ACS Publications. Most Trusted. Most Cited. Most Read
My Activity
CONTENT TYPES

Cellobiose Dehydrogenase Aryl Diazonium Modified Single Walled Carbon Nanotubes: Enhanced Direct Electron Transfer through a Positively Charged Surface

View Author Information
Department of Analytical Chemistry/Biochemistry, Lund University, P.O. Box 124, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden
ACIB GmbH c/o Food Biotechnology Laboratory, Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Muthgasse 18, 1190 Vienna, Austria
§ APART-fellow of the Austrian Academy of Sciences at the Department of Analytical Chemistry/Biochemistry, Lund University, P.O. Box 124, 221 00 Lund, Sweden
School of Chemistry, The University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia
Cite this: Anal. Chem. 2011, 83, 8, 3042–3049
Publication Date (Web):March 18, 2011
https://doi.org/10.1021/ac103250b

Copyright © 2011 American Chemical Society. This publication is licensed under these Terms of Use.

  • Open Access

Article Views

3448

Altmetric

-

Citations

LEARN ABOUT THESE METRICS
PDF (5 MB)

Abstract

One of the challenges in the field of biosensors and biofuel cells is to establish a highly efficient electron transfer rate between the active site of redox enzymes and electrodes to fully access the catalytic potential of the biocatalyst and achieve high current densities. We report on very efficient direct electron transfer (DET) between cellobiose dehydrogenase (CDH) from Phanerochaete sordida (PsCDH) and surface modified single walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT). Sonicated SWCNTs were adsorbed on the top of glassy carbon electrodes and modified with aryl diazonium salts generated in situ from p-aminobenzoic acid and p-phenylenediamine, thus featuring at acidic pH (3.5 and 4.5) negative or positive surface charges. After adsorption of PsCDH, both electrode types showed excellent long-term stability and very efficient DET. The modified electrode presenting p-aminophenyl groups produced a DET current density of 500 μA cm−2 at 200 mV vs normal hydrogen reference electrode (NHE) in a 5 mM lactose solution buffered at pH 3.5. This is the highest reported DET value so far using a CDH modified electrode and comes close to electrodes using mediated electron transfer. Moreover, the onset of the electrocatalytic current for lactose oxidation started at 70 mV vs NHE, a potential which is 50 mV lower compared to when unmodified SWCNTs were used. This effect potentially reduces the interference by oxidizable matrix components in biosensors and increases the open circuit potential in biofuel cells. The stability of the electrode was greatly increased compared with unmodified but cross-linked SWCNTs electrodes and lost only 15% of the initial current after 50 h of constant potential scanning.

Efficient electron transfer between redox enzymes and electrodes is a major issue in the development of biosensors and biofuel cells. Most commonly, large distances (above 20 Å) prevent direct electron transfer (DET) between the prosthetic group in the active site and the electrode. (1, 2) Mediated electron transfer (MET) employs redox mediators to shuttle redox equivalents or allow electron hopping between the enzyme and the electrode and has been widely applied to solve this problem. Good sensitivities and high current densities have been demonstrated for different biosensors and biofuel cells based on MET. (3-8) On the other side, DET between the enzyme and the electrode surface would obviate problems associated with MET (e.g., leaking or limited stability of redox mediators, expensive heavy metal complexes, potential toxicity of mediator), allow a more simple design of the electrode, and reduce the number of additional components, which have to be added and optimized. (9) When implanted or deposited after use, DET based biosensors or biofuel cells cannot release environmentally hazardous, potentially toxic mediators or their degradation products.
It is well-known that DET either requires a close proximity of the active site of the redox enzyme to the protein surface (e.g., cytochrome c peroxidase) (3, 10) or needs a connection with the protein surface by a built in electron transfer pathway constructed by a chain of redox active cofactors (e.g., NiFe hydrogenaes) (1, 2, 11) or by an electric wire. (12-16) DET is therefore rarely observed; it was shown for only 5% of the currently known redox enzymes. (3, 17) Moreover, even if the prerequisites for DET are given, the correct orientation of the active site and vicinity to the electrode surface are required for high electron transfer rates. (2) DET is therefore difficult to achieve, and an optimized electrode surface is required. The most commonly employed electrode modifiers for DET are self-assembled monolayers (SAM) of functionalized thiols on gold, which facilitate the ordered immobilization of proteins. (18-22) Similar to the modification with thiols, but more stable and with the possibility to be employed on both metal and carbon surfaces, is the modification with functionalized aryl diazonium salts. (23-26) Corgier et al. introduced in 2005 the use of diazonium-modified antibodies for the direct electrically addressable immobilization of proteins. (27) In 2006, Polsky et al. showed a high direct heterogenenous electron transfer for horseradish peroxidase covalently bonded to carboxyl terminated aryl diazonium salt modified electrodes. (28) More recently, Blanford et al. used aryl diazonium coupling to attach anthracene-2-diazonium on a glassy carbon electrode surface to create the equivalent of an “electric plug” to achieve high DET currents with Pycnoporus cinnabarinus laccase. (29) In recent years, the currents obtained from both DET and MET based electrodes were increased by modifications based on nanomaterials such as single walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNTs). (3, 30, 31) These can improve current densities by two mechanisms: (i) by functioning as nanoscaled electrical wires, which facilitate the contact of the active sites of redox enzymes (32, 33) and (ii) by generating a large surface area for protein binding. (6, 7, 30-34) In 2001, Bahr and Tour modified SWCNTs with in situ generation of functionalized aryl diazonium species. (35)
Cellobiose dehydrogenase (EC 1.1.99.18, CDH) is one of the redox enzymes capable of DET, which is a result of its two-domain structure. (36) The extracellular, glycosylated flavocytochrome is formed by basidiomycete and ascomycete fungi and is believed to be involved in lignocellulose degradation. Depending on the origin, CDHs show different substrate specificities, but in general, they all oxidize β-1,4-linked di- and oligosaccharides (e.g., cellobiose, cellodextrins, and lactose). Some ascomycete CDHs may also oxidize monosaccharides (e.g., glucose). In the catalytic reaction, 2H+/2e are donated to the FAD cofactor in the larger flavodehydrogenase domain (DHCDH). The electrons are transferred either directly from the FAD to one- or two-electron acceptors or sequentially by intramolecular electron transfer (IET) to the haem b cofactor located in the smaller cytochrome domain (CYTCDH), which can act as an electron transfer mediator between DHCDH and an electrode (DET step). Because of their carbohydrate oxidizing activity, CDHs have been employed in DET based amperometric lactose biosensors (37, 38) and recently also in lactose or glucose powered biofuel cells. (32-34, 39, 40) CDH from the basidiomycete Phanerochaete sordida (PsCDH) is an acidic enzyme with respect to its pH optima and its isoelectric point (pI). (41, 42) To improve the electron transfer efficiency between CYTPsCDH and electrodes, SWCNTs were adsorbed on the top of glassy carbon electrodes and further modified with in situ generated aryl diazonium salts starting from p-aminobenzoic acid and p-phenylenediamine. We have chosen phenyl-COOH (COOH-PD) and phenyl-NH2 (NH2-PD) moieties, because they are present in their deprotonated (carboxyphenyl group pKa = 2.8) or protonated state (aminophenyl group pKa = 4.6) at the investigated pH values of 4.5 and 3.5, respectively. PsCDH was specifically chosen for its very good DET properties (10, 22, 32, 33, 37, 38) and the low isoelectric point (a relatively high abundance of acidic amino acids). This study aimed at investigating the effect of negatively/positively charged SWCNTs on the DET characteristics obtained with a negatively charged protein moiety (CYTCDH) with respect to current density and stability of the produced electrodes. This study is also motivated by the fact that third generation biosensors and biofuel cell electrodes exhibit much lower current densities than their equivalents based on MET. If there is a way to drastically increase the current density through a higher percentage of immobilized redox enzymes orientated toward DET, much would be gained both for analytical as well as other types applications for third generation based bioelectrodes.

Experimental Part

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Reagents and Equipment

All reagents were used as received, and aqueous solutions were prepared with Milli-Q water (>18 MΩcm−1, Millipore, Sydney, Australia). Ferricyanide (K4Fe(CN)6), hexaamineruthenium(III)chloride (Ru(NH3)6Cl3), p-aminobenzoic acid, polyethylene glycol diglycidylether (PEGDGE), sodium nitrate (NaNO2), dichloroindophenol (DCIP), and 1,4-benzoquinone (BQ) were obtained from Sigma Chemical Co. (Sydney, Australia). p-Phenylenediamine was from Hopkin and Williams LTD (Glenmilles, PA, USA). Single walled carbon nanotubes (SWCNT) were HiPco tubes from Carbon Nanotechnologies Inc. (Houston, TX, USA). All electrochemical measurements were performed with a BAS-100B electrochemical analyzer (Bioanalytical System Inc. West Lafayette, IL, USA) and a conventional three-electrode system using 3 mm diameter modified glassy carbon (GC) electrodes (BAS) as working electrodes, a homemade platinum plug as counter electrode, and an Ag|AgCl (3 M KCl) reference electrode. The potential is in all cases referred to the normal hydrogen reference electrode (NHE). The current densities were calculated with respect to the geometric electrode area. Unless otherwise stated, cyclic voltammetry (CVs) was carried out in 0.1 M sodium acetate buffers of various pH values. Buffer solutions were degassed by sparging with argon for at least 15 min prior to data acquisition and were blanketed with argon during the entire experiment.

Electrode Preparation and Electrochemical Measurements

GC electrodes were polished with aqueous alumina slurries (Al2O3) by stepwise decreasing the particle size (1 to 0.05 μm) on wet microcloth pads (Buehler, Lake Bluff, IL, USA) using Milli-Q water. The electrodes were thoroughly rinsed with and sonicated in Milli-Q water for 5 min between polishing steps. Ten μL of a 30 mg mL−1 overnight sonicated aqueous solution of SWCNTs was dropped on the top of a GC electrode dried in a desiccator. Carboxylate and amine groups on the GC electrodes were introduced by electrochemical reduction of the aryldiazonium cation generated in situ from either p-aminobenzoic acid (COOH-PD) or p-phenylenediamine (NH2-PD). (43) Briefly, 5 mM (final concentration) NaNO2 was added to a 5 mM acidic aqueous solution (0.5 M HCl) of the aryl amine (1 mM) to generate the aryldiazonium cation. The solution was kept in complete darkness in an ice bath and allowed to react for 5 min under a nitrogen stream and stirring. Surface derivatization was carried out using electrochemical reduction by scanning the SWCNTs-GC working electrode from 1.2 to −0.8 V vs NHE at a rate of 100 mV s−1 for 2 cycles in the aryldiazonium cation-generating solution. The resulting modified electrodes were removed and rinsed with large volumes of water and dried under a stream of nitrogen. Enzyme-modified electrodes were prepared by allowing 10 μL of a Phanerochaete sordida cellobiose dehydrogenase (PsCDH) solution to adsorb on the top (6.55 mg/mL; 206 U/mL, produced according the method from Ludwig et al. (44)) to adsorb on the top of the SWCNTs aryldiazonium modified GC electrodes (Figure 1). The electrodes were allowed to dry overnight at 4 °C under controlled humidity. The activity of PsCDH was 140 U mL−1, the protein concentration was 4.2 mg mL−1, and the specific activity was 33 U mg−1. The cultivation and purification of the enzyme was the same as described for Trametes villosa CDH. (44)

Figure 1

Figure 1. Schematic representation of SWCNTs-GC electrodes modified with (A1) p-phenylenediamine or (B1) p-aminobenzoic acid. After modification, PsCDH is added and will adsorb onto the SWCNTs exhibiting either (A2) aniline moieties or (B2) benzoic acid moieties. The orientation of PsCDH is very likely influenced by the charged surfaces, with the highly negatively charged CYTPsCDH attracted by the positive charges of A2 or repulsed by the negative charges on B2.

