of single enzyme molecules within a few nanometers thick layer [32] which
results in the stabilization of enzyme activity without any serious limitation of the substrate
transport from solution to the active site of the enzyme [33, 34]. The synthesis of PE is
available via a more or less simple laboratorial technique [32–34]. This technique was
previously applied on the chymotrypsin enzyme only, and the activity of SEN enzymes
was investigated using relatively small substrate molecules as N-acetyl-L-tyrosine ethyl ester
[32, 33]. It was not clear that the covered enzyme nanoparticles can digest large substrate
molecules, for example cellulose macromolecules, which is crucially important for hydro-
lysis of cellulosic biomass in order to produce biofuel. The total cellulase activity of the
pretreated and the native enzymes has been measured in order to get how strongly the
stability of the enzyme can be improved by its pretreatment. For it, the hydrolysis of
Whatman type filter paper was used. This method was applied since 1984, when the
Commission on Biotechnology of the International Union of Pure and Applied Chemistry
proposed a number of standard procedures for the measurement of cellulase activity [35].
That is why this technique has been applied to measure the activity of the cellulase enzyme
complex, and cellulose filter paper has been used as a substrate (Whatman type filter paper).
The main aim of this work is to prove that the pretreatment method used can serve enzyme
nanoparticles with much longer stability than the native one applying it for digestion of the
large polysaccharide molecules.

Materials and Methods

For the preparation of enzyme nanoparticles using cellulase enzyme complex, the following
chemical compounds were used: Celluclast BG enzyme complex from T. reesei
(Novozymes), acryloyl chloride, 1,3-bis[tris(hydroxymethyl)methylamino]propane or Bis-
Tris propane, 3,5-dinitro-salicylic acid (Sigma), sodium bis(2-ethylhexyl) sulphosuccinate or
Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383 1375

aerosol OT (AOT), methacryloxypropyltrimetoxysilane (MAPS), 2,2-azobis(2,4-dimethyl-

valeronitrile; Fluka), disodium hydrogen phosphate, potassium dihydrogen phosphate, cal-
cium chloride, 2-propanol, and n-hexane (Spektrum-3d, Scharlau).
Julaba F12 cryostat was used to keep the reaction mixture at 0 °C. The polymerization
step in the synthesis of single enzyme nanoparticles of Celluclast BG enzyme (PE) was
carried out in a double-walled stirred vessel (Fig. 2). The solution was irradiated by an UV
lamp made by Vilber Lourmat. Filtration of the surface-polymerized enzymes was carried
out with a syringe filter (pore size, 0.1 μm) made by Millipore. UV spectra were recorded
and enzyme activity measurements carried out by means of a Biochrom 4060 spectropho-
tometer made by Pharmacia. A New Brunswick Scientific G24 incubator shaker was used
for the stability measurements. Malvern Zetasizer (Nano series Nano-ZS, Malvern Instru-
ments Ltd. Worcestershire, England) was applied for detection of size distribution of the
enzyme nanoparticles.

Preparation of Cellulase Enzyme Nanoparticles

The preparation process of cellulase enzyme nanoparticles (PE) has three steps (Fig. 3). The
detailed description of the procedure was given earlier [32–34, 36].
1. The first step is a modification of Celluclast BG enzyme complex (native enzyme, NE)
and its solution in a hydrophobic medium following the method of Wang et al. [37] (1)
Primary amino groups on the surface of the enzyme are modified by acryloyl chloride.
One hundred milligrams of NE was dissolved in 50 ml distilled water. Forty microliters
of acryloyl chloride was added to the solution under 0 °C (the unreacted acryloyl
chloride was removed using dialysis membrane with cutoff 10 kDa after half an hour
of reaction time). Then, the solution was mixed with 50 ml double concentrated stock
solution. The resulting solution contained 1 mg/ml acryloylated NE, 1 % (v/v) isopro-
panol, and 2 mM CaCl2 dissolved in 10 mM Bis-Tris buffer at pH07.0. There was no
measurable decrease in enzyme activity after the modification of NE with acryloyl

