Jump to ContentJump to Main Navigation
Show Summary Details
More options …

Green Processing and Synthesis

Editor-in-Chief: Hessel, Volker / Tran, Nam Nghiep

Editorial Board: Akay, Galip / Arends, Isabel W.C.E. / Cann, Michael C. / Cheng, Yi / Cravotto, Giancarlo / Gruber-Wölfler, Heidrun / Kralisch, Dana / D. P. Nigam, Krishna / Saha, Basudeb / Serra, Christophe A. / Zhang, Wei


IMPACT FACTOR 2018: 1.128

CiteScore 2018: 0.97

SCImago Journal Rank (SJR) 2018: 0.263
Source Normalized Impact per Paper (SNIP) 2018: 0.366

Open Access
Online
ISSN
2191-9550
See all formats and pricing
More options …
Volume 1, Issue 4

Issues

Modular micro reaction engineering for carboligation catalyzed by benzoylformate decarboxylase

Janosch Fagaschewski
  • Institute of Technical Biocatalysis, Hamburg University of Technology, Denickestrasse 15, D-21073 Hamburg, Germany
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Sven Bohne
  • Institute of Microsystems Technology, Hamburg University of Technology, Eissendorfer Strasse 42, D-21073 Hamburg, Germany
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Dennis Kaufhold
  • Institute of Technical Biocatalysis, Hamburg University of Technology, Denickestrasse 15, D-21073 Hamburg, Germany
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Jörg Müller
  • Institute of Microsystems Technology, Hamburg University of Technology, Eissendorfer Strasse 42, D-21073 Hamburg, Germany
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
/ Lutz Hilterhaus
  • Corresponding author
  • Institute of Technical Biocatalysis, Hamburg University of Technology, Denickestrasse 15, D-21073 Hamburg, Germany
  • Email
  • Other articles by this author:
  • De Gruyter OnlineGoogle Scholar
Published Online: 2012-08-25 | DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/gps-2012-0013

Abstract

The downscale of different unit operations for the biocatalytic carboligation of benzaldehyde and acetaldehyde catalyzed by benzoylformate decarboxylase from Pseudomonas putida was investigated. The reactor volume was reduced to 115 μl thus enabling a substrate and enzyme saving by a factor of 52 in comparison to standard laboratory techniques. Additionally, the successful downscale of membrane based liquid-liquid contactors was shown, which allows, for example, the screening of solvents for extraction as well as the feed of a substrate. Here, comparable volumes as well as residence times were realized, enabling the integration of all three unit operations.

Keywords: biocatalysis; downscale; enzyme; membrane; screening

1 Introduction

In comparison to chemical processes where heat exchangers as well as temperature and pressure control of the reaction are crucial parts, the key parts of bioprocesses are the biocatalysts, which can be enzymes or whole cells. These biocatalysts exhibit a certain activity and selectivity towards a specific substrate. Both activity and selectivity regarding a certain reaction can be characterized by kinetics as well as thermodynamics of the reaction [1, 2]. Apart from parameters such as temperature or pH, the solvent also plays an important role in enzyme activity and especially enzyme stability. All this needs to be quantified when setting up a bioprocess. Finally, questions regarding the choice of reactor type, catalyst recovery and downstream processing need to be answered [3].

Commonly accepted advantages of bioprocesses are the high selectivity of most biocatalysts as well as the usually mild reaction conditions, both resulting in low amounts of side products and thus high product quality [4]. When setting up a bioprocess first of all the catalyst must be selected and characterized with an understanding of kinetics and appropriate reaction conditions. However, catalysts and very often also the substrates are relatively expensive. Additionally, the biocatalyst has a limited stability. Therefore, in the early stage of ­bioprocess ­development there is a strong interest in a low consumption of consumables as well as in a high reproducibility and reliability of the data obtained from the characterization [57]. A crucial point for bioprocesses is also the product recovery, because often relatively low product concentrations are obtained and products must be isolated from a liquid phase. Here an appropriate downstream process or in situ recovery strategy has to be chosen [8].