Steady-State Kinetic Measurements

The pH-dependent activity of PsCDH in solution was measured using either the one-electron acceptor cytochrome c or the two-electron acceptors DCIP or BQ in 0.1 M sodium citrate buffer (measured pH range of 2.9−6.4) containing 30 mM lactose as electron donor according to published methods. (45) The apparent KM value of PsCDH for lactose was measured spectrophotometrically at 30 °C employing different lactose concentrations (0.1−50 mM) and cytochrome c (20 μM) as saturating electron acceptor (45) and calculated by linear least-squares regression using Sigma Plot 11 (Systat Software, San Jose, CA, USA). The kcat was calculated from the Vmax value by applying the molecular mass of PsCDH (81 000 Da), and the protein concentration was measured by the Bradford method using a manufactured protein assay reagent (Fermentas, St. Leon-Rot, Germany) and bovine serum albumin as protein standard.

Isoelectric Focusing

To determine the isoelectric point of PsCDH and its proteolytic cleavage products (papain cleavage), samples containing either the native enzyme or the flavodehydrogenase domain (DHPsCDH) and the cytochrome domain (CYTPsCDH) were applied on a Multiphor II system (GE Healthcare) using precast gels (Clean gel IEF) rehydrated with carrier ampholytes in the range between pH 2.0 and 9.0 (GE Healthcare and Serva, Heidelberg, Germany). The IEF protein standard 3−10 from Serva was used to determine the pI values. Enzymatically active bands were visualized by active staining. Therefore, the gel was first soaked in 3 mM DCIP solution before pouring 300 mM lactose solution over the surface. Shortly after, colorless bands appeared because of reduction of DCIP into its leucoform. Afterward, the gel was transferred into 20% acetic acid for overnight protein fixation. Proteins were visualized by silver staining. (46)

Results and Discussion

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

Aryl Diazonium Coupling

The process is based on aryl amines, which are converted into aryl diazonium salts by treatment with hydrochloric acid and nitrite at ice temperature. Subsequently, the aryl group is covalently attached to the electrode surface by electrochemical reduction, releasing N2. (20, 23, 24) GC electrodes were used as robust supports for physical absorption of SWCNTs and further modification with the introduction of amine groups, which are protonated (positively charged) at pH 3.5 and carboxylate groups, which are deprotonated (negatively charged) at pH 4.5. Deposition of NH2-PD and COOH-PD, respectively, was achieved by two sequential potential CVs from 1.2 to −0.8 V vs NHE in aqueous solution containing 0.5 M HCl and 5 mM NaNO2. Two consecutive CVs are shown in Figure 2a for the NH2-PD modification of a SWCNTs-GC electrode and in Figure 2b for a corresponding COOH-PD one. The first cycle in Figure 2a presents two reduction peaks. During the second cycle, only a small reduction current at a lower potential is present, suggesting the presence of the grafted layer. (23-25) The reduction of the p-aminobenzoic acid moiety is exhibited in Figure 2b and characterized by a well-defined, reproducible, and irreversible reduction peak at 0 mV vs NHE in the first cycle. The lower current obtained in the second cycle is evidence of surface saturation and suggests that a layer of covalently bound molecules was formed.

Figure 2

Figure 2. Cyclic voltammograms for in situ generation of aryl diazonium salts on SWCNTs-GC electrodes obtained from (a) 1 mM p-phenylenediamine and (b) 1 mM 4-aminobenzoic acid in 0.5 M HCl aqueous medium with 1 mM NaNO2 at a scan rate of 100 mVs−1. First scan (—), second scan (red − −).

Presence of the Grafted Layer

To demonstrate the presence of the grafted layer and investigate its properties, cyclic voltammetry with soluble electroactive species was performed and the influence of the electrode modification on the oxidation/reduction processes of Ru(NH3)63+ and Fe(CN)64- was investigated. Figure 3a shows the CVs recorded with the NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM Ru(NH3)63+ at pH 3.0 (—) and at pH 6.0 (red − −). The oxidation/reduction process of Ru(NH3)63+ presents a quasireversible behavior at pH 6.0 with an apparent redox potential of 0 mV vs NHE. At pH 3.0, the NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode shows a blocking behavior. The increase of positive charges on the NH2-PD modified electrode when decreasing the pH from 6.0 to 3.0 leads to electrostatic repulsion between Ru(NH3)63+ and the modified electrode surface. The surface pKa of NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC should be close to that of surface bound p-aminothiophenol and to that of aniline adsorbed on gold pKa = 4.6. (47) A very large fraction of the amino groups will therefore be positively charged at pH 3.5 but neutral at pH 6.0. It could be argued that p-phenylenediamine can form a bifunctional diazonium salt, which should attack the graphite surface in an uncontrollable way. However, it was shown very recently (48) that upon exposure to sodium nitrite only one of the amine groups is converted. In Figure 3b, results from a COOH-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode in the presence of Fe(CN)64- are shown. At pH 4.0, the carboxylate groups present at the electrode surface are negatively charged and block the Fe(CN)64- redox species from accessing the electrode. At pH 2.0, the carboxylate groups are mostly uncharged and the probe exhibits a well-defined redox wave with a midpoint potential of 425 mV vs NHE. This is in good agreement with previous studies by Saby et al., (49) who reported a surface pKa of 2.8 for a glassy carbon electrode presenting p-carboxyphenyl groups.

Figure 3

Figure 3. (a) Cyclic voltammograms recorded at NH2-PD/SWCNT-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM Ru(NH3)63+ in acetate buffer at pH 3.0 (—) and at pH 6.0 (red − −). (b) Cyclic voltammograms recorded at COOH-PD/SWCNT-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM Fe(CN)63-/4- at pH 4 (—) and at pH 2 (red − −).

Molecular and Catalytic Properties of P. sordida CDH

The isoelectric points (pI) of PsCDH and DHPsCDH were determined by isoelectric focusing using active staining and silver staining (Figure 4). The pI value of the purified PsCDH was estimated to be 4.1; for the proteolytic cleavage product DHPsCDH, a pI value of 5.7 was found. Additionally, minor bands were found in the silver stained gel, one representing a PsCDH isoform (pI = 4.0) and the other (pI = 4.8) could be the proteolytic cleavage product of either the minor isoform or DHPsCDH itself. Both bands are active and overemphasized by the sensitive active staining, which even shows a band for glucose oxidase in lane 1 (from the pI standard) although lactose was used as substrate. No CYTPsCDH band was found, it is likely to be further degraded by papain. By comparison of the values obtained for PsCDH to the values of the well characterized CDH from P. chrysosporium (CDH 4.18, DHPcCDH 5.45, CYTPcCDH 3.42), (50) it can be deduced that the pI of CYTPsCDH must be even lower than the pI of CYTPcCDH to compensate for the less negatively charged DHPsCDH.

Figure 4

Figure 4. Isoelectric focusing of P. sordida CDH. Active staining with 2,6-dichloroindophenol and lactose is shown on the left side; silver staining is on the right side. Lanes 1 and 4, pI marker; lanes 2 and 5, proteolytic digest of PsCDH; lanes 3 and 6, purified PsCDH.

The pH-dependent activity for different electron acceptors was measured within the pH range of 2.9−6.4 (Figure 5). With the two-electron acceptors, BQ and DCIP, PsCDH exhibits a plateau-shaped pH profile between pH 3.5 and 5.0, which ensures that lactose turnover at DHPsCDH is relatively constant at pH 3.5 and 4.5. In contrast, the one-electron acceptor cytochrome c, which interacts solely with CYTPsCDH, shows a bell-shaped profile with a pH optimum at pH 4.0. The IET is strongly pH dependent and decreases dramatically above pH 4.5 (34% residual activity at pH 5.0, 8% at pH 5.5). However, at the investigated pH values, the IET is fairly constant with 95% of the maximum value at pH 3.5 and 80% at pH 4.5, which ensures that DET currents measured on the electrodes are not influenced by rate limiting or vastly differing IET rates.

Figure 5

Figure 5. Activity versus pH profiles of PsCDH using (−▽−) cytochrome c, (−◻−) DCIP, and (−○−) BQ. The turnover numbers are given for the different electron acceptors. For lactose, the turnover number would be the same in the case of the two-electron acceptors but only half the value in the case of cytochrome c (stoichiometry = 2).

The KM value of PsCDH for lactose was determined to be 0.7 mM, and the kcat was 45 s−1, values which compare well with data reported for P. chrysosporium CDH measured for lactose with cytochrome c as electron acceptor at room temperature (KM = 0.63 mM, kcat = 28.8 s−1). (51) The lactose concentration used for all further experiments (5 mM) is therefore 7.1-fold the KM value of the enzyme and ensures a high catalytic substrate turnover (∼88% of Vmax). It is, on the other side, sufficiently low to avoid significant background current by nonspecific oxidation as reported for a SWCNT modified electrode and a lactose concentration of 100 mM. (32)

Effect of NH2-PD and COOH−PD Modifications on DET of PsCDH

PsCDH has an overall isoelectric point of 4.1, but its two domains differ strongly in their individual pI values. Whereas DHPsCDH is less negatively charged (pI = 5.7), CYTPsCDH has an isoelectric point below 3.5 and presents many negatively charged amino acid residues on its surface (when assuming a high structural similarity with P. chrysosporium CYTCDH, PDB ID: 1D7B). (52) We sought to take advantage of this uneven distribution of charges and investigate the influence of charged electrode surfaces on the possibility to orientate the enzyme to achieve efficient DET. Moreover, the pH optimum for activity and IET between pH 3.5 and 4.5 allowed us to neglect their influence on DET within this pH range. To obtain high currents, SWCNTs were used as nanoscaled electrical wires to facilitate DET between the CYTCDH of the native enzyme and the underlying electrode and to provide a large surface area for enzyme immobilization. (32, 33) Moreover, aryl diazonium coupling was used to create specific functional charged groups on the electrode nanowire surface to possibly increase the interaction forces and orientate the enzyme on the surface. The scheme in Figure 1 shows the modification route of SWCNTs-GC electrodes with p-aminobenzoic acid or p-phenylenediamine and subsequently with PsCDH. In Figure 6a, the CV of a PsCDH modified COOH-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode shows the DET current in the presence and absence of substrate in acetate buffer, pH 4.5. In the CV in the absence of substrate, two redox waves can be observed. The first redox wave at −50 mV can be referred to FAD from DHPsCDH, while the second one at a more positive potential (100 mV) can be assigned to the haem b in CYTPsCDH. When 5 mM substrate is added, the onset of the electrocatalytic current for lactose oxidation can be observed around 70 mV vs NHE with a maximum increase in the slope of the wave at 170 mV and the current steadily increases up until around 200−210 mV and after that starts to level off. No electrocatalytic current was observed from the DHFAD domain. Therefore, the wave seen at −50 mV in the CV without substrate is most likely caused by FAD released from the protein or a denaturated domain, as we already reported in refs 32 and 33, rather than DET between the catalytically active site of the DHFAD domain and the electrode.