Fig. 2 UV irradiation for the

polymerization on the surface
of the single enzyme molecules
Thermometer

Hexane phase
365 nm
UV UV Double-walled vessel
irradiation
lamp Water cooling

Magnetic stirrer

Side view
1376 Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383

Protein Polymerization Cross

P P
modification on the surface P linkage P

Fig. 3 Synthesis steps for preparation of single enzyme nanoparticles

chloride. (2) the modified NE was dissolved in hexane media using the “hydrophobic
ion pairing” method [38, 39]. Fifty milliliters of an aqueous enzyme solution was added
to an equal volume of hexane containing 4 mM AOT surfactant. The resulting two-
phase mixture was stirred and centrifuged at 7,000×g at room temperature for 10 min.
2. After that, the solution of the acryloylated NE in hexane, 3-(trimethoxysilyl)propyl
methacrylate (MAPS, 1,325 μl) was added to 10 mg acryloylated NE in 50 ml hexane.
Free radical polymerization was initiated between the vinyl groups of MAPS monomers
and acryloylated NE under UV irradiation (365 nm), in the presence of 0.8 mg/ml 2,2′-
azobis-(2,4-dimethylvaleronitrile) as initiator. This polymerization step was performed
under UV light in a double-walled and water-cooled glass vessel, for 8 h at room
temperature (UV light of this wavelength is not absorbed by the glass wall).
3. The final (third) step was the hydrolysis and condensation of the trimethoxysilyl
functional group. This process was carried out in an aqueous phase. For this reason,
an equal volume of aqueous phosphate buffer (10 mM phosphate buffer, pH07.8) was
added to the hexane phase. The resulting two-phase system was stirred with a magnetic
stirrer at 300 rpm at 22 °C for 5 min. The aqueous buffer phase was filtered using a
syringe filter unit (maximum pore size, 0.1 μm).

Characterization of the Enzyme Nanoparticles

The morphology and the size of the resulting PE were examined by a JEOL-1200X
transmission electron microscope (TEM) at an accelerated voltage of 80 kV. The procedure
of the imaging was rather simple; the sample did not need specific preparation for the
measurement. One drop of the PE solution was enough to get detectable image by the TEM.
The drops of PE samples were dried, and after the drying, the enzyme nanoparticles were
detected.

Measurement and Calculation of Enzyme Concentration

The concentration of the natural Celluclast BG enzyme complex (NE) was determined by
taking calibration measurements of the enzyme absorption at 280 nm. There was no found
difference between the absorption properties of modified and native enzymes. But the
concentration of the pretreated Celluclast BG enzyme complex (PE) could not be obtained
from the measurement of the UV light absorption because the polymer layer prepared
around the enzymes also has got high absorption at wavelength 280 nm. The PE concen-
tration in water was therefore calculated from the initial concentration of modified NE in
hexane (in this case the absorption was measurable), assuming that after the polymerization
step the full amount of PE was transferred from the hexane into the water phase, and the
amount of PE precipitated during the phase transfer process was negligible.
Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383 1377

Measurement of Enzyme Activity

Whatman filter paper was used as substrate (filter paper unit, FPU), and total cellulase
activity was measured using DNS probe according the instructions of Ghose [35, 40]. One
milliliter of 0.05 M citrat buffer (pH04.8) and 0.5 ml of the cellulase (NE or PE) stick
solution were mixed, and filter paper sample was added into the mixture as a substrate (1×
6 cm Whatman no. 1. standard filter paper), and the mixture was incubated at 50 °C for
60 min without shaking. After the incubation, the enzyme–substrate mixture was cooled, and
the next steps were the standard activity measurement (DNS probe was used to measure the
total cellulase activity after the treatment) [40].

Measurement of Enzyme Stability

The heat stability of native and pretreated enzymes was measured at the following method:
the stick solutions were incubated at the desired temperatures (from 37 to 80 °C). The
incubated stock solutions (0.5 ml) of NE and PE were sampled to the activity measurement
(see above). Three samples were measured, and mean values were calculated. The relative
activity was calculated as the ratio of residual activity to the initial activity.
The pH stability was measured similarly to the activity measurements: using 1 h incuba-
tion under different pH values at 50 °C. Whatman filter paper was used as substrate (FPU).