Classical approaches for the screening of enzyme activity are based on the use of multititer plates mostly made from polystyrene or glassy materials [9]. These multi-titer plates represent an open batch system, which has two main drawbacks. Firstly, organic solvents must be circumvented because they might attack the plastic material. Secondly, volatile substrates or products cannot be used, because their evaporation results in huge errors of measurement. Therefore, the first set-up for the evaluation of a biocatalyst or reaction conditions for a bioprocess is a stirred tank reactor with a volume of usually 30–500 ml. Here, mostly standard glass hardware is used [10]. This approach is fairly labor intensive and automation is difficult. Later, a high amount of substrate as well as enzymes is necessary to obtain the desired data in a sufficient density. However, for the process development and scale-up, (kinetic) data obtained at real process conditions are necessary.

This is where micro reaction technology can contribute its promising potentials [11, 12]. Using micro reactors a downscale of the reaction can be realized [13, 14], and also other unit operations, such as membrane separation processes as they are often used in biotechnology, can be characterized on a small scale [15, 16]. Usually the characterization of each unit operation of a process is done independently, where every single unit operation operates with its own conditions and limitations (‘process window’). However, micro system technology offers the possibility to characterize combinations of unit operations, whereby the process window of the combined systems is restricted by the overlap of the unit operations. Initially only process windows, which are acceptable for all necessary unit operations, are evaluated [17]. Therefore, this approach can drastically reduce development times by omitting laborious investigations of conditions which are not applicable within the final process at any rate (Figure 1).

Illustration of a possible sequence of unit operations within a bioprocess comparing the development time to character-ize all unit operations within their specific process windows (PWs) with the development time when characterizing the combined unit operations in a common smaller process window.
Figure 1

Illustration of a possible sequence of unit operations within a bioprocess comparing the development time to character-ize all unit operations within their specific process windows (PWs) with the development time when characterizing the combined unit operations in a common smaller process window.

A biocatalytic process, consisting of continuous substrate feed, enzymatic reaction and continuous product removal, is presented below. The process was subdivided into its unit operations, which were considered individually.

First two different types of micro reactors for a carboligation catalyzed by benzoylformate decarboxylase [18, 19] are presented and one of these reactors is characterized in view of residence time distribution and flow conditions. In addition, the enzymatically catalyzed reaction was investigated in stirred vessel as well as in two micro reactors. Here, the comparability of stirred vessel and flow reactors should be reached [20].

To utilize a flow system in micro scale, a continuous product removal in a similar scale is required. Therefore, a product removal with membranes operating as contactor devices should be established and des­cribed in view of the degree of extraction and process stability.

Additionally, the usage of membranes for substrate feed was evaluated during this study. The relatively low solubility of benzaldehyde in the aqueous buffer led to a new approach for continuous substrate feed in a membrane module. A reproducible and constant benzaldehyde transfer rate across the membrane was the goal.

2 Materials and methods

2.1 Enzymatic assay

All chemicals used in this study were purchased from Sigma-Aldrich (Steinheim, Germany), unless indicated otherwise.

To obtain benzoyl formate decarboxylase (BFD) fermentation, harvesting and purification of the enzyme was done as described in [18, 19]. Enzymatic activity determination was carried out according to [19]: one unit is defined as the amount of enzyme in milligrams transforming 1 mmol benzaldehyde and acetaldehyde to hydroxyl phenylpropanone (HPP) per min in 100 mm phosphate buffer containing 0.5 mm thiamine diphosphate (ThDP) and 2 mm MgCl2, 400 mm acetaldehyde and 40 mm benzaldehyde at pH 7.5 and 30°C. The tenfold acetaldehyde excess was chosen according to the Km values determined for BFD in previous studies [19].

2.2 Micro reactors and characterization

Two different types of micro reactors were used for this work. The μ-CaR was made of a stainless steel capillary with an inner diameter of 200 μl. Connectors and valves were provided by Swagelok. Analysis of residence time distribution was done as depicted in Figure 2. The dimensionless sum of exit age distribution F(θ) was calculated according to [21].

Set-up for the analysis of the residence time distribution.
Figure 2

Set-up for the analysis of the residence time distribution.