Figure 6

Figure 6. (a) Cyclic voltammogram of a PsCDH COOH-PD/SWCNT-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM lactose (red − −) and in the absence of substrate (−). 0.1 M acetate buffer, pH 4.5. Scan rate 1 mV s−1. (b) Cyclic voltammogram of a PsCDH NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM lactose (red − −) and in the absence of substrate. 0.1 M acetate buffer, pH 3.5. Scan rate 1 mV s−1.

The electrocatalytic current density curve for substrate oxidation reaches a maximum at 150 μA cm−2. This value is comparable to the electrocatalytic current obtained for a PsCDH SWCNT-GC electrode (results not shown) and for a PsCDH SWCNT modified pyrolytic graphite electrode (32) (results not shown). These similar results are not surprising, since it is known that SWCNTs present already some carboxyl groups on their surface (53) and the COOH-PD modification is only expected to saturate the surface with such functionalities. The CVs reported here were obtained at a scan rate of 1 mVs−1. At this scan rate, there is still a noticeable capacitive current due to the high surface area of the electrode. When the amount of enzyme solution used for electrode preparation was varied (5 or 10 μL), the maximum electrocatalytic current was constant, indicating an excess of enzyme.
The modification of the SWCNTs-GC electrode with NH2-PD and PsCDH led to different results compared with earlier reported data for SWCNTs (32, 33) or the COOH-PD/SWCNTs-GC from this study, especially with respect to the very high catalytic current density obtained (Figure 6b). In fact, a current density of more than 500 μA cm−2 was obtained when the electrode was immersed in a solution containing 5 mM lactose in acetate buffer at pH 3.5 as seen in Figure 6b. This corresponds to an approximately 3.5-fold increase in current with respect to the modification with COOH-PD/SWCNTs. The electrocatalytic current for lactose oxidation can be observed to start at around 0 mV with a maximum for the wave at around 100 mV vs NHE. In the CV without substrate, only a well-defined wave with a midpoint potential at 70 mV can be observed. The onset of the catalytic anodic wave for lactose oxidation is around 50 mV lower than what we obtained for the COOH-PD/SWCNTs-GC (70 mV) and previously for unmodified SWCNTs (75 mV at pH 3.5). (32, 33) The reason for the lower onset of the anodic wave for lactose oxidation and for the haem b midpoint potential might be the obvious extremely good DET communication between CYTPsCDH and the NH2-PD/SWCNTs layer. The low isoelectric point of CYTPsCDH (pI <3.5) and the high surface concentration of negatively charged amino acid residues already at pH 3.5 can explain why a NH2-PD modification (together with the already existing COOH groups) can create a less electrostatic repulsive environment for CYTPsCDH and enhance DET. Similar current densities for PsCDH (500 μA cm−2 at pH 4.0) were obtained before only when a mediated system based on an osmium redox polymer in combination with PsCDH/SWCNTs modified pyrolytic graphite electrodes was used, (33) where the electrons are shuttled in a mediated mode from the enzyme to the electrode by the osmium redox polymer that was cross-linked to the enzyme. Previous studies of both basidiomycete (class I) and ascomycete (class II) CDH on thiol modified gold electrodes (21, 22, 54, 55) have revealed that a positively charged headgroup on the SAM yields much better electrochemical communication with the enzyme than a negatively charged SAM. As expected, the good electrochemical communication between PsCDH and the NH2-PD modified surface is in agreement with previous results, shown for PsCDH at positively charged 4,4′-aldrithiol SAM modified gold electrodes. (22) Two mechanisms can explain the enhanced current observed at NH2-PD-SWCNT modified electrodes. First, PsCDH can be orientated in a better way for DET by electrostatic forces from the positively charged SWCNT surface. This may also lead to that a higher percentage of the immobilized CDH molecules are orientated for DET with the electrode material. Second, the electrostatic repulsion between the negative surface charges of unmodified or COOH-PD SWCNTs and the also negatively charged CYTPsCDH at low pH might reduce the DET rate.

Stability Measurements

When investigating the stability of PsCDH NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrodes in 5 mM lactose at pH 3.5, it performed extremely well. The catalytic current decreased only by 15% in 50 h during continuous recording of multicycle voltammograms at a scan rate of 0.1 mV s−1 between −0.2 and 0.4 V. In Figure 7, 15 scans are shown, which cover a time span of 50 h. Every 10 h, the solution was exchanged for a freshly prepared lactose solution. These results were obtained without a cross-linker. The long-term stability of the electrode was neither positively nor negatively affected when a cross-linker (polyethylene glycol diglycidylether, PEGDGE) was added in a control experiment. This is different to previous reports for CDH/SWCNTs modified carbon electrodes, where always a poor long-term stability was observed in the absence of a cross-linker. The NH2-PD modification seems to prevent the release of PsCDH from the SWCNTs layer, which is most probably due to attractive electrostatic interactions. Also, in this case, for the COOH-PD/SWCNTs modification, no cross-linker had to be added, suggesting an environment which strongly binds PsCDH and supports its stability. The stability was much higher than what has been reported before for PsCDH cross-linked to SWCNTs modified pyrolytic graphite electrodes working under DET conditions (20% decrease after 12 h when scanning at a scan rate of 0.1 mV s−1 between 294 and 394 mV). (32) A comparable stability to the one reported here was only exhibited previously for PsCDH cross-linked to an Os redox polymer and SWCNTs on graphite working under MET conditions (33% decrease after 100 h of running multicyclic voltammograms at different pH values). (33) We have previously seen that, when increasing the ionic strength of the supporting electrolyte, then the DET response current rather increases than decreases, (56) as could have been expected if the interaction between the adsorbed enzyme and the electrode surface is solely based on electrostatic interactions. Obviously, the influence of the ionic strength is much more complex, as was also recently shown for another redox enzyme, sulfite oxidase, when immobilized onto SAM-coated silver electrodes (57) and is currently under intensive studies.

Figure 7

Figure 7. Multiple CVs (15 cycles are shown registered at even intervals during 50 h) of a PsCDH NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM lactose in 0.1 M acetate buffer, pH 3.5. Scan rate 0.1 mVs−1.

Conclusions

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

In PsCDH modified GC electrodes, both the COOH-PD/SWCNT and the NH2-PD/SWCNT modifications were shown to provide a favorable environment for enzyme deposition. Also, the long-term stability of the modified electrode was positively affected by the aryl diazonium salt modification. We can report a loss of 15% of the original activity after 50 h of cycling the electrode between −200 and +400 mV vs NHE. The PsCDH COOH-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode resulted in a lower current density (150 μAcm−2, 5 mM lactose, pH 4.5) than the PsCDH NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode exhibiting a current density of 500 μAcm−2 (5 mM lactose, pH 3.5). We conclude that the strongly negatively charged CYTPsCDH interacts better with the positively charged surface of NH2-PD modified electrodes. To the best of our knowledge, this is the first time that such a high a current density is reported for an oxidizing enzyme modified electrode working under DET conditions. Similar current densities were previously reported only for enzymes working in MET conditions. (8, 33, 34) Moreover, the onset of the electrocatalytic current for lactose oxidation started at a potential more than 50 mV lower than when the SWCNTs-GC electrodes were modified with COOH-PD.

Author Information

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

  • Corresponding Author
    • Lo Gorton - Department of Analytical Chemistry/Biochemistry, Lund University, P.O. Box 124, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden Email: [email protected]
  • Authors
    • Federico Tasca - Department of Analytical Chemistry/Biochemistry, Lund University, P.O. Box 124, SE-221 00 Lund, Sweden
    • Wolfgang Harreither - ACIB GmbH c/o Food Biotechnology Laboratory, Department of Food Science and Technology, University of Natural Resources and Life Sciences, Muthgasse 18, 1190 Vienna, Austria
    • Roland Ludwig - APART-fellow of the Austrian Academy of Sciences at the Department of Analytical Chemistry/Biochemistry, Lund University, P.O. Box 124, 221 00 Lund, Sweden
    • John Justin Gooding - School of Chemistry, The University of New South Wales, Sydney 2052, Australia

Acknowledgment

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

F.T. would like to acknowledge the Solander Program and the Swedish Chemical Society for supporting travelling and living expenses during his stay at the School of Chemistry at UNSW, Sydney, Australia. R.L. gratefully acknowledges financial support from the Austrian Academy of Sciences (APART-fellowship 11322). L.G. gratefully acknowledges financial support from the The Swedish Research Council (VR) and the Foundation for Research, Science, and Technology, New Zealand. R.L. and L.G. gratefully acknowledge financial support from the European Union (“3D-Bionanodevice” NMP4-SL-2009-229255). J.J.G. gratefully acknowledges financial support from the Australian Research Council Discovery Projects funding scheme (project number DP1094564).

References

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article references 57 other publications.