Results and Discussion

The size distribution, structural characteristics, and activity of the pretreated enzyme nano-
particles (PE) were investigated. Activity of PE product was also measured by incubating it
under different, sometimes even extreme, conditions. These results are briefly summarized
in the next subsections.

Size Distribution of PE During the Preparation Process

The aim of the pretreatment is to form single enzyme nanoparticles where the single enzymes
are covered by thin polymer layer. The size distribution gives information on the size of these
aggregations as well as on what portion of enzyme forms aggregations. If the average size of the
resulting PE product is in the same range as the original size of the NE, one can conclude that
there is no detectable aggregation in the PE product. Otherwise, one can detect the amount of
the aggregated enzymes during each step of the synthesis process. The size distribution of the
PE was measured by Zetasizer after the preparation. The size distribution of the initial native
cellulose enzyme complexes (NE in aqueous solution, blue line), the surface-modified enzymes
dissolved in hexane (NE in hexane solution, green line), and pretreated enzymes (PE in aqueous
solution, black line) are illustrated in Fig. 4. The average particle size of native Celluclast BG
enzyme complex is about 4 nm, and that of modified NE dissolved in hexane by ion pair is
9 nm, while that of PE product in water is about 11 nm. That could mean that the thickness of
the polymer layer formed around the enzyme is about 3 nm.

Structural Characterization of Pretreated Enzymes

Transmission electron microscopic images can prove that the polymer layer is really formed
around the enzyme molecules. Figure 5 shows that the resulting enzyme nanoparticles have
1378 Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383

NE/hexane

NE/water
PE/water

Record 160: PE-8-3/3 1

Record 175: NE 2 mg/ml in 0.2 M buffer after 20’ sonication and filtration 1
Record 186: NE-16-1/hexane 1

Fig. 4 Size distribution of aqueous solution of the native cellulase enzyme complex (NE, blue line), surface-
modified cellulase enzymes dissolved in hexane (NE, green line), and pretreated cellulase enzymes dissolved
in water (PE, black line)

hollow spherical structures on the electron microscopic images. The surrounding silica-containing
nano-layer is electrodense and results in a dark layer around the enzyme molecules on the picture.
The size of the PE particles is about 5–30 nm (Fig. 5). The results obtained confirm that
this technique is suitable to realize the enzyme complex nanoparticles making smaller
polymer layer around single enzyme molecules of the enzyme complex which are separable
(smaller particles in Fig. 5), or in some cases, a few enzymes can be included in the
nanoparticles (greater particles in Fig. 5). (Larger particles on the TEM image could be
produced by agglomeration of nanoparticles during the preparation of the sample to these
measurements). The thickness of the polymer layer can be estimated to be about 3 nm
according to Fig. 5. The cellulase enzyme complex contains three different types of enzymes
with a different function. The diameter of cellulosome in the case of Clostridium thermo-
cellum is about 18 nm [41]. Celluclast BG enzymes cannot make cellulosome (there is no
covalent binding between the enzymes), but the precise spatial arrangement of enzymes
during their cooperative cellulose digestion is critical for the good function.

Activity of Enzyme Complexes Using Native Substrates

The question to be answered is whether single enzyme nanoparticles can degrade large
substrate molecules as polysaccharides, as well. It can be imaged that the polymer layer

Fig. 5 TEM images of the

pretreated Celluclast BG
enzyme complexes (PE)
Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383 1379