The μ-SiR was made of 500 μm borosilicate glass (Pyrex®, Plan Optik AG, Elsoff, Germany) and silicon wafers (Si-Mat, Kaufering, Germany) using standard photolithography and dry etching techniques to machine the channel pattern to the silicon. With advanced silicon etching (ASE) an anisotropic etch occurs resulting in rectangular channel geometry. The channels have a width of 300 μm, a height of 500 μm as well as a length of 77 mm. The fluidic connectors were etched to the Pyrex® using hydrofluoric acid. Finally, both wafers were mated irreversible by anodic bonding.

Enzymatic reactions were carried out as depicted in Figure 3 at 30°C. Substrate concentrations were adjusted as described for the enzymatic assay by keeping ratio of flow rates constant for all residence times. The aqueous substrate solution and the aqueous enzyme solution were pumped into the reactor and samples were taken at the outflow. The product concentration was determined using high pressure liquid chromatography (HPLC).

Set-up for the analysis of the enzymatic reaction.
Figure 3

Set-up for the analysis of the enzymatic reaction.

2.3 Membrane module and characterization

The membrane module is made of polytetrafluorethylen (Teflon®). Separated channels with an inner diameter of 2 mm and an inner length of 75 mm are available. This allows a fine adjustment of the accessible membrane area or parallel use of different membranes or different solvents. Figure 4 shows a model of one channel and one ferrule for potting and sealing the hollow fiber on both ends with an epoxide two-part glue Loctite 3340 (Henkel, Düsseldorf, Germany). The ferrules have a ¼ inch-28 UNF thread for easy capability of connecting tubes. The module can be operated co- or counter-current. Figure 5 illustrates the set-up for the analysis of the substrate feed. Figure 6 illustrates the set-up for the analysis of the product extraction.

Model of one channel and one ferrule for potting and sealing the hollow fiber on both ends (left). Membrane module with nine single channels (right).
Figure 4

Model of one channel and one ferrule for potting and sealing the hollow fiber on both ends (left). Membrane module with nine single channels (right).

Set-up for the analysis of the substrate feed.
Figure 5

Set-up for the analysis of the substrate feed.

Set-up for the analysis of the product extraction.
Figure 6

Set-up for the analysis of the product extraction.

Parameters such as temperature, enzyme concentration, flow rates and the reaction volume for the two micro reactors and the membrane processes are listed in Table 1.

2.4 Analytics

Benzaldehyde (BA) and HPP concentrations in reaction buffer were determined by HPLC-UV analysis at 254 nm using a Merck KGaA (Darmstadt, Germany) Chromolith RP-8 phase at 40°C. Triethanolamine buffer and methanol (1:1) were used as an eluent with an isocratic flow rate of 1 ml/min. The reaction was quenched by adding stop solution, consisting of 90% acetonitrile and 5% phosphoric acid.

For the determination of HPP concentration in ethyl acetate a gas chromatography with flame ionization detector was used. An isocratic flow of 1.8 ml/min hydrogen was applied to a Varian CP-Chirasil-DEX CB phase from Agilent Technologies (Böblingen, Germany) at 110°C.

3 Results and discussion

Micro reactors are promising tools for screening of catalysts and reaction conditions [22]. Here two different types of micro reactors were evaluated for the investigation of an enzymatic reaction utilizing volatile substrates.

As a model system the carboligation of BA and acetaldehyde (AA) catalyzed by the enzyme BFD from Pseudomonas putida was chosen [19, 23]. The product (S)-2-hydroxyphenyl propanone (HPP) is formed in an enantiomerically pure form (Figure 7). However, to date, the analysis of this reaction has been carried out in a glass vessel operated as a stirred tank reactor [24]. Here, the evaporation of the highly volatile substrate acetaldehyde (boiling point 20°C) is problematic and requires additional equipment, such as reflux and/or closed pressure apparatus. Thus, using micro reactors can be highly beneficial [25].

Reaction scheme for the ligation of benzaldehyde (BA) and acetaldehyde (AA) catalyzed by the enzyme benzoyl formate decarboxylase (BFD). Reaction conditions: 40 mm BA, 400 mm AA, 100 mm phosphate buffer [pH 7.5, 0.5 mm thiamine diphosphate (ThDP) and 2 mm MgCl2], T=30°C.
Figure 7

Reaction scheme for the ligation of benzaldehyde (BA) and acetaldehyde (AA) catalyzed by the enzyme benzoyl formate decarboxylase (BFD). Reaction conditions: 40 mm BA, 400 mm AA, 100 mm phosphate buffer [pH 7.5, 0.5 mm thiamine diphosphate (ThDP) and 2 mm MgCl2], T=30°C.