  1. 1
    Cracknell, J. A.; Vincent, K. A.; Armstrong, F. A. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 2439 2461
  2. 2
    Léger, C.; Bertrand, P. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 2379 2438
  3. 3
    Tasca, F.; Timur, S.; Ludwig, R.; Haltrich, D.; Volc, J.; Antiochia, R.; Gorton, L. Electroanalysis 2007, 19, 294 302
  4. 4
    Heller, A. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2006, 10, 664 672
  5. 5
    Mano, N.; Heller, A. Anal. Chem. 2005, 77, 729 732
  6. 6
    Zafar, M. N.; Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Patridge, E. V.; Ferry, J. G.; Nöll, G. Anal. Chem. 2009, 81, 4082 4088
  7. 7
    Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Wagner, J. B.; Nöll, G. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2008, 24, 272 278
  8. 8
    Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Kujawa, M.; Patel, I.; Harreither, W.; Peterbauer, C. K.; Ludwig, R.; Nöll, G. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2010, 25, 1710 1716
  9. 9
    Barton, S. C.; Gallaway, J.; Atanassov, P. Chem. Rev. 2004, 104, 4867 4886
  10. 10
    Christenson, A.; Dimcheva, N.; Ferapontova, E. E.; Gorton, L.; Ruzgas, T.; Stoica, L.; Shleev, S.; Yaropolov, A. L.; Haltrich, D.; Thorneley, R. N. F.; Aust, S. D. Electroanalysis 2004, 16, 1074 1092
  11. 11
    Vincent, K. A.; Parkin, A.; Armstrong, F. A. Chem. Rev. 2007, 107, 4366 4413
  12. 12
    Wei, J. J.; Liu, H. Y.; Dick, A. R.; Yamamoto, H.; He, Y. F.; Waldeck, D. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 9591 9599
  13. 13
    Gooding, J. J.; Wibowo, R.; Liu, J. Q.; Yang, W. R.; Losic, D.; Orbons, S.; Mearns, F. J.; Shapter, J. G.; Hibbert, D. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 9006 9007
  14. 14
    Hess, C. R.; Juda, G. A.; Dooley, D. M.; Amii, R. N.; Hill, M. G.; Winkler, J. R.; Gray, H. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 7156 7157
  15. 15
    Liu, G. Z.; Gooding, J. J. Langmuir 2006, 22, 7421 7430
  16. 16
    Willner, I.; Yan, Y. M.; Willner, B.; Tel-Vered, R. Fuel Cells 2009, 9, 7 24
  17. 17
    Wollenberger, U.; Spricigo, R.; Leimkuhler, S.; Schronder, K. Protein electrodes with direct electrochemical communication In Biosensing for the 21st Century; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2008; Vol. 109; pp 1964.
  18. 18
    Finklea, H. O. Electrochemistry of organized monolayers of thiols and related molecules on electrodes. In Electroanalytical Chemistry; Bard, A. J., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1996; Vol. 19; pp 109335.
  19. 19
    Gooding, J. J.; Hibbert, D. B. TrAC, Trends Anal. Chem. 1999, 18, 525 533
  20. 20
    Gooding, J. J.; Mearns, F.; Yang, W. R.; Liu, J. Q. Electroanalysis 2003, 15, 81 96
  21. 21
    Lindgren, A.; Larsson, T.; Ruzgas, T.; Gorton, L. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2000, 494, 105 113
  22. 22
    Stoica, L.; Dimcheva, N.; Haltrich, D.; Ruzgas, T.; Gorton, L. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2005, 2010 2018
  23. 23
    Delamar, M.; Hitmi, R.; Pinson, J.; Savéant, J. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 5883 5884
  24. 24
    Downard, A. J. Electroanalysis 2000, 12, 1085 1096
  25. 25
    Gooding, J. J. Electroanalysis 2008, 20, 573 582
  26. 26
    Liu, Y. C.; McCreery, R. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 11254 11259
  27. 27
    Corgier, B. P.; Marquette, C. A.; Blum, L. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 18328 18332
  28. 28
    Polsky, R.; Harper, J. C.; Dirk, S. M.; Arango, D. C.; Wheeler, D. R.; Brozik, S. M. Langmuir 2007, 23, 364 366
  29. 29
    Blanford, C. F.; Heath, R. S.; Armstrong, F. A. Chem. Commun. 2007, 1710 1712
  30. 30
    Yan, Y. M.; Yehezkeli, O.; Willner, I. Chem.—Eur. J. 2007, 13, 10168 10175
  31. 31
    Guiseppi-Elie, A.; Lei, C.; Baughman Ray, H. Nanotechnology 2002, 13, 559 564
  32. 32
    Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; Ludwig, R.; Nöll, G. J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 9956 9961
  33. 33
    Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; Ludwig, R.; Nöll, G. Anal. Chem. 2009, 81, 2791 2798
  34. 34
    Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; Ludwig, R.; Nöll, G. J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 13668 13673
  35. 35
    Bahr, J. L.; Tour, J. M. Chem. Mater. 2001, 13, 3823 3824
  36. 36
    Ludwig, R.; Harreither, W.; Tasca, F.; Gorton, L. ChemPhysChem 2010, 11, 2674 2697
  37. 37
    Stoica, L.; Ludwig, R.; Haltrich, D.; Gorton, L. Anal. Chem. 2006, 78, 393 398
  38. 38
    Safina, G.; Ludwig, R.; Gorton, L. Electrochim. Acta 2010, 55, 7690 7695
  39. 39
    Coman, V.; Vaz-Domínguez, C.; Ludwig, R.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; De Lacey, A. L.; Ruzgas, T.; Gorton, L.; Shleev, S. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2008, 10, 6093 6096
  40. 40
    Coman, V.; Ludwig, R.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; Gorton, L.; Ruzgas, T.; Shleev, S. Fuel Cells 2010, 10, 9 16
  41. 41
    Zamocky, M.; Ludwig, R.; Peterbauer, C.; Hallberg, B. M.; Divne, C.; Nicholls, P.; Haltrich, D. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 2006, 7, 255 280
  42. 42
    Harreither, W.; Sygmund, C.; Dunhofen, E.; Vicuna, R.; Haltrich, D.; Ludwig, R. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 75, 2750 2757
  43. 43
    Baranton, S.; Belanger, D. J. Phys. Chem. B 2005, 109, 24401 24410
  44. 44
    Ludwig, R.; Salamon, A.; Varga, J.; Zamocky, M.; Peterbauer; K., C.; Kulbe, K. D.; Haltrich, D. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2004, 64, 213 222
  45. 45
    Baminger, U.; Subramaniam, S. S.; Renganathan, V.; Haltrich, D. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2001, 67, 1766 1774
  46. 46
    Ansorge, W. J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 1985, 11, 13 20
  47. 47
    Sun, L.; Johnson, B.; Wade, T.; Crooks, R. M. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 8869 8871
  48. 48
    Liu, G.; Luais, E.; Gooding, J. J. Langmuir 2011, DOI: DOI: org/10.1021/la104373v , in press.
  49. 49
    Saby, C.; Ortiz, B.; Champagne, G. Y.; Belanger, D. Langmuir 1997, 13, 6805 6813
  50. 50
    Henriksson, G.; Pettersson, G.; Johansson, G.; Ruiz, A.; Uzcategui, E. Eur. J. Biochem. 1991, 196, 101 106
  51. 51
    Bao, W.; Usha, S. N.; Renganathan, V. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1993, 300, 705 713
  52. 52
    Hallberg, B. M.; Bergfors, T.; Bäckbro, K.; Pettersson, G.; Henriksson, G.; Divna, C. Structure 2001, 8, 79 88
  53. 53
    Yu, X. F.; Mu, T.; Huang, H. Z.; Liu, Z. F.; Wu, N. Z. Surf. Sci. 2000, 461, 199 207
  54. 54
    Lindgren, A.; Gorton, L.; Ruzgas, T.; Baminger, U.; Haltrich, D.; Schülein, M. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2001, 496, 76 81
  55. 55
    Coman, V.; Harreither, W.; Ludwig, R.; Haltrich, D.; Gorton, L. Chem. Anal. (Warsaw) 2007, 52, 945 960
  56. 56
    Larsson, T.; Lindgren, A.; Ruzgas, T.; Lindquist, S. E.; Gorton, L. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2000, 482, 1 10
  57. 57
    Sezer, M.; Spricigo, R.; Utesch, T.; Millo, D.; Leimkuehler, S.; Mroginski, M. A.; Wollenberger, U.; Hildebrandt, P.; Weidiger, I. M. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2010, 12, 7894 7903

Cited By

ARTICLE SECTIONS
Jump To

This article is cited by 107 publications.