around the enzyme molecules is not porous enough to allow the free diffusion of larger
substrate molecules from the solution to the active center of the enzyme. The activity of the
enzyme nanoparticles indicates whether the substrate molecules can connect to the active
site of the enzyme or not. Natural crystalline cellulose polymer was used as substrate. Most
cellulases have a catalytic domain (the active site of the enzyme) and a cellulose binding
domain that anchors the enzyme onto the cellulose surface and orients the cellulose fiber
towards the tunnel containing the active site [42, 43]. Total activity of enzyme complex was
measured both of NE and PE. Turnover number or molar activity of cellulase enzyme
complex can not be calculated because the activity of cellulase enzyme complex is deter-
mined by different enzymes with a different molecular weight. For this reason absolute
activity of celluclast BG enzyme complex was expressed in units/mg. The absolute value of
the activity of natural Celluclast BG enzyme complex (NE) was 2.84 Unit/mg. In the case of
the pretreated enzyme complex (PE) the absolute value of the activity was 0.746 Unit/mg.
(This value was applied to a pure enzyme mass without the weight of the polymer layer
around the enzyme molecules.) The absolute value of the activity of PE has 26.27 % of the
activity of NE which is acceptable in practical points of view. It can be stated that enzyme
nanoparticles of Celloclast BG enzyme complexes with a polymer layer (PE) can degrade as
great and stable substrates as native crystalline cellulose polymer. That should mean that the
polymer layer around the enzyme molecules is thin, porous, and flexible enough to enable
the interaction between the cellulose binding sites of the cellulase enzymes inside the
polymer layer and the cellulose polymer outside the polymer layer of PE. Thus, this layer
does not hinder the formation of enzyme–substrate complex and does not make practically
diffusive limitation to it. It means that the polymer layer does not limit the function of
domains of cellulase enzymes.

Temperature Stability of Pretreated Enzymes Under Different Conditions

The pretreatment of an enzyme can serve to form a much more stable enzyme than the native
one. The PE (continuous line in Fig. 6) retains about 40 % of its initial activity value after a
110-day period, while the NE (not pretreated, dotted line) Celluclast has lost its activity after
11 days at room temperature (20 °C). The results show that the stability of the PE is at least
one order of magnitude better than that of the NE. After the first short and quickly
decreasing period of the activity of PE, the gradient of the stability’s decrease of the PE is

Fig. 6 The relative activity (activ- 1.0

ity at different times related to that
of the starting time) of PE and of
the NE at 20 °C without stirring 0.8
Relative activity

(X native cellulase enzymes, O

pretreated cellulase enzymes)
0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 40 80 120
Time [days]
1380 Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383

Fig. 7 Stability of PE and NE 1.0

at 37 °C and stirring speed
of 150 rpm (X native cellulase
enzymes, O pretreated cellulase 0.8
enzymes)

Relative activity
0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time [days]

much lower than that of the NE (Fig. 6). The NE loses its activity within about 15 days,
while the pretreated one retains more than 50 % of its original activity. This activity lowers
slowly during the 120 days investigated. The prepared enzyme keeps about 35 % of its
starting activity even after this long period of time.
Similarly, the activity of PE is higher than that of the NE incubating them at 37 °C under
stirring conditions with 150 rpm. The NE loses its activity during 6 days under the above
conditions, but about 40 % of its starting activity of PE remains during a 100-day incubation
time (Fig. 7). The pretreated enzyme gradually also loses its activity as a function of time,
but this decrease is much slower than that of the native one.
At extreme temperature, namely 80 °C, and without stirring, the activity of the PE is also
much higher than that of the native one. The NE loses its whole activity after 6 h of
incubation time, while the PE retains about 40 % of its original activity after a 12-
h incubation time (Fig. 8).
The activity change of the PE and NE during 1-h incubation time is plotted in Fig. 9,
measured at different temperatures between at 50 and 80 °C. The procedure of these
measurements is given in the “Measurement of Enzyme Activity” section. There is no
difference between the activity of NE and PE at 50 °C for 1-h incubation, but increasing

Fig. 8 Stability of PE and NE 1.0

at 80 °C (X native cellulase
enzymes, O pretreated cellulase
enzymes) 0.8
Relative activity

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
0 4 8 12
Time [hours]
Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383 1381

Fig. 9 Activities of PE and NE

at difference temperatures (X 1
native cellulase enzymes, O
pretreated cellulase enzymes)
0.8

Relative activity
0.6

0.4

0.2

0
50 60 70 80
T [oC]

the temperatures, the activity of NE strongly lowers, while the activity of PE does not change
practically. The activity of NE is decreased down to about 10 % of its activity at 80 °C, while
that of PE remains practically at its starting value.

pH Stability of Pretreated Enzyme Complex

The PE retains its activity not only at extremely high temperatures but also at an extremely
wide pH range. The activity of the NE enzyme complex decreases below 15–25 % of its
activity measured at pH06.0, in the pH range of 1.5 and 12.0, while the activity of the
pretreated enzyme PE changes only slightly (Fig. 10). Further investigations are needed to
clarify what is the reason for this surprising property.

