ArticleMembranes2023
Breakthrough Curve Modeling and Analysis for Lysozyme Adsorption by Tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane Affinity Nanofiber Membrane.
Article in Membranes, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
1 citing paper in PubMed.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
In this study, a polyacrylonitrile nanofiber membrane was first hydrolyzed and then functionalized with tris(hydroxymethyl)aminomethane (P-Tris), then used as an affinity nanofiber membrane for lysozyme adsorption in membrane chromatography. The dynamic adsorption behavior of lysozyme was investigated in a flow system under various operating parameters, including adsorption pHs, initial feed lysozyme concentration, loading flow rate, and the number of stacked membrane layers. Four different kinetic models, pseudo-first-order, pseudo-second-order, Elovich, and intraparticle diffusion kinetic models, were applied to experimental data from breakthrough curves of lysozyme. The results showed that the dynamic adsorption results were fitted well with the pseudo-second-order kinetic model. The breakthrough curve experimental results show significant differences in the breakthrough time, the dynamic binding capacity, the length of the mass transfer zone, and the utilization rate of the membrane bed under different operating parameters. Four dynamic adsorption models (i.e., Bohart-Adams, Thomas, Yoon-Nelson, and BDST models) were used to analyze the breakthrough curve characteristics of the dynamic adsorption experiments. Among them, the Yoon-Nelson model was the best model to fit the breakthrough curve. However, some of the theoretical results based on the Thomas and Bohart-Adams model analyses of the breakthrough curve fit well with the experimental data, with an error percentage of <5%. The Bohart-Adams model has the largest difference from the experimental results; hence it is not suitable for breakthrough curve analysis. These results significantly impact dynamic kinetics studies and breakthrough curve characteristic analysis in membrane bed chromatography.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.