Katarzyna Szymańska, Klaudia Odrozek, Aurelia Zniszczoł, Wojciech Pudło, and Andrzej B. Jarzębski Chem. Eng. J., 2017, 315, pp. 18-24.
Soudabeh Saeid, Pasi Tolvanen, Narendra Kumar, Kari Eränen, Janne Peltonen, Markus Peurla, Jyri-Pekka Mikkola, Andreas Franz, and Tapio Salmi Appl. Catal. B, 2018, 230, pp. 77-90.
Roger A. Sheldon and Pedro C. Pereira Chem. Soc. Rev., 2017, 46(10), pp. 2678-2691.
Tung Ngoc Pham, Ajaikumar Samikannu, Anne-Riikka Rautio, Koppany L. Juhasz, Zoltan Konya, Johan Wärnå, Krisztian Kordas, and Jyri-Pekka Mikkola Top. Catal., 2016, 59, pp. 1165-1177.
Hilde Larsson, Patrick Alexander Schjøtt Andersen, Emil Byström, Krist V. Gernaey, and Ulrich Krühne Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2017, 56, 14, pp. 3853-3865.
Valerie Eta and Jyri-Pekka Mikkola Carbohydr. Polym., 2016, 136, pp. 459-465.
Philipp Petermeier, Jan Philipp Bittner, Simon Müller, Emil Byström, Selin Kara Green Chemistry, 2022, 24(18), pp. 6889-6899.
Hendrik Mallin, Jan Muschiol, Emil Byström, and Uwe T. Bornscheuer ChemCatChem, 2013, 5, pp. 3529-3532.
Valerie Eta, Ikenna Anugwom, Pasi Virtanen, P. Mäki-Arvelaa, and Jyri-Pekka Mikkola Ind. Crops Prod., 2014, 55, pp. 109-115.
Adriana Freites Aguilera, Pasi Tolvanen, Shuyana Heredia, Marta González Muñoz, Tina Samson, Adrien Oger, Antoine Verove, Kari Eränen, Sebastien Leveneur, Jyri-Pekka Mikkola, and Tapio Salmi Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2018, 57(11), pp. 3876-3886.
Ran Duan, Bo S. Westerlind, Magnus Norgren, Ikenna Anugwom, Pasi Virtanen, and Jyri-Pekka Mikkola BioRes., 2016, 11(4), pp. 8570-8588.
Ariana Causevic, Eimantas Gladkauskas, Kim Olofsson, Patrick Adlercreutz, and Carl Grey Biochem. Eng. J., 2022, 187, 108610.
Ikenna Anugwoma, Luis Rujana, Johan Wärnå, Mattias Hedenström, and Jyri-Pekka Mikkola Chem. Eng. J., 2016, 297, pp. 256-264.
Anup Ashok and Santhosh Kumar Devarai 3 Biotech, 2019, 9(9), 349.
Carl-Johan Aurell, Staffan Karlsson, Fritiof Pontén, and Søren M. Andersen Org. Process Res. Dev., 2014, 18(9), pp. 1116-1119.
Jochen Wachtmeister, Philip Mennicken, Andreas Hunold, and Dörte Rother ChemCatChem, 2016, 8, pp. 607-614.
Jens Johannsen, Francesca Meyer, Claudia Engelmann, Andreas Liese, Georg Fieg, Paul Bubenheim, and Thomas Waluga AIChE J., 2021, 67(4), e17158.
An interesting paper where the authors mentions ”A further refinement, the rotating bed reactor developed by SpinChem... This