Conclusion

The Celluclast BG enzyme complex has been covered by a few nanometers thick polymer
layer in order to improve its stability. This layer isolates the enzymes from the environment
Fig. 10 pH stability of PE and 1.2
NE (X native cellulase enzymes,
O pretreated cellulase enzymes)
1.0
Relative activity

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0.0
1 4 7 10 13
pH
1382 Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383

which can act positively on its stability. It has been proved that the pretreated enzymes could
be much more stable than the native, not pretreated enzymes even in extreme temperatures
and pH environment. The covered Celluclast BG enzyme complex (PE) retains its activity at
least ten times longer than that of the native one, at a temperature range between 20 and 37 °C.
The pretreated enzyme complex can hold back about 50 % of its original activity after 12 h of
incubation time at even 80 °C, while the native Celluclast BG enzyme complex (NE) totally
loses it during 6 h of incubation. The activity of PE has not been reduced significantly even at
extreme pH values as 1.5 and 12.0. Consequently, the pretreatment method can essentially
widen the industrial application of the enzyme-catalyzed bioreaction under more extreme
environmental conditions, as well.

Acknowledgments This work was supported by the National Office for Research and Technology (NKTH
TECH_08_A3/2-2008-0385) and by the National Development Agency grant (TÁMOP-4.2.1/B-09/1/KONV-
2010-0003). The authors wish to thank József Takács (Department of Anatomy, Histology and Embryology of
Semmelweis University, Budapest) for TEM images.

References

1. Lynd, L. R., Weimer, P. J., van Zyl, W. H., & Pretorius, I. S. (2002). Microbiology and Molecular Biology
Reviews, 66(3), 506–577.
2. Sánchez, J. Ó., & Cardona, C. A. (2008). Bioresource Technology, 99, 5270–5295.
3. Kumar, P., Barrett, D. M., Delwiche, M. J., & Stroeve, P. (2009). Industrial and Engineering Chemistry
Research, 48, 3713–3729.
4. Klemm, D., Heublein, B., Fink, H.-P., & Bohn, A. (2005). ChemInform, 36(36), 3358.
5. Schwarz, W. H. (2001). Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology, 56(5–6), 634–649.
6. Shoham, Y., Lamed, R., & Bayer, E. A. (1999). Trends in Microbiology, 7(7), 275–281.
7. Mattinen, M.-L., Linder, M., Drakenberg, T., & Annila, A. (1998). European Journal of Biochemistry,
256(2), 279–286.
8. Norris, V., den Blaauwen, T., Doi, R. H., Harshey, R. M., Janniere, L., Jiménez-Sánchez, A., et al. (2007).
Annual Review of Microbiology, 61, 309–329.
9. O'fagain, C. (2003). Enzyme and Microbial Technology, 33, 137–149.
10. Ge, J., Lu, D., Liu, Z., & Liu, Z. (2009). Biochemical Engineering Journal, 44(1), 53–69.
11. Liu, W., Zhang, S., & Wang, P. (2009). Journal of Biotechnology, 139(1), 102–107.
12. Hong, R., Fischer, N. O., Verma, A., Goodman, C. M., Emrick, T., & Rotello, V. M. (2004). Journal of the
American Chemical Society, 126(3), 739–743.
13. Saiyed, Z. M., Sharma, S., Godawat, R., Telang, S. D., & Ramchand, C. N. (2007). Journal of
Biotechnology, 131(3), 240–244.
14. Hong, J., Gong, P., Xu, D., Dong, L., & Yao, S. (2007). Journal of Biotechnology, 128(3), 597–605.
15. Zhao, M., Wang, W., & Yang, C. (2008). Journal of Biotechnology, 136(Suppl.1), S435.
16. Dong, Q., Ouyang, L.-M., Yu, H.-L., & Xu, J.-H. (2010). Carbohydrate Research, 345, 1622–1626.
17. Huang, C.-L., Cheng, W.-C., Yang, J.-C., Chi, M.-C., Chen, J.-H., Lin, H.-P., et al. (2010). Journal of
Industrial Microbiology and Biotechnology, 37, 717–725.
18. Andrad, L. H., Rebelo, L. P., Netto, C. G. C. M., & Toma, H. E. (2010). Journal of Molecular Catalysis B:
Enzymatic, 66(1–2), 55–62.
19. Rebelo, L. P., Netto, C. G. C. M., Toma, H. E., & Andrade, L. H. (2010). Journal of the Brazilian
Chemical Society, 21(8), 1537–1542.
20. Konwarh, R., Kalita, D., Mahanta, C., Mandal, M., & Karak, N. (2010). Applied Microbiology and
Biotechnology, 87, 1983–1992.
21. Cui, Y., Li, Y., Yang, Y., Liu, X., Lei, L., Zhou, L., et al. (2010). Journal of Biotechnology, 150(1), 171–
174.
22. Na, W., Wei, Q., Lan, J.-N., Nie, Z.-R., Sun, H., & Li, Q.-Y. (2010). Microporous and Mesoporous
Materials, 134, 72–78.
23. Kumar, R., Maitra, A. N., Patanjali, P. K., & Sharma, P. (2005). Biomaterials, 26, 6743–6753.
24. Kumar, R. S., Das, S., & Maitra, A. (2005). Journal of Colloid and Interface Science, 284, 358–361.
Appl Biochem Biotechnol (2012) 168:1372–1383 1383

