Buffer pH and Concentration

The effect of pH on the reaction rate and enantioselectivity using Bacillus lentus protease-III was studied and the results are summarized in Tab. 3. As with most ester resolutions using alkaline proteases, at high pH the hydrolysis is more rapid, however the selectivity is somewhat lower. We also observed that base-catalyzed hydrolysis is significant when the pH is over 9.0 ( 1%), which has a negative effect on selectivity. Based on initial rate measurements, the rate of hydrolysis at pH 8 was four-fold higher than that at pH 7. Thus there is a substantial decrease in rate of hydrolysis with decreasing pH. 

The effect of buffer strength on the rate of hydrolysis was also examined. From the pH/selectivity determination, it was clear that pH control is essential to obtain good selectivity, especially during scale-up. The sensitivity of the process to deviations in pH could be decreased by the use of very concentrated buffers. From the results in Tab. 4, it is apparent that the rate of hydrolysis also decreases at very high buffer concentrations, possibly due to the decreased solubility of the substrate at high salt concentrations or inactivation of the enzyme. Based on these results, a buffer strength of 0.3 M was selected for scale-up of the process. 

Reaction conditions room temperature, 1.0 g substrate, 8.7 mL 0.3 M phosphate buffer, 0.3 ml Bacillus lentus protease-III. 

---

Catechin and epicatechin are two flavanols of the catechin family. They are enantiomers. The capillary zone electrophoresis (CE) methods with UV-detection were developed for quantitative determination of this flavanols in green tea extracts. For this purpose following conditions were varied mnning buffers, pH and concentration of chiral additive (P-cyclodextrin was chosen as a chiral selector). Borate buffers improve selectivity of separation because borate can make complexes with ortho-dihydroxy groups on the flavanoid nucleus. 

CZE separations are based solely on the differences in the electrophoretic mobilities of charged species, either in aqueous or nonaqueous media (this latter often referred to as nonaqueous capillary electrophoresis, NACE). In CZE, the migration of a species within the capillary column is the net result of mass transport phenomena and chemical equilibria. Two modes of migration are possible, that is, under suppressed electroosmotic flow (EOF), achieved at low pH buffers or by the use of surface modified capillaries, and in the presence of EOF in the latter, two possibilities arise separations under co- and counter-EOF, depending on the relative mobility of the analyte and EOF itself. With the proper control of electrolyte composition (buffer type regarding both co- and counterions, buffer pH and concentration, as well as additives), the analyte mobility can be altered. Flow characteristics are also dependable on the electrolyte composition as well as on the capillary surface condition. 

If the pollutant is charged and exhibits UV-absorbing properties, the CZE mode is readily recommended. Eor basic pollutants, moderately low to low pH buffers are indicated and the analyte migrates coelectroosmotically as a cation (protonated species) whereas for acidic pollutants, high pH buffers will promote the analyte dissociation and it migrates counterelectroosmotically as an anion. In both cases, buffer pH and concentration are the variables to optimize before the addition of any modifiers is considered. 

The measure of the catalytic activity of an enzyme is the rate of the reaction catalyzed by the enzyme. The conditions of an enzyme activity assay are optimized with relation to type and ionic strength of the buffer, pH, and concentrations of substrate, cosubstrate and activators used. The closely controlled assay conditions, including the temperature, are critical because, in contrast to substrate analysis, the reliability of the results in this case often can not be verified by using a weighed standard sample. 

Cross-validation should be performed to compare results obtained by methods based on different techniques, e.g. LC-MS and HPLC-UV, or by the same method in different laboratories. Both methods should have been validated independently prior to cross-validation. Capillary electrophoresis (CE) is an alternative for HPLC for a wide range of analytical problems offering shorter analysis times. Both methods are selective and robust. Comparison of robustness implies a variation of different parameters, such as the mobile phase composition, the buffer pH and molarity, temperature, flow-rate and sample solvent [104]. Some concern has been expressed about the reproducibility of CE. Crucial parameters for robustness in CE are the mobile phase composition, which is essential for good separation, the nature of the eluents (volatility), buffer pH and concentration of the additive. Comparison of validated CE and HPLC methods shows that HPLC is about a factor of two better than CE for all quantitative parameters. 

Lee et al. [30] described a micellar electrokinetic capillary chromatographic method for the determination of some antiepileptics including valproic acid. They used a fused silica capillary column (72 cm x 50 pm) and SDS as the micellar phase and multiwavelength UV detection. Reaction conditions, such as pH and concentration of running buffer were optimized. Solutes were identified by characterizing the sample peak in terms of retention time and absorption spectra. Recoveries were 93-105%. 

Parameters that should be tested in HPLC method development are flow rate, column temperature, batch and supplier of the column, injection volume, mobile phase composition and buffer pH, and detection wavelength [2], For GC/GLC methods, one should investigate the effects of column temperature, mobile phase flow rate, and column lots or suppliers [38], For capillary electrophoresis, changes in temperature, buffer pH, ionic strength, buffer concentrations, detector wavelength, rinse times, and capillaries lots and supplier should be studied [35, 36], Typical variation such as extraction time, and stability of the analytical solution should be also evaluated [37],... 