The first micro reactor type used was a micro capillary reactor (μ-CaR) consisting of a steel capillary of 1.6 m and an inner diameter of 200 μm. Including connectors and valves the resulting reaction section volume was 790 μl. This reactor was characterized in view of residence time distribution (RTD) using the substrate benzaldehyde as a tracer and by measuring the absorption at 280 nm in the outflow of the reactor. The resulting F(θ) curves are shown in Figure 8.

Flow scheme for the analysis of the residence time distribution and the resulting F(θ) curves for the μ-CaR. Conditions: Ocean Optics flow cell, injection of 5 μl 25 mm benzaldehyde as a tracer.
Figure 8

Flow scheme for the analysis of the residence time distribution and the resulting F(θ) curves for the μ-CaR. Conditions: Ocean Optics flow cell, injection of 5 μl 25 mm benzaldehyde as a tracer.

To compare the μ-CaR to the stirred tank reactor plug performance of the flow reactor was evaluated. ­According to the first order boundary condition for open-open systems, an analytical solution from the dispersion model was used to determine Bodenstein numbers. Therefore the E(θ, Dax) curves were fitted to experimental data. Figure 9 illustrates the comparison between experimental data and the analytical solution, resulting in a Bodenstein number of 95. Various flow rates were adjusted to validate the flow conditions. The resulting Bodenstein numbers are summarized in Table 2.

Analytical solution of the boundary condition for open-open systems at given Bodenstein numbers to fit the experimental data for a residence time of 116 s at a Reynolds number of 11.
Figure 9

Analytical solution of the boundary condition for open-open systems at given Bodenstein numbers to fit the experimental data for a residence time of 116 s at a Reynolds number of 11.

Table 1

Reaction conditions for stirred vessel, flow reactors and membrane modules.

Table 2

Flow rates and Reynolds numbers applied for the characterization of the μ-CaR.

For conditions, see Figure 8.

The resulting Bodenstein numbers vary between 78 and 110. Thus, laminar plug-flow can be assumed for all evaluated Reynolds numbers [26]. A RTD analysis of the stirred vessel is not required because of premixed ­substrates and the addition of enzyme dissolved in reaction buffer.

Because the investigated biocatalytic reaction (see Figure 7) has a typical initial reaction rate of 4 mm/min at a substrate concentration of 20 mm BA and 200 mm AA residence times of up to 15 min should be realized, thus flow rates were varied in the range of 0.05 to 1.00 ml/min.

The second reactor (μ-SiR) was made from borosilicate glass and silicon. Rectangular channels were etched into the silicon, capped with glass on both sides. This allows a visual access to the reactor. The reaction section volume was 115 μl and a Y-shaped connector was implemented directly on the microchip.

Figure 10 depicts concentration over time curves for the two investigated micro reactor types in comparison to the formerly used stirred vessel (‘batch’) (30 ml). To compare the stirred vessel with flow systems the reaction conditions must be comparable. Owing to the reactor set-up and enzyme solubility an equal enzyme concentration in all reactors was not achieved. For that reason, a normalized time tn, multiplying the applied enzyme activity in units per milliliter (U×ml) reaction volume with the batch and residence time, is used for comparison.

HPP concentration in the course of the reaction. Reaction time (batch) as well as residence times (micro reactors) were normalized in view of the enzyme activity applied. Concentration time plot for the μ-CaR with a volume of 790 μl and for the μ-SiR with a volume of 115 μl. Reaction conditions: 40 mm BA, 400 mm AA, 100 mm phosphate buffer [pH 7.5, 0.5 mm thiamine diphosphate (ThDP) and 2 mm MgCl2], T=30°C.
Figure 10

HPP concentration in the course of the reaction. Reaction time (batch) as well as residence times (micro reactors) were normalized in view of the enzyme activity applied. Concentration time plot for the μ-CaR with a volume of 790 μl and for the μ-SiR with a volume of 115 μl. Reaction conditions: 40 mm BA, 400 mm AA, 100 mm phosphate buffer [pH 7.5, 0.5 mm thiamine diphosphate (ThDP) and 2 mm MgCl2], T=30°C.