25. Yu, J., Tu, J., Zhao, F., & Zeng, B. (2010). Journal of Solid State Electrochemistry, 14, 1595–1600.
26. Ge, Y., Ming, Y., Lu, D., Zhang, M., & Liu, Z. (2007). Biochemical Engineering Journal, 36(2), 93–99.
27. Zeng, Y.-L., Huang, H.-W., Jiang, J.-H., Tian, M.-N., Li, C.-X., Shen, G.-L., et al. (2007). Analytica
Chimica Acta, 604(2), 170–176.
28. Yao, K., Zhu, Y., Yang, X., & Li, C. (2008). Materials Science and Engineering: C, 28(8), 1236–1241.
29. Naik, R. R., Tomczak, M. M., Luckarift, H. R., Spain, J. C., & Stonea, M. O. (2004). Chemical
Communications, 15, 1684–1685.
30. Yang, Z., Shihui, S., & Chunjing, Z. (2008). Biochemical and Biophysical Research Communications,
367, 169–175.
31. Yan, M., Ge, Y., Liu, Z., & Ouyang, P. K. (2006). Journal of the American Chemical Society, 128, 11008–
11009.
32. Kim, J., & Grate, J. W. (2003). Nano Letters, 3(9), 1219–1222.
33. Kim, J., Grate, J. W., & Wang, P. (2006). Chemical Engineering Science, 61(3), 1017–1026.
34. Hegedüs, I., & Nagy, E. (2009). Chemical Engineering Science, 64, 1053–1060.
35. Dashtban, M., Maki, M., Leung, K. T., Mao, C., & Qin, W. (2010). Critical Reviews in Biotechnology, 30
(4), 302–309.
36. Hegedüs, I., & Nagy, E. (2009). Hungarian Journal of Industrial Chemistry, 37(2), 123–130.
37. Wang, P., Sergeeva, M. V., Lim, L., & Dordick, J. S. (1997). Nature Biotechnology, 15, 789–793.
38. Meyer, J. D., & Manning, M. C. (1998). Pharmaceutical Research, 15(2), 188–193.
39. Paradkar, V. M., & Dordick, J. S. (1994). Journal of the American Chemical Society, 116, 5009–5010.
40. Ghose, T. K. (1987). Pure and Applied Chemistry, 59(2), 257–268.
41. Uversky, V., & Kataeva, I. A. (2006). Cellulosome. In Molecular anatomy and physiology of proteina-
ceous machines. New York: Nova Science.
42. Gilkes, N. R., Henrissat, B., Kilburn, D. G., Miller, R. C., & Warren, R. A. J. (1991). Microbiological
Reviews, 55, 303–315.
43. Zhao, X., Rignall, T. R., McCabe, C., Adney, W. S., & Himmel, M. E. (2008). Chemical Physics Letters,
460, 284–288.

View publication stats