The terminology applied in the different papers might vary. For example, both the terms buffer concentration and electrolyte concentration are frequently used and usually refer to the same. The same occurs for the terms buffer pH and electrolyte pH, and buffer ionic strength and electrolyte ionic strength. However, for the exact meaning or practical implications, we refer to the corresponding literature. 

The rates of formation of various cyclic peptides and DKPs have been documented and shown to be affected by a wide range of physicochemical and structural parameters. Goolcharran and Borchardt examined the effects of exogenous (i.e., pH, temperature, buffer species, and concentration) and endogenous (i.e., primary sequences) factors affecting the rate of cyclic dipeptide formation, using the dipeptide analogues of X-Pro-/)-nitroaniline (X-Pro-/>NA where X represents the amino acid residue of the respective cyclic dipeptide). 

The composition of the aqueous phase plays a critical role in interfacial reactions too. Sah and Bahl [35] showed that critical factors such as pH, buffer type and concentration affected the destabilisation of (3-lactoglobulin towards emulsification. In particular, pHs away from the pi and low buffer/salt concentrations are beneficial for minimising the interfacial inactivation. 

Folate is a relatively unstable nutrient processing and storage conditions that promote oxidation are of particular concern since some of the forms of folate found in foods are easily oxidized. The reduced forms of folate (dihydro- and tetrahydrofolate) are oxidized to p-aminobenzoylglutamic acid and pterin-6-carboxylic acid, with a concomitant loss in vitamin activity. 5-Methyl-H4 folate can also be oxidized. Antioxidants (particularly ascorbic acid in the context of milk) can protect folate against destruction. The rate of the oxidative degradation of folate in foods depends on the derivative present and the food itself, particularly its pH, buffering capacity and concentration of catalytic trace elements and antioxidants. 

All biochemical laboratory activities, whether in education, research, or industry, are replete with techniques that must be carried out almost on a daily basis. This chapter outlines the theoretical and practical aspects of some of these general and routine procedures, including use of buffers, pH and other electrodes, dialysis, membrane filtration, lyophilization, centrifugal concentration, and quantitative methods for protein and nucleic acid measurement. 

This is most simply prepared by the addition solid NaCl to 0.05 M phosphate buffer pH 6.3. This will alter the pH and concentration of the phosphate, but in this case it will not affect the procedure because the critical factor is the sodium chloride concentration. 

Buffers stabilize a solution at a certain pH. This depends on the nature of the buffer and its concentration. For example, the carbonic acid-bicarbonate system has a pH of 6.37 when the two ingredients are at equimolar concentration. A change in the concentration of the carbonic acid relative to its conjugate base can shift the pH of the buffer. The Henderson-Hasselbalch equation below gives the relationship between pH and concentration. 

The sensor developed by Gawley and co-workers is based on de Silva s modular approach comprises an azacrown ether linked to a fluorophore by a short link. The molecule combines the aza[18]crown-6 recognition element with a fluorescent coumaryl group attached by a methylene spacer. In tests it was shown to bind to saxitoxin with a binding constant on the order of 105 M 1, even in a phosphate buffer at physiological pH and concentrations of sodium and potassium, and could detect levels of the toxin down to 1(T7 M. Subsequent modification of the sensor allowed it to be linked to the surface of a quartz slide to allow the fluorescent response to concentrations of saxitoxin between 10-4 and 10-6 M to be detected via a fibre optic system. This level of sensitivity is comparable to the current mouse bioassay that requires the inoculation of a large number of animals to determine the concentration of saxitoxin present in the test sample [25],... 

Carboxymethylcellulose slurry (equivalent of 75 g of dry material)—Slowly wet 75 g of dry resin in distilled water. Draw off the supernatant (after the resin has settled) with vacuum filtration. Resuspend the filtered resin cake in 1.5 L of 0.5 M NaOH (30 g of NaOH dissolved in 1.5 L of distilled water). Allow the resin to settle, draw off the supernatant, and wash the resin cake twice, as before, in 2.5 L volumes of distilled water. Resuspend the resin cake in 2.5 L of 0.5 M HC1 (100 ml of concentrated HC1 in 2.4 L of distilled water). Allow the resin to settle, draw off the supernatant, and wash the resin cake twice, as before, in 2.5 L volumes of distilled water. Repeat the wash procedure described above with 1.5 L volumes of 0.03 M sodium acetate buffer, pH 5.0, until the pH and ionic strength of the drawn-off supernatant is the same as that of the sodium acetate buffer (pH and conductivity meter). Resuspend the resin cake in 1.5 L 0.03 M sodium acetate buffer, pH 5.0. Add 2 g/liter sodium azide for storage to prevent bacterial growth. Remove the azide by washing again in 0.03 M sodium acetate buffer, pH 5.0 when it is ready to be used by the class. 

---