Evidently, the resulting curves are very similar and it can be concluded that the downscale of reaction volume has no impact on the reaction progress. When comparing the results of the continuous flow experiments with the batch experiments one has to keep in mind that each data point necessitates at least one residence time. Therefore, for five data points a reduction of enzyme and substrate consumption in comparison to the batch experiment at 30 ml scale by a factor of 7.6 and 52.2 for the μ-CaR and the μ-SiR, respectively, was achieved. The reactor volume was reduced at these experiments by a factor of 38 and 261, respectively.

A crucial point for many bioprocesses is product recovery, because often relatively low product concentrations are obtained and products must be isolated from a liquid phase. Here, the choice of an appropriate downstream process or in situ recovery strategy has to be done. To analyze the substrate supply as well as the product extraction, the respective unit operations were implemented on small scale applying membrane contactors [27, 28].

The biocatalytic reaction of BFD requires the substrate benzaldehyde. However, this substrate has a limited solubility of only 40 mm in aqueous solution. Dissolving the substrate in batch mode is a time-consuming step that requires intensive mixing for around 30 min. Therefore, a feed via a membrane is a good way to circumvent this procedure and enables the direct integration of the substrate supply into the micro system. Benzaldehyde is a hydrophobic compound that easily wets hydrophobic membrane materials such as polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF), whereas the aqueous/polar reaction phase cannot go into the pores. The membrane acts as an interface between the two liquid phases and benzaldehyde diffuses into the reaction system. These membranes are available as flat membrane filters as well as micro hollow fibers. The huge advantage of micro hollow fibers is their low inner diameter of around 700 μm, which excellently fits to the micro reactors illustrated above [29]. Therefore, this membrane type was chosen for the investigated system. The volume of the used hollow fiber was 30 μl at a length of 7.5 cm. For the biocatalytic reaction the pore size is a also crucial parameter, because a leaching of the enzyme through the membrane reduces the catalytic activity in the reactor. However, two immiscible liquid phases, the hydrophilic enzyme containing phase (aqueous) and the hydrophobic substrate phase, were applied, no leaching of the enzyme in the direction of the organic phase was observed and the micro hollow fiber was therefore operated as a liquid-liquid contactor [30].

As illustrated in Figure 11 saturation of the membrane with the substrate benzaldehyde and thus a constant benzaldehyde transfer rate (156 μmol/min in this case) is achieved within 90 min at a constant volume flow of 0.3 ml/min representing a residence time of 0.1 min [31]. Both the residence time of 0.1 min as well as the transfer rate of 156 μmol/min are completely sufficient to provide enough substrate for the biocatalytic reaction. Carrying out the reaction with an activity of around 4 mm/min in a volume of 115 μl and at a residence of 0.1 min, a maximal consumption of 0.046 μmol is expected whereas a feed of 15.6 μmol is ensured.

Feed of the substrate benzaldehyde via a hollow fiber membrane. Membrane parameters: hydrophobic PVDF membrane, di = 700 μm, pore diameter 0.1 μm, area 165 mm2. Experimental conditions: T=20°C, flow of aqueous phase 300 μl/min, residence time 0.1 min.
Figure 11

Feed of the substrate benzaldehyde via a hollow fiber membrane. Membrane parameters: hydrophobic PVDF membrane, di = 700 μm, pore diameter 0.1 μm, area 165 mm2. Experimental conditions: T=20°C, flow of aqueous phase 300 μl/min, residence time 0.1 min.

The principle of a liquid-liquid contactor in the form of a micro hollow fiber was also applied for product extraction. Here, an organic solvent (ethyl acetate) was used to extract the product from the aqueous phase. The degree of extraction at different residence times up to 1 min was investigated using a 20 mm HPP solution (Figure 12). At a residence time of 1 min a degree of extraction of 50% was obtained. Comparing these results again with results obtained for the downscaled biocatalytic reaction, a product concentration of 2 mm HPP is to be expected in the case of a residence time of 1 min, illustrating the effectiveness of this established procedure.