  1. Taiki Adachi, Tomoko Miyata, Fumiaki Makino, Hideaki Tanaka, Keiichi Namba, Kenji Kano, Keisei Sowa, Yuki Kitazumi, Osamu Shirai. Experimental and Theoretical Insights into Bienzymatic Cascade for Mediatorless Bioelectrochemical Ethanol Oxidation with Alcohol and Aldehyde Dehydrogenases. ACS Catalysis 2023, 13 (12) , 7955-7965. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.3c01962
  2. Zhiyong Xu, Jian Zhou. Molecular Insights of Cellobiose Dehydrogenase Adsorption on Self-Assembled Monolayers. Langmuir 2023, 39 (16) , 5880-5890. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.3c00343
  3. Chethani K. Ruhunage, Vaishnavi Dhawan, Tucker J. McKenzie, Abdul Hoque, Connor E. Rahm, Chaminda P. Nawarathne, Neil Ayres, Xinyan Tracy Cui, Noe T. Alvarez. Hydrophilic Micro- and Macroelectrodes with Antibiofouling Properties for Biomedical Applications. ACS Biomaterials Science & Engineering 2022, 8 (7) , 2920-2931. https://doi.org/10.1021/acsbiomaterials.2c00173
  4. Solène Gentil, Carlo Pifferi, Pierre Rousselot-Pailley, Thierry Tron, Olivier Renaudet, Alan Le Goff. Clicked Bifunctional Dendrimeric and Cyclopeptidic Addressable Redox Scaffolds for the Functionalization of Carbon Nanotubes with Redox Molecules and Enzymes. Langmuir 2021, 37 (3) , 1001-1011. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.langmuir.0c02095
  5. Yuki Kitazumi Osamu Shirai Kenji Kano . Significance of Nanostructures of an Electrode Surface in Direct Electron Transfer-Type Bioelectrocatalysis of Redox Enzymes. 2020, 147-163. https://doi.org/10.1021/bk-2020-1342.ch007
  6. Xinxin Xiao, Hong-qi Xia, Ranran Wu, Lu Bai, Lu Yan, Edmond Magner, Serge Cosnier, Elisabeth Lojou, Zhiguang Zhu, Aihua Liu. Tackling the Challenges of Enzymatic (Bio)Fuel Cells. Chemical Reviews 2019, 119 (16) , 9509-9558. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.chemrev.9b00115
  7. Su Ma, Christophe V. F. P. Laurent, Marta Meneghello, Jani Tuoriniemi, Chris Oostenbrink, Lo Gorton, Philip N. Bartlett, Roland Ludwig. Direct Electron-Transfer Anisotropy of a Site-Specifically Immobilized Cellobiose Dehydrogenase. ACS Catalysis 2019, 9 (8) , 7607-7615. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.9b02014
  8. Paolo Bollella, Yuya Hibino, Kenji Kano, Lo Gorton, Riccarda Antiochia. Enhanced Direct Electron Transfer of Fructose Dehydrogenase Rationally Immobilized on a 2-Aminoanthracene Diazonium Cation Grafted Single-Walled Carbon Nanotube Based Electrode. ACS Catalysis 2018, 8 (11) , 10279-10289. https://doi.org/10.1021/acscatal.8b02729
  9. Paolo Bollella, Yuya Hibino, Kenji Kano, Lo Gorton, Riccarda Antiochia. Highly Sensitive Membraneless Fructose Biosensor Based on Fructose Dehydrogenase Immobilized onto Aryl Thiol Modified Highly Porous Gold Electrode: Characterization and Application in Food Samples. Analytical Chemistry 2018, 90 (20) , 12131-12136. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.analchem.8b03093
  10. Guang Yang, Bo Liang, Qin Zhu, Yichuan Hu, and Xuesong Ye . Comprehensive Study of the Effects of Nanopore Structures on Enzyme Activity for the Enzyme Based Electrochemical Biosensors Based on Molecular Simulation. The Journal of Physical Chemistry A 2016, 120 (50) , 10043-10056. https://doi.org/10.1021/acs.jpca.6b10206
  11. Christopher Schulz, Roland Ludwig, and Lo Gorton . Polyethyleneimine as a Promoter Layer for the Immobilization of Cellobiose Dehydrogenase from Myriococcum thermophilum on Graphite Electrodes. Analytical Chemistry 2014, 86 (9) , 4256-4263. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac403957t
  12. Carole Baffert, Kateryna Sybirna, Pierre Ezanno, Thomas Lautier, Viviane Hajj, Isabelle Meynial-Salles, Philippe Soucaille, Hervé Bottin, and Christophe Léger . Covalent Attachment of FeFe Hydrogenases to Carbon Electrodes for Direct Electron Transfer. Analytical Chemistry 2012, 84 (18) , 7999-8005. https://doi.org/10.1021/ac301812s
  13. Sven C. Feifel, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton, and Fred Lisdat . Catalytically Active Silica Nanoparticle-Based Supramolecular Architectures of Two Proteins – Cellobiose Dehydrogenase and Cytochrome c on Electrodes. Langmuir 2012, 28 (25) , 9189-9194. https://doi.org/10.1021/la301290z
  14. Wolfgang Harreither, Peter Nicholls, Christoph Sygmund, Lo Gorton, and Roland Ludwig . Investigation of the pH-Dependent Electron Transfer Mechanism of Ascomycetous Class II Cellobiose Dehydrogenases on Electrodes. Langmuir 2012, 28 (16) , 6714-6723. https://doi.org/10.1021/la3005486
  15. Matthew T. Meredith, Michael Minson, David Hickey, Kateryna Artyushkova, Daniel T. Glatzhofer, and Shelley D. Minteer . Anthracene-Modified Multi-Walled Carbon Nanotubes as Direct Electron Transfer Scaffolds for Enzymatic Oxygen Reduction. ACS Catalysis 2011, 1 (12) , 1683-1690. https://doi.org/10.1021/cs200475q
  16. Xinru Zhai, Xiaojun Liu, Huihui Dong, Mingzhen Lin, Xinxin Zheng, Qinzheng Yang. Implementation of cytochrome c proteins and carbon nanotubes hybrids in bioelectrodes towards bioelectrochemical systems applications. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering 2024, 47 (2) , 159-168. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-023-02933-x
  17. Sufia ul Haque, Mohammad Yasir, Stefania Ciocan, Narcis M. Duteanu. Enzymatic Fuel Cells and Biosensors. 2023, 467-494. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527839001.ch19
  18. Thomas M. B. Reichhart, Stefan Scheiblbrandner, Christoph Sygmund, Wolfgang Harreither, Josef Schenkenfelder, Christopher Schulz, Alfons K. G. Felice, Lo Gorton, Roland Ludwig. Interface engineering of cellobiose dehydrogenase improves interdomain electron transfer. Protein Science 2023, 32 (8) https://doi.org/10.1002/pro.4702
  19. N. Palaniappan, Nidhi Vashistha, Ruby Aslam. Functionalized Carbon Nanotubes. 2023, 95-115. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119905080.ch5
  20. Anna Aldinio-Colbachini, Andrea Fasano, Chloé Guendon, Aurore Jacq-Bailly, Jérémy Wozniak, Carole Baffert, Arlette Kpebe, Christophe Léger, Myriam Brugna, Vincent Fourmond. Transport limited adsorption experiments give a new lower estimate of the turnover frequency of Escherichia coli hydrogenase 1. BBA Advances 2023, 3 , 100090. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bbadva.2023.100090
  21. Taiki Adachi, Ievgen Mazurenko, Nicolas Mano, Yuki Kitazumi, Kunishige Kataoka, Kenji Kano, Keisei Sowa, Elisabeth Lojou. Kinetic and thermodynamic analysis of Cu2+-dependent reductive inactivation in direct electron transfer-type bioelectrocatalysis by copper efflux oxidase. Electrochimica Acta 2022, 429 , 140987. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2022.140987
  22. Thenmozhi Rajarathinam, Dinakaran Thirumalai, Sivaguru Jayaraman, Seonghye Kim, Minho Kwon, Hyun-jong Paik, Suhkmann Kim, Mijeong Kang, Seung-Cheol Chang. Enzyme Nanosheet-Based Electrochemical Aspartate Biosensor for Fish Point-of-Care Applications. Micromachines 2022, 13 (9) , 1428. https://doi.org/10.3390/mi13091428
  23. Mithra Geetha, Kishor Kumar Sadasivuni, Maryam Al-Ejji, Nandagopal Sivadas, Moghal Zubair Khalid Baig, Tamanna Jannat Promi, Sumayya Ali Ahmad, Sara Alabed, Dima Anwar Hijazi, Fatimatulzahraa Alsaedi, Faozia Nasser Al-Shaibah. Review of Progress and Prospects in Research on Enzymatic and Non- Enzymatic Biofuel Cells; Specific Emphasis on 2D Nanomaterials. Current Biotechnology 2022, 11 (3) , 212-229. https://doi.org/10.2174/2211550112666221201152211
  24. Yohei Suzuki, Akira Itoh, Kunishige Kataoka, Satoshi Yamashita, Kenji Kano, Keisei Sowa, Yuki Kitazumi, Osamu Shirai. Effects of N-linked glycans of bilirubin oxidase on direct electron transfer-type bioelectrocatalysis. Bioelectrochemistry 2022, 146 , 108141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioelechem.2022.108141
  25. Stefan Scheiblbrandner, Florian Csarman, Roland Ludwig. Cellobiose dehydrogenase in biofuel cells. Current Opinion in Biotechnology 2022, 73 , 205-212. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.copbio.2021.08.013
  26. Christine Vautrin-Ul. Modification of sp2 Carbon Allotropes with Diazonium Salts—Focus on Carbon Nanotubes Functionalization. 2022, 137-156. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04398-7_7
  27. Daniel Bélanger. Diazonium Salts and Related Compounds in Electrochemical Energy Storage and Conversion. 2022, 427-451. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-04398-7_22
  28. David C. Ferrier, Kevin C. Honeychurch. Carbon Nanotube (CNT)-Based Biosensors. Biosensors 2021, 11 (12) , 486. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios11120486
  29. César Zúñiga Loyola, Gabriel Abarca, Soledad Ureta-Zañartu, Carolina Aliaga, Jose H. Zagal, Moulay Tahar Sougrati, Frédéric Jaouen, Walter Orellana, Federico Tasca. Insights into the electronic structure of Fe penta-coordinated complexes. Spectroscopic examination and electrochemical analysis for the oxygen reduction and oxygen evolution reactions. Journal of Materials Chemistry A 2021, 9 (42) , 23802-23816. https://doi.org/10.1039/D1TA05991B
  30. Ieva Šakinytė, Marius Butkevičius, Vidutė Gurevičienė, Jonita Stankevičiūtė, Rolandas Meškys, Julija Razumienė. Reagentless D-Tagatose Biosensors Based on the Oriented Immobilization of Fructose Dehydrogenase onto Coated Gold Nanoparticles- or Reduced Graphene Oxide-Modified Surfaces: Application in a Prototype Bioreactor. Biosensors 2021, 11 (11) , 466. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios11110466
  31. Sufia ul Haque, Narcis Duteanu, Stefania Ciocan, Abu Nasar, Inamuddin. A review: Evolution of enzymatic biofuel cells. Journal of Environmental Management 2021, 298 , 113483. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jenvman.2021.113483
  32. Franziska Schachinger, Hucheng Chang, Stefan Scheiblbrandner, Roland Ludwig. Amperometric Biosensors Based on Direct Electron Transfer Enzymes. Molecules 2021, 26 (15) , 4525. https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules26154525
  33. Thenmozhi Rajarathinam, Minho Kwon, Dinakaran Thirumalai, Seonghye Kim, Seulah Lee, Jang-Hee Yoon, Hyun-jong Paik, Suhkmann Kim, Jaewon Lee, Hong Koo Ha, Seung-Cheol Chang. Polymer-dispersed reduced graphene oxide nanosheets and Prussian blue modified biosensor for amperometric detection of sarcosine. Analytica Chimica Acta 2021, 1175 , 338749. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aca.2021.338749
  34. Leonardo Ciogli, Rosaceleste Zumpano, Andrey A. Poloznikov, Dmitry M. Hushpulian, Vladimir I. Tishkov, Rafael Andreu, Lo Gorton, Franco Mazzei, Gabriele Favero, Paolo Bollella. Highly Sensitive Hydrogen Peroxide Biosensor Based on Tobacco Peroxidase Immobilized on p ‐Phenylenediamine Diazonium Cation Grafted Carbon Nanotubes: Preventing Fenton‐like Inactivation at Negative Potential. ChemElectroChem 2021, 8 (13) , 2495-2504. https://doi.org/10.1002/celc.202100341
  35. Luisa Pilan. Tailoring the performance of electrochemical biosensors based on carbon nanomaterials via aryldiazonium electrografting. Bioelectrochemistry 2021, 138 , 107697. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioelechem.2020.107697
  36. Sooyoun Yu, Nosang V. Myung. Recent Advances in the Direct Electron Transfer-Enabled Enzymatic Fuel Cells. Frontiers in Chemistry 2021, 8 https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2020.620153
  37. Joseph Govan, Walter Orellana, José H. Zagal, Federico Tasca. Penta-coordinated transition metal macrocycles as electrocatalysts for the oxygen reduction reaction. Journal of Solid State Electrochemistry 2021, 25 (1) , 15-31. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10008-019-04489-x
  38. Hao Xiong, Deepak Devegowda, Liangliang Huang. Oil–water transport in clay‐hosted nanopores: Effects of long‐range electrostatic forces. AIChE Journal 2020, 66 (8) https://doi.org/10.1002/aic.16276
  39. Stefan Scheiblbrandner, Roland Ludwig. Cellobiose dehydrogenase: Bioelectrochemical insights and applications. Bioelectrochemistry 2020, 131 , 107345. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioelechem.2019.107345
  40. Ravinder Kour, Sandeep Arya, Sheng-Joue Young, Vinay Gupta, Pankaj Bandhoria, Ajit Khosla. Review—Recent Advances in Carbon Nanomaterials as Electrochemical Biosensors. Journal of The Electrochemical Society 2020, 167 (3) , 037555. https://doi.org/10.1149/1945-7111/ab6bc4
  41. Marco Viera, Jorge Riquelme, Carolina Aliaga, José F. Marco, Walter Orellana, José H. Zagal, Federico Tasca. Oxygen Reduction Reaction at Penta-Coordinated Co Phthalocyanines. Frontiers in Chemistry 2020, 8 https://doi.org/10.3389/fchem.2020.00022
  42. Katarzyna Olszewska, Anna Olszewska, Jerzy Rogalski, Justyna Sulej. Biotechnological And Biomedical Applications Of Fungal Cellobiose Dehydrogenase. Postępy Mikrobiologii - Advancements of Microbiology 2020, 59 (1) , 75-86. https://doi.org/10.21307/PM-2020.59.1.007
  43. Gabriel Abarca, Marco Viera, Carolina Aliaga, José F. Marco, Walter Orellana, José H. Zagal, Federico Tasca. In search of the most active MN4 catalyst for the oxygen reduction reaction. The case of perfluorinated Fe phthalocyanine. Journal of Materials Chemistry A 2019, 7 (43) , 24776-24783. https://doi.org/10.1039/C9TA09125D
  44. Uffe Bjørnholt Jensen, Hossein Mohammad‐Beigi, Stepan Shipovskov, Duncan S. Sutherland, Elena E. Ferapontova. Activation of Cellobiose Dehydrogenase Bioelectrocatalysis by Carbon Nanoparticles. ChemElectroChem 2019, 6 (19) , 5032-5040. https://doi.org/10.1002/celc.201901066
  45. Sheela Berchmans, T. Balamurugan. Direct Electron Transfer in Redox Enzymes and Microorganisms. 2019, 21-35. https://doi.org/10.1002/9781119611103.ch2
  46. Nan Li, Ari M. Chow, Hashwin V. S. Ganesh, Melanie Ratnam, Ian R. Brown, Kagan Kerman. Diazonium-Modified Screen-Printed Electrodes for Immunosensing Growth Hormone in Blood Samples. Biosensors 2019, 9 (3) , 88. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios9030088
  47. Valentina Grippo, Su Ma, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton, Renata Bilewicz. Cellobiose dehydrogenase hosted in lipidic cubic phase to improve catalytic activity and stability. Bioelectrochemistry 2019, 125 , 134-141. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioelechem.2017.10.003
  48. Alan Le Goff, Michael Holzinger. Molecular engineering of the bio/nano-interface for enzymatic electrocatalysis in fuel cells. Sustainable Energy & Fuels 2018, 2 (12) , 2555-2566. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8SE00374B
  49. Giovanni Fusco, Gero Göbel, Robertino Zanoni, Maria Paola Bracciale, Gabriele Favero, Franco Mazzei, Fred Lisdat. Aqueous polythiophene electrosynthesis: A new route to an efficient electrode coupling of PQQ-dependent glucose dehydrogenase for sensing and bioenergetic applications. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2018, 112 , 8-17. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2018.04.014
  50. Mojtaba Tavahodi, Christopher Schulz, Anna Assarsson, Roberto Ortiz, Roland Ludwig, Celia Cabaleiro-Lago, Behzad Haghighi, Lo Gorton. Interaction of polymer-coated gold nanoparticles with cellobiose dehydrogenase: The role of surface charges. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 2018, 819 , 226-233. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2017.10.035
