Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: http://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/5498
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorSutherland, I A-
dc.contributor.authorHewitson, P-
dc.contributor.authorSiebers, R-
dc.contributor.authorVan den Heuvel, R-
dc.contributor.authorArbenz, L-
dc.contributor.authorKinkel, J-
dc.contributor.authorFisher, D-
dc.date.accessioned2011-07-04T15:29:44Z-
dc.date.available2011-07-04T15:29:44Z-
dc.date.issued2011-
dc.identifier.citationJournal of Chromatography A, 1218(32): 5527–5530, Aug 2011en_US
dc.identifier.issn0021-9673-
dc.identifier.urihttp://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S002196731100481Xen
dc.identifier.urihttp://bura.brunel.ac.uk/handle/2438/5498-
dc.descriptionCopyright @ 2011 Elsevier B.V. - This article is available from the specified link below.en_US
dc.description.abstractTwo different laboratory scale liquid–liquid extraction processes using aqueous two-phase systems (ATPS) are compared: centrifugal partition chromatography (CPC) and multilayer toroidal coil chromatography (MTCC). Both use the same phase system, 12.5% (w/w) PEG-1000:12.5% (w/w) K2HPO4, the same flow rate of 10 mL/min and a similar mean acceleration field of between 220 × g and 240 × g. The main performance difference between the two processes is that there is a continuous loss of stationary phase with CPC, while for MTCC there is not – even when sample loading is increased. Comparable separation efficiency is demonstrated using a mixture of lysozyme and myoglobin. A throughput of 0.14 g/h is possible with CPC despite having to refill the system with stationary phase before each injection. A higher throughput of 0.67 g/h is demonstrated with MTCC mainly due to its ability to tolerate serial sample injections which significantly reduces its cycle time. While CPC has already demonstrated that it can be scaled to pilot scale, MTCC has still to achieve this goal.en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipFunding was obtained from BBSRC for funding this study (Follow-on grant no. BB/FOF/206) following on from the BBSRC protein purification study (DEMPRO – grant no. BB/C506364/1).en_US
dc.description.sponsorshipThis article has been made available through the Brunel Open Access Publishing Fund-
dc.language.isoenen_US
dc.publisherElsevieren_US
dc.subjectToroidalen_US
dc.subjectTCCen_US
dc.subjectCPCen_US
dc.subjectCounter-current chromatography (CCC)en_US
dc.subjectProtein purificationen_US
dc.subjectLysozymeen_US
dc.subjectMyoglobinen_US
dc.titleScale-up of protein purifications using aqueous two-phase systems: Comparing multilayer toroidal coil chromatography with centrifugal partition chromatographyen_US
dc.typeArticleen_US
dc.identifier.doihttp://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.chroma.2011.04.013-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel (Active)-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Brunel (Active)/Research Centres-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Research Centres-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Research Centres/ABC-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/Research Centres/BIAS-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/School of Health Sciences and Social Care-
pubs.organisational-data/Brunel/School of Health Sciences and Social Care/BIAS-
Appears in Collections:Brunel Institute for Bioengineering (BIB)
Publications
Brunel OA Publishing Fund

Files in This Item:
There are no files associated with this item.


Items in BURA are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.