Extraction of the product 2-hydroxy phenylpropanone via a hollow fiber membrane using ethyl acetate for extraction. Mem-brane parameters: hydrophobic PVDF membrane, di=700 μm, pore diameter 0.1 μm, area 165 mm2. Experimental conditions: starting concentration of HPP 20 mm, T=20°C, flow of aqueous phase: 30–100 μl/min.
Figure 12

Extraction of the product 2-hydroxy phenylpropanone via a hollow fiber membrane using ethyl acetate for extraction. Mem-brane parameters: hydrophobic PVDF membrane, di=700 μm, pore diameter 0.1 μm, area 165 mm2. Experimental conditions: starting concentration of HPP 20 mm, T=20°C, flow of aqueous phase: 30–100 μl/min.

4 Conclusions

In this study, the successful downscale of different unit operations for the biocatalytic carboligation of benzaldehyde and acetaldehyde was demonstrated. The reactor volume was reduced to 115 μl, thus enabling a substrate and enzyme saving by a factor of 52 in comparison to standard laboratory techniques. Additionally, the ­successful downscale of membrane based liquid-liquid contactors was shown, which allow, for example, the screening of solvents for extraction. Comparable volumes as well as residence times were realized, enabling the integration of all three unit operations.

Future work will deal with the combination of different unit operations (Figure 13) and the analysis of these combinations compared to the analysis of single unit operations. A more detailed analysis of the flow stream of the individual components within the channel is aimed for both micro reactors [32].

Possible flow scheme for the continuous analysis of the combined unit operations introduced. The reactor cycle with a sampling valve as well as two membrane cycles for substrate feed and product removal is shown.
Figure 13

Possible flow scheme for the continuous analysis of the combined unit operations introduced. The reactor cycle with a sampling valve as well as two membrane cycles for substrate feed and product removal is shown.

We thank Michael Hensges (Ham­burg University of Technology) for technical support and Dr. Anne van den Wittenboer for helpful comments on this manuscript. We thank Prof. Dr. M. Pohl for providing the BFD plasmid.

List of abbreviations

AA

Acetaldehyde

ASE

Advanced silicon etching

BA

Benzaldehyde

BFD

Benzoyl formate decarboxylase

CI

Concentration indication

HPLC

High pressure liquid chromatography

HPP

Hydroxyl phenylpropanone

μ-CaR

Micro capillary reactor

μ-SiR

Micro silicon reactor

PVDF

Polyvinylidene fluoride

PI

Pressure indication

PW

Process window

RTD

Residence time distribution

TC

Temperature control

ThDP

Thiamine diphosphate

List of symbols

Dax

Axial dispersion coefficient

E(θ)

Density curve of dimensionless residence time

θ

Dimensionless residence time

u

Flow velocity

tn

Normalized time

Re

Reynolds number

F(θ)

Sum curve of dimensionless residence time

Volume flow

References

  • [1]

    Strompen S, Weiß M, Ingram T, Smirnova I, Gröger H, Hilterhaus L, Liese A. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2012, 109, 1479–1489 Google Scholar

  • [2]

    Vasic-Racki D, Kragl U, Liese A. Chem. Biochem. Eng. Q. 2003, 17, 7–18 Google Scholar

  • [3]

    Liese A, Seelbach K, Wandrey C, Eds., Industrial Biotransformations, Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2006 Google Scholar

  • [4]

    Hilterhaus L, Liese A. In White Biotechnology. Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology, Ulber R, Sell D, Eds., Springer-Verlag: Berlin/Heidelberg, 2007, Vol. 105, pp. 133–173 Google Scholar

  • [5]

    Betts JI, Baganz F. Microbial Cell Factories 2006, 5, 21 PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • [6]

    Fernandes P, Carvalho F, Marques MPC. Rec. Patents Biotechnol. 2011, 5, 160–173Google Scholar

  • [7]

    Bolivar JM, Wiesbauer J, Nidetzky B. Trends Biotechnol. 2011, 29, 333–342 PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • [8]