  51. Paolo Bollella, Lo Gorton, Riccarda Antiochia. Direct Electron Transfer of Dehydrogenases for Development of 3rd Generation Biosensors and Enzymatic Fuel Cells. Sensors 2018, 18 (5) , 1319. https://doi.org/10.3390/s18051319
  52. Jorge Riquelme, Karinna Neira, José F. Marco, Patricio Hermosilla-Ibáñez, Walter Orellana, José H. Zagal, Federico Tasca. Biomimicking vitamin B12. A Co phthalocyanine pyridine axial ligand coordinated catalyst for the oxygen reduction reaction. Electrochimica Acta 2018, 265 , 547-555. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2018.01.177
  53. Paolo Bollella, Giovanni Fusco, Daniela Stevar, Lo Gorton, Roland Ludwig, Su Ma, Harry Boer, Anu Koivula, Cristina Tortolini, Gabriele Favero, Riccarda Antiochia, Franco Mazzei. A Glucose/Oxygen Enzymatic Fuel Cell based on Gold Nanoparticles modified Graphene Screen-Printed Electrode. Proof-of-Concept in Human Saliva. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2018, 256 , 921-930. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2017.10.025
  54. A. J. Gross, M. Holzinger, S. Cosnier. Buckypaper bioelectrodes: emerging materials for implantable and wearable biofuel cells. Energy & Environmental Science 2018, 11 (7) , 1670-1687. https://doi.org/10.1039/C8EE00330K
  55. Y. Sugimoto, K. So, H.-Q. Xia, K. Kano. Orientation-Oriented Adsorption and Immobilization of Redox Enzymes for Electrochemical Communication With Electrodes. 2018, 403-421. https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-12-409547-2.13474-2
  56. Paolo Bollella, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton. Cellobiose dehydrogenase: Insights on the nanostructuration of electrodes for improved development of biosensors and biofuel cells. Applied Materials Today 2017, 9 , 319-332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apmt.2017.08.009
  57. Hussein Kanso, María Begoña González García, Laura Fernández Llano, Su Ma, Roland Ludwig, Pablo Fanjul Bolado, David Hernández Santos. Novel thin layer flow-cell screen-printed graphene electrode for enzymatic sensors. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2017, 93 , 298-304. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.08.069
  58. Ross D. Milton, Shelley D. Minteer. Direct enzymatic bioelectrocatalysis: differentiating between myth and reality. Journal of The Royal Society Interface 2017, 14 (131) , 20170253. https://doi.org/10.1098/rsif.2017.0253
  59. Mojtaba Tavahodi, Roberto Ortiz, Christopher Schulz, Ali Ekhtiari, Roland Ludwig, Behzad Haghighi, Lo Gorton. Direct Electron Transfer of Cellobiose Dehydrogenase on Positively Charged Polyethyleneimine Gold Nanoparticles. ChemPlusChem 2017, 82 (4) , 546-552. https://doi.org/10.1002/cplu.201600453
  60. P. Bollella, F. Mazzei, G. Favero, G. Fusco, R. Ludwig, L. Gorton, R. Antiochia. Improved DET communication between cellobiose dehydrogenase and a gold electrode modified with a rigid self-assembled monolayer and green metal nanoparticles: The role of an ordered nanostructuration. Biosensors and Bioelectronics 2017, 88 , 196-203. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bios.2016.08.027
  61. Kento Sakai, Yu Sugimoto, Yuki Kitazumi, Osamu Shirai, Kazuyoshi Takagi, Kenji Kano. Direct electron transfer-type bioelectrocatalytic interconversion of carbon dioxide/formate and NAD+/NADH redox couples with tungsten-containing formate dehydrogenase. Electrochimica Acta 2017, 228 , 537-544. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2017.01.112
  62. Shelley D. Minteer. Methods in Biological Fuel Cells. 2017, 743-755. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-662-46657-5_22
  63. Ricardo Venegas, Francisco J. Recio, Jorge Riquelme, Karinna Neira, José F. Marco, Ingrid Ponce, José H. Zagal, Federico Tasca. Biomimetic reduction of O 2 in an acid medium on iron phthalocyanines axially coordinated to pyridine anchored on carbon nanotubes. Journal of Materials Chemistry A 2017, 5 (24) , 12054-12059. https://doi.org/10.1039/C7TA02381B
  64. Paolo Bollella, Christopher Schulz, Gabriele Favero, Franco Mazzei, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton, Riccarda Antiochia. Green Synthesis and Characterization of Gold and Silver Nanoparticles and their Application for Development of a Third Generation Lactose Biosensor. Electroanalysis 2017, 29 (1) , 77-86. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201600476
  65. Hussein Kanso, María Begoña González García, Su Ma, Roland Ludwig, Pablo Fanjul Bolado, David Hernández Santos. Dual Biosensor for Simultaneous Monitoring of Lactate and Glucose Based on Thin‐layer Flow Cell Screen‐printed Electrode. Electroanalysis 2017, 29 (1) , 87-92. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201600487
  66. Xavier Devaux, Naoual Allali, Victor Mamane, Manuel Dossot. Covalent functionalization of Single‐Wall Carbon Nanotube by ferrocene derivatives : localisation and identification of a single molecule. 2016, 470-471. https://doi.org/10.1002/9783527808465.EMC2016.5997
  67. Hong-qi Xia, Keisei So, Yuki Kitazumi, Osamu Shirai, Koji Nishikawa, Yoshiki Higuchi, Kenji Kano. Dual gas-diffusion membrane- and mediatorless dihydrogen/air-breathing biofuel cell operating at room temperature. Journal of Power Sources 2016, 335 , 105-112. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jpowsour.2016.10.030
  68. Hong-qi Xia, Yuya Hibino, Yuki Kitazumi, Osamu Shirai, Kenji Kano. Interaction between d-fructose dehydrogenase and methoxy-substituent-functionalized carbon surface to increase productive orientations. Electrochimica Acta 2016, 218 , 41-46. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2016.09.093
  69. Carmen Ioana Fort, Roberto Ortiz, Liviu Cosmin Cotet, Virginia Danciu, Ionel Catalin Popescu, Lo Gorton. Carbon Aerogel as Electrode Material for Improved Direct Electron Transfer in Biosensors Incorporating Cellobiose Dehydrogenase. Electroanalysis 2016, 28 (10) , 2311-2319. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201600219
  70. Alina N. Sekretaryova, Mats Eriksson, Anthony P.F. Turner. Bioelectrocatalytic systems for health applications. Biotechnology Advances 2016, 34 (3) , 177-197. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2015.12.005
  71. Carmen Castro, Nicolas Arancibia-Miranda, Cristina Acuña-Rougier, Mauricio Escudey, Federico Tasca. Spectroscopic and Electrochemical Studies of Imogolite and Fe-Modified Imogolite Nanotubes. Nanomaterials 2016, 6 (2) , 28. https://doi.org/10.3390/nano6020028
  72. Lars J. C. Jeuken. Structure and Modification of Electrode Materials for Protein Electrochemistry. 2016, 43-73. https://doi.org/10.1007/10_2015_5011
  73. Wei Zhang, Shuyun Zhu, Rafael Luque, Shuang Han, Lianzhe Hu, Guobao Xu. Recent development of carbon electrode materials and their bioanalytical and environmental applications. Chemical Society Reviews 2016, 45 (3) , 715-752. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5CS00297D
  74. Ahmed A. Mohamed, Zakaria Salmi, Si Amar Dahoumane, Ahmed Mekki, Benjamin Carbonnier, Mohamed M. Chehimi. Functionalization of nanomaterials with aryldiazonium salts. Advances in Colloid and Interface Science 2015, 225 , 16-36. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cis.2015.07.011
  75. Patrycja Kielb, Murat Sezer, Sagie Katz, Francesca Lopez, Christopher Schulz, Lo Gorton, Roland Ludwig, Ulla Wollenberger, Ingo Zebger, Inez M. Weidinger. Spectroscopic Observation of Calcium‐Induced Reorientation of Cellobiose Dehydrogenase Immobilized on Electrodes and its Effect on Electrocatalytic Activity. ChemPhysChem 2015, 16 (9) , 1960-1968. https://doi.org/10.1002/cphc.201500112
  76. Paloma Yáñez‐Sedeño, Reynaldo Villalonga, José M. Pingarrón. Electroanalytical Methods Based on Hybrid Nanomaterials. 2015, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/9780470027318.a9394
  77. Yin Song, Chunhui Chen, Chunlei Wang. Graphene/enzyme-encrusted three-dimensional carbon micropillar arrays for mediatorless micro-biofuel cells. Nanoscale 2015, 7 (16) , 7084-7090. https://doi.org/10.1039/C4NR06856D
  78. Somayyeh Bozorgzadeh, Hassan Hamidi, Roberto Ortiz, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton. Direct electron transfer of Phanerochaete chrysosporium cellobiose dehydrogenase at platinum and palladium nanoparticles decorated carbon nanotubes modified electrodes. Physical Chemistry Chemical Physics 2015, 17 (37) , 24157-24165. https://doi.org/10.1039/C5CP03812J
  79. Pascal Blondeau. Enhancing the Surface Sensitivity and Selectivity: Functionalization of Carbon Nanomaterials. 2015, 79-102. https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-319-08648-4_4
  80. Johannes Tanne, Daniel Kracher, Birgit Dietzel, Burkhard Schulz, Roland Ludwig, Fred Lisdat, Frieder Scheller, Frank Bier. Carboxylated or Aminated Polyaniline—Multiwalled Carbon Nanotubes Nanohybrids for Immobilization of Cellobiose Dehydrogenase on Gold Electrodes. Biosensors 2014, 4 (4) , 370-386. https://doi.org/10.3390/bios4040370
  81. Roberto Ortiz, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton. Highly Efficient Membraneless Glucose Bioanode Based on Corynascus thermophilus Cellobiose Dehydrogenase on Aryl Diazonium‐Activated Single‐Walled Carbon Nanotubes. ChemElectroChem 2014, 1 (11) , 1948-1956. https://doi.org/10.1002/celc.201402197
  82. Magnus Falk, Miguel Alcalde, Philip N. Bartlett, Antonio L. De Lacey, Lo Gorton, Cristina Gutierrez-Sanchez, Raoudha Haddad, Jeremy Kilburn, Dónal Leech, Roland Ludwig, Edmond Magner, Diana M. Mate, Peter Ó. Conghaile, Roberto Ortiz, Marcos Pita, Sascha Pöller, Tautgirdas Ruzgas, Urszula Salaj-Kosla, Wolfgang Schuhmann, Fredrik Sebelius, Minling Shao, Leonard Stoica, Cristoph Sygmund, Jonas Tilly, Miguel D. Toscano, Jeevanthi Vivekananthan, Emma Wright, Sergey Shleev, . Self-Powered Wireless Carbohydrate/Oxygen Sensitive Biodevice Based on Radio Signal Transmission. PLoS ONE 2014, 9 (10) , e109104. https://doi.org/10.1371/journal.pone.0109104
  83. Aysu Yarman, Christopher Schulz, Cristoph Sygmund, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton, Ulla Wollenberger, Frieder W. Scheller. Third Generation ATP Sensor with Enzymatic Analyte Recycling. Electroanalysis 2014, 26 (9) , 2043-2048. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201400231
  84. Behzad Haghighi, Babak Karimi, Mojtaba Tavahodi, Hesam Behzadneia. Electrochemical Behavior of Glucose Oxidase Immobilized on Pd‐Nanoparticles Decorated Ionic Liquid Derived Fibrillated Mesoporous Carbon. Electroanalysis 2014, 26 (9) , 2010-2016. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201400266
  85. Zhiyong Gao, Feng Wang, Jiuli Chang, Dapeng Wu, Xiaorui Wang, Xin Wang, Fang Xu, Shuyan Gao, Kai Jiang. Chemically grafted graphene-polyaniline composite for application in supercapacitor. Electrochimica Acta 2014, 133 , 325-334. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2014.04.033
  86. Yin Song, Varun Penmatsa, Chunlei Wang. Modeling and Simulation of Enzymatic Biofuel Cells with Three-Dimensional Microelectrodes. Energies 2014, 7 (7) , 4694-4709. https://doi.org/10.3390/en7074694
  87. Zhenyu Sun, Jeevanthi Vivekananthan, Dmitrii A. Guschin, Xing Huang, Volodymyr Kuznetsov, Petra Ebbinghaus, Adnan Sarfraz, Martin Muhler, Wolfgang Schuhmann. High‐Concentration Graphene Dispersions with Minimal Stabilizer: A Scaffold for Enzyme Immobilization for Glucose Oxidation. Chemistry – A European Journal 2014, 20 (19) , 5752-5761. https://doi.org/10.1002/chem.201400098
  88. A. de Poulpiquet, A. Ciaccafava, E. Lojou. New trends in enzyme immobilization at nanostructured interfaces for efficient electrocatalysis in biofuel cells. Electrochimica Acta 2014, 126 , 104-114. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2013.07.133
  89. Charuksha Walgama, Sadagopan Krishnan. Tuning the Electrocatalytic Efficiency of Heme-Protein Films by Controlled Immobilization on Pyrene-Functionalized Nanostructure Electrodes. Journal of The Electrochemical Society 2014, 161 (1) , H47-H52. https://doi.org/10.1149/2.089401jes
  90. M. Boujtita. Chemical and biological sensing with carbon nanotubes (CNTs). 2014, 3-27. https://doi.org/10.1533/9780857096722.1.3
  91. Seiya Tsujimura. Recent advances in carbon electrodes for the development of enzyme-based biofuel cells. TANSO 2014, 2014 (265) , 195-203. https://doi.org/10.7209/tanso.2014.195
  92. Hiroaki Maeda, Ryota Sakamoto, Hiroshi Nishihara. Metal complex oligomer and polymer wires on electrodes: Tactical constructions and versatile functionalities. Polymer 2013, 54 (17) , 4383-4403. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.polymer.2013.04.019
  93. Roland Ludwig, Roberto Ortiz, Christopher Schulz, Wolfgang Harreither, Christoph Sygmund, Lo Gorton. Cellobiose dehydrogenase modified electrodes: advances by materials science and biochemical engineering. Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry 2013, 405 (11) , 3637-3658. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00216-012-6627-x
  94. Yang Liu, Yan Du, Chang Ming Li. Direct Electrochemistry Based Biosensors and Biofuel Cells Enabled with Nanostructured Materials. Electroanalysis 2013, 25 (4) , 815-831. https://doi.org/10.1002/elan.201200555
  95. Weiguang Ma, Xiangyu Lv, Dongxue Han, Fenghua Li, Xiandui Dong, Li Niu. Decoration of electro-reduced graphene oxide with uniform gold nanoparticles based on in situ diazonium chemistry and their application in methanol oxidation. Journal of Electroanalytical Chemistry 2013, 690 , 111-116. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jelechem.2012.12.007
  96. Federico Tasca, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton, Riccarda Antiochia. Determination of lactose by a novel third generation biosensor based on a cellobiose dehydrogenase and aryl diazonium modified single wall carbon nanotubes electrode. Sensors and Actuators B: Chemical 2013, 177 , 64-69. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.snb.2012.10.114
  97. Ronen Polsky, Susan M. Brozik, Xiaoyin Xiao, J. Todd Holland. Electrical “Wiring” of Enzymes. 2013, 1-18. https://doi.org/10.1002/047134608X.W8194
  98. Sven C. Feifel, Andreas Kapp, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton, Fred Lisdat. Electrocatalytically active multi-protein assemblies using nanoscaled building blocks. RSC Advances 2013, 3 (10) , 3428. https://doi.org/10.1039/c2ra22819j
  99. Gabor Kovacs, Roberto Ortiz, Vasile Coman, Wolfgang Harreither, Ionel Catalin Popescu, Roland Ludwig, Lo Gorton. Graphite electrodes modified with Neurospora crassa cellobiose dehydrogenase: Comparative electrochemical characterization under direct and mediated electron transfer. Bioelectrochemistry 2012, 88 , 84-91. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.bioelechem.2012.06.006
  100. Dónal Leech, Paul Kavanagh, Wolfgang Schuhmann. Enzymatic fuel cells: Recent progress. Electrochimica Acta 2012, 84 , 223-234. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.electacta.2012.02.087
Load all citations
  • Abstract

    Figure 1

    Figure 1. Schematic representation of SWCNTs-GC electrodes modified with (A1) p-phenylenediamine or (B1) p-aminobenzoic acid. After modification, PsCDH is added and will adsorb onto the SWCNTs exhibiting either (A2) aniline moieties or (B2) benzoic acid moieties. The orientation of PsCDH is very likely influenced by the charged surfaces, with the highly negatively charged CYTPsCDH attracted by the positive charges of A2 or repulsed by the negative charges on B2.

    Figure 2

    Figure 2. Cyclic voltammograms for in situ generation of aryl diazonium salts on SWCNTs-GC electrodes obtained from (a) 1 mM p-phenylenediamine and (b) 1 mM 4-aminobenzoic acid in 0.5 M HCl aqueous medium with 1 mM NaNO2 at a scan rate of 100 mVs−1. First scan (—), second scan (red − −).

    Figure 3

    Figure 3. (a) Cyclic voltammograms recorded at NH2-PD/SWCNT-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM Ru(NH3)63+ in acetate buffer at pH 3.0 (—) and at pH 6.0 (red − −). (b) Cyclic voltammograms recorded at COOH-PD/SWCNT-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM Fe(CN)63-/4- at pH 4 (—) and at pH 2 (red − −).

    Figure 4

    Figure 4. Isoelectric focusing of P. sordida CDH. Active staining with 2,6-dichloroindophenol and lactose is shown on the left side; silver staining is on the right side. Lanes 1 and 4, pI marker; lanes 2 and 5, proteolytic digest of PsCDH; lanes 3 and 6, purified PsCDH.