    Schmid A, Dordick JS, Hauer B, Kiener A, Wubbolts M, Witholt B. Nature 2001, 409, 258–268 Google Scholar

  • [9]

    Lutz S, Bornscheuer UT, Eds., Protein Engineering Handbook, 1st ed., Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2008 Google Scholar

  • [10]

    Schügerl K, Zeng AP, Eds., Tools and Applications of Biochemical Engineering Science. Advances in Biochemical Engineering Biotechnology, Springer-Verlag: Berlin/Heidelberg, 2002 Google Scholar

  • [11]

    Mills PL, Quiram DJ, Ryleyc JF. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2007, 62, 6992–7010 Google Scholar

  • [12]

    Chen BH, Micheletti M, Baganz F, Woodley JM, Lye GJ. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2009, 64, 403–409 Google Scholar

  • [13]

    Klemm E, Rudek M, Markowz G, Schütte R. In Winnacker-Küchler Chemische Technik – Prozesse und Produkte, 5th ed., Dittmeyer R, Keim W, Kreysa G, Oberhol A, Eds., Wiley-VCH: Weinheim, 2004, Vol. 2, pp. 759–819 Google Scholar

  • [14]

    de Bellefon C, Pestre N, Lamouille T, Grenouillet P, Hessel V. Adv. Synth. Catal. 2003, 345, 190–193 Google Scholar

  • [15]

    Kolfschoten RC, Janssen AEM, Boom RM. J. Sep. Sci. 2001, 34, 1338–1346 Google Scholar

  • [16]

    Wojik A, Marr R. Chem. Ingen. Techn. 2005, 77, 653–668 Google Scholar

  • [17]

    Hessel V, Cortesea B, de Croona MHJM. Chem. Eng. Sci. 2011, 66, 1426–1448 Google Scholar

  • [18]

    Iding H, Dünnwald T, Greiner L, Liese A, Müller M, Siegert P, Grötzinger J, Demir AS, Pohl M. Chemistry 2000, 6, 1483–1495 PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • [19]

    Kara S, Long WS, Berheide M, Peper S, Niemeyer B, Liese A. J. Biotechnol. 2011, 152, 87–92 Google Scholar

  • [20]

    Marangoni AG, Ed., Enzyme Kinetics: A Modern Approach, John Wiley & Sons: New York, 2002 Google Scholar

  • [21]

    Levenspiel O, Ed., Chemical Reaction Engineering, 3rd ed., John Wiley & Sons: New York, 1999 Google Scholar

  • [22]

    Urban PL, Godall DM, Bruce NC. Biotechnol. Adv. 2006, 24, 42–57 PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • [23]

    Berheide M, Peper S, Kara S, Long WS, Schenkel S, Niemeyer B, Pohl M, Liese A. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2010, 106, 18–26 PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • [24]

    Kara S. Online Monitoring of Biocatalytic 2-Hydroxy Ketone Synthesis under Ambient and High Pressure, Mensch und Buch: Berlin, 2012 Google Scholar

  • [25]

    Song H, Ismagilov RF. J. Am. Chem. Soc. 2003, 125, 14613–14619 Google Scholar

  • [26]

    Schlüter M, Hoffmann M, Räbiger N. Chem. Ingen. Techn. 2004, 76, 1682–1688 Google Scholar

  • [27]

    Muller DH, Liauw MA, Greiner L. Chem. Eng. Technol. 2005, 28, 1569–1571 Google Scholar

  • [28]

    Lyagin E, Drews A, Bhattacharya S, Ansorge-Schumacher MB, Kraume M. Biotechnol. J. 2010, 5, 813–821 PubMedGoogle Scholar

  • [29]

    Kopf F, Schlueter M, Kaufhold D, Hilterhaus L, Liese A, Wolff C, Beutel S, Scheper T. Chem. Ingen. Techn. 2011, 83, 1066–1073 Google Scholar

  • [30]

    Gostoli C. In Mass Transfer – Advanced Aspects, Nakajima H, Ed., InTech: Rijeka, 2011 Google Scholar

  • [31]

    Cussler EL. Diffusion – Mass Transfer in Fluid Systems, Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, 2009 Google Scholar

  • [32]

    Tišma M, Zelić B, Vasić-Rački D, Žnidaršič-Plazlc P, Plazl I, Chem. Eng. J. 2009, 149, 383–388 Google Scholar

About the article

Janosch Fagaschewski

Janosch Fagaschewski (born 1983) studied chemical engineering at the Hamburg University of Technology. He obtained his diploma in 2010 working on a modular enzymatic process in micro scale. Since 2010, he has been working as a PhD student at the Institute of Technical Biocatalysis at the Hamburg University of Technology. His research interests include the scale down of enzymatically catalyzed reactions, the combination of several unit operations in micro scale and the development of screening tools for enzymes and process conditions in micro fluidic devices.