    Figure 5

    Figure 5. Activity versus pH profiles of PsCDH using (−▽−) cytochrome c, (−◻−) DCIP, and (−○−) BQ. The turnover numbers are given for the different electron acceptors. For lactose, the turnover number would be the same in the case of the two-electron acceptors but only half the value in the case of cytochrome c (stoichiometry = 2).

    Figure 6

    Figure 6. (a) Cyclic voltammogram of a PsCDH COOH-PD/SWCNT-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM lactose (red − −) and in the absence of substrate (−). 0.1 M acetate buffer, pH 4.5. Scan rate 1 mV s−1. (b) Cyclic voltammogram of a PsCDH NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM lactose (red − −) and in the absence of substrate. 0.1 M acetate buffer, pH 3.5. Scan rate 1 mV s−1.

    Figure 7

    Figure 7. Multiple CVs (15 cycles are shown registered at even intervals during 50 h) of a PsCDH NH2-PD/SWCNTs-GC electrode in the presence of 5 mM lactose in 0.1 M acetate buffer, pH 3.5. Scan rate 0.1 mVs−1.

  • References

    ARTICLE SECTIONS
    Jump To

    This article references 57 other publications.

    1. 1
      Cracknell, J. A.; Vincent, K. A.; Armstrong, F. A. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 2439 2461
    2. 2
      Léger, C.; Bertrand, P. Chem. Rev. 2008, 108, 2379 2438
    3. 3
      Tasca, F.; Timur, S.; Ludwig, R.; Haltrich, D.; Volc, J.; Antiochia, R.; Gorton, L. Electroanalysis 2007, 19, 294 302
    4. 4
      Heller, A. Curr. Opin. Chem. Biol. 2006, 10, 664 672
    5. 5
      Mano, N.; Heller, A. Anal. Chem. 2005, 77, 729 732
    6. 6
      Zafar, M. N.; Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Patridge, E. V.; Ferry, J. G.; Nöll, G. Anal. Chem. 2009, 81, 4082 4088
    7. 7
      Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Wagner, J. B.; Nöll, G. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2008, 24, 272 278
    8. 8
      Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Kujawa, M.; Patel, I.; Harreither, W.; Peterbauer, C. K.; Ludwig, R.; Nöll, G. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2010, 25, 1710 1716
    9. 9
      Barton, S. C.; Gallaway, J.; Atanassov, P. Chem. Rev. 2004, 104, 4867 4886
    10. 10
      Christenson, A.; Dimcheva, N.; Ferapontova, E. E.; Gorton, L.; Ruzgas, T.; Stoica, L.; Shleev, S.; Yaropolov, A. L.; Haltrich, D.; Thorneley, R. N. F.; Aust, S. D. Electroanalysis 2004, 16, 1074 1092
    11. 11
      Vincent, K. A.; Parkin, A.; Armstrong, F. A. Chem. Rev. 2007, 107, 4366 4413
    12. 12
      Wei, J. J.; Liu, H. Y.; Dick, A. R.; Yamamoto, H.; He, Y. F.; Waldeck, D. H. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2002, 124, 9591 9599
    13. 13
      Gooding, J. J.; Wibowo, R.; Liu, J. Q.; Yang, W. R.; Losic, D.; Orbons, S.; Mearns, F. J.; Shapter, J. G.; Hibbert, D. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 9006 9007
    14. 14
      Hess, C. R.; Juda, G. A.; Dooley, D. M.; Amii, R. N.; Hill, M. G.; Winkler, J. R.; Gray, H. B. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 7156 7157
    15. 15
      Liu, G. Z.; Gooding, J. J. Langmuir 2006, 22, 7421 7430
    16. 16
      Willner, I.; Yan, Y. M.; Willner, B.; Tel-Vered, R. Fuel Cells 2009, 9, 7 24
    17. 17
      Wollenberger, U.; Spricigo, R.; Leimkuhler, S.; Schronder, K. Protein electrodes with direct electrochemical communication In Biosensing for the 21st Century; Springer-Verlag: Berlin, 2008; Vol. 109; pp 1964.
    18. 18
      Finklea, H. O. Electrochemistry of organized monolayers of thiols and related molecules on electrodes. In Electroanalytical Chemistry; Bard, A. J., Ed.; Marcel Dekker: New York, 1996; Vol. 19; pp 109335.
    19. 19
      Gooding, J. J.; Hibbert, D. B. TrAC, Trends Anal. Chem. 1999, 18, 525 533
    20. 20
      Gooding, J. J.; Mearns, F.; Yang, W. R.; Liu, J. Q. Electroanalysis 2003, 15, 81 96
    21. 21
      Lindgren, A.; Larsson, T.; Ruzgas, T.; Gorton, L. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2000, 494, 105 113
    22. 22
      Stoica, L.; Dimcheva, N.; Haltrich, D.; Ruzgas, T.; Gorton, L. Biosens. Bioelectron. 2005, 2010 2018
    23. 23
      Delamar, M.; Hitmi, R.; Pinson, J.; Savéant, J. M. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1992, 114, 5883 5884
    24. 24
      Downard, A. J. Electroanalysis 2000, 12, 1085 1096
    25. 25
      Gooding, J. J. Electroanalysis 2008, 20, 573 582
    26. 26
      Liu, Y. C.; McCreery, R. L. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 1995, 117, 11254 11259
    27. 27
      Corgier, B. P.; Marquette, C. A.; Blum, L. J. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2005, 127, 18328 18332
    28. 28
      Polsky, R.; Harper, J. C.; Dirk, S. M.; Arango, D. C.; Wheeler, D. R.; Brozik, S. M. Langmuir 2007, 23, 364 366
    29. 29
      Blanford, C. F.; Heath, R. S.; Armstrong, F. A. Chem. Commun. 2007, 1710 1712
    30. 30
      Yan, Y. M.; Yehezkeli, O.; Willner, I. Chem.—Eur. J. 2007, 13, 10168 10175
    31. 31
      Guiseppi-Elie, A.; Lei, C.; Baughman Ray, H. Nanotechnology 2002, 13, 559 564
    32. 32
      Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; Ludwig, R.; Nöll, G. J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 9956 9961
    33. 33
      Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; Ludwig, R.; Nöll, G. Anal. Chem. 2009, 81, 2791 2798
    34. 34
      Tasca, F.; Gorton, L.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; Ludwig, R.; Nöll, G. J. Phys. Chem. C 2008, 112, 13668 13673
    35. 35
      Bahr, J. L.; Tour, J. M. Chem. Mater. 2001, 13, 3823 3824
    36. 36
      Ludwig, R.; Harreither, W.; Tasca, F.; Gorton, L. ChemPhysChem 2010, 11, 2674 2697
    37. 37
      Stoica, L.; Ludwig, R.; Haltrich, D.; Gorton, L. Anal. Chem. 2006, 78, 393 398
    38. 38
      Safina, G.; Ludwig, R.; Gorton, L. Electrochim. Acta 2010, 55, 7690 7695
    39. 39
      Coman, V.; Vaz-Domínguez, C.; Ludwig, R.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; De Lacey, A. L.; Ruzgas, T.; Gorton, L.; Shleev, S. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2008, 10, 6093 6096
    40. 40
      Coman, V.; Ludwig, R.; Harreither, W.; Haltrich, D.; Gorton, L.; Ruzgas, T.; Shleev, S. Fuel Cells 2010, 10, 9 16
    41. 41
      Zamocky, M.; Ludwig, R.; Peterbauer, C.; Hallberg, B. M.; Divne, C.; Nicholls, P.; Haltrich, D. Curr. Protein Pept. Sci. 2006, 7, 255 280
    42. 42
      Harreither, W.; Sygmund, C.; Dunhofen, E.; Vicuna, R.; Haltrich, D.; Ludwig, R. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2009, 75, 2750 2757
    43. 43
      Baranton, S.; Belanger, D. J. Phys. Chem. B 2005, 109, 24401 24410
    44. 44
      Ludwig, R.; Salamon, A.; Varga, J.; Zamocky, M.; Peterbauer; K., C.; Kulbe, K. D.; Haltrich, D. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2004, 64, 213 222
    45. 45
      Baminger, U.; Subramaniam, S. S.; Renganathan, V.; Haltrich, D. Appl. Environ. Microbiol. 2001, 67, 1766 1774
    46. 46
      Ansorge, W. J. Biochem. Biophys. Methods 1985, 11, 13 20
    47. 47
      Sun, L.; Johnson, B.; Wade, T.; Crooks, R. M. J. Phys. Chem. 1990, 94, 8869 8871
    48. 48
      Liu, G.; Luais, E.; Gooding, J. J. Langmuir 2011, DOI: DOI: org/10.1021/la104373v , in press.
    49. 49
      Saby, C.; Ortiz, B.; Champagne, G. Y.; Belanger, D. Langmuir 1997, 13, 6805 6813
    50. 50
      Henriksson, G.; Pettersson, G.; Johansson, G.; Ruiz, A.; Uzcategui, E. Eur. J. Biochem. 1991, 196, 101 106
    51. 51
      Bao, W.; Usha, S. N.; Renganathan, V. Arch. Biochem. Biophys. 1993, 300, 705 713
    52. 52
      Hallberg, B. M.; Bergfors, T.; Bäckbro, K.; Pettersson, G.; Henriksson, G.; Divna, C. Structure 2001, 8, 79 88
    53. 53
      Yu, X. F.; Mu, T.; Huang, H. Z.; Liu, Z. F.; Wu, N. Z. Surf. Sci. 2000, 461, 199 207
    54. 54
      Lindgren, A.; Gorton, L.; Ruzgas, T.; Baminger, U.; Haltrich, D.; Schülein, M. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2001, 496, 76 81
    55. 55
      Coman, V.; Harreither, W.; Ludwig, R.; Haltrich, D.; Gorton, L. Chem. Anal. (Warsaw) 2007, 52, 945 960
    56. 56
      Larsson, T.; Lindgren, A.; Ruzgas, T.; Lindquist, S. E.; Gorton, L. J. Electroanal. Chem. 2000, 482, 1 10
    57. 57
      Sezer, M.; Spricigo, R.; Utesch, T.; Millo, D.; Leimkuehler, S.; Mroginski, M. A.; Wollenberger, U.; Hildebrandt, P.; Weidiger, I. M. Phys. Chem. Chem. Phys. 2010, 12, 7894 7903

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

Pair your accounts.

Export articles to Mendeley

Get article recommendations from ACS based on references in your Mendeley library.

You’ve supercharged your research process with ACS and Mendeley!

STEP 1:
Click to create an ACS ID

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

Please note: If you switch to a different device, you may be asked to login again with only your ACS ID.

MENDELEY PAIRING EXPIRED
Your Mendeley pairing has expired. Please reconnect