Sven Bohne

Sven Bohne (born 1979) studied electrical engineering specializing in microsystem technology at the University of Rostock and Hamburg University of Technology. He obtained his diploma in electrical engineering in 2009 and worked as a research assistant at the Institute of Microsystems Technology in Hamburg. There he started working on his PhD thesis ‘The Development of a Micro­fluidic Enzymatic Multistep Bioreactor’.

Dennis Kaufhold

Dennis Kaufhold (born 1984) studied chemical engineering at the Hamburg University of Technology. He obtained his diploma in chemical engineering in 2009 working on the continuous enzymatic hydrolysis of natural oils. Since 2009, he has been working as a PhD student at the Institute of Technical Biocatalysis at the Hamburg University of Technology. He engages in the field of aeration of biocatalytic reaction systems, with major research on bubble free aeration with hollow fiber membrane contactors.

Jörg Müller

Jörg Müller (born 1944) studied electrical engineering at the Technical University Braunschweig, Germany. He obtained his diploma in 1969 and started his PhD studies at the Institute of HF-Technology at TU Braunschweig (H.-G. Unger), receiving his PhD in 1972. In 1979, he finished his Habilitation there. He worked as head of R&D ‘high-frequency diodes’ at Siemens AG, Germany, until 1983. From then to 2012 he was head of the Institute of Microsystems Technology at the Hamburg University of Technology, Germany. His research interest includes micro systems for biotechnology, gas analytics and minimal invasive medicine, as well as integrated optics for telecommunications and sensors. In 2009, his research on a planar integrated micro mass spectrometer (PIMMS) was honored with the AMA innovation award.

Lutz Hilterhaus

Lutz Hilterhaus (born 1978) studied chemistry specializing in biochemistry at the University of Münster, Germany. He obtained his diploma in chemistry in 2003 and worked as a research assistant at the Institute of Biochemistry in Münster. From 2004 to 2007 he did his PhD studies in the working group of Prof. Andreas Liese at the Institute of Technical Biocatalysis at Hamburg University of Technology (TUHH). After a Postdoc in the working group of Prof. Uwe Bornscheuer (University of Greifswald) in 2008, he returned to Hamburg where he is head of a junior research group ‘MicroBioTechnology’ since 2009.


Corresponding author: Lutz Hilterhaus, Institute of Technical Biocatalysis, Hamburg University of Technology, Denickestrasse 15, D-21073 Hamburg, Germany


Received: 2012-03-01

Accepted: 2012-04-17

Published Online: 2012-08-25

Published in Print: 2012-08-01


Citation Information: Green Processing and Synthesis, Volume 1, Issue 4, Pages 337–344, ISSN (Online) 2191-9550, ISSN (Print) 2191-9542, DOI: https://doi.org/10.1515/gps-2012-0013.

Export Citation

©2012 Walter de Gruyter GmbH & Co. KG, Berlin/Boston.Get Permission

Citing Articles

Here you can find all Crossref-listed publications in which this article is cited. If you would like to receive automatic email messages as soon as this article is cited in other publications, simply activate the “Citation Alert” on the top of this page.

[1]
Dennis Kaufhold, Janosch Fagaschewski, Daniel Sellin, Simon Strompen, Andreas Liese, and Lutz Hilterhaus
Analytical and Bioanalytical Chemistry, 2014, Volume 406, Number 13, Page 3157
[2]
Thomas Willms, Holger Kryk, Michael Wiezorek, and Uwe Hampel
Chemical Engineering Communications, 2017

Comments (0)

Please log in or register to comment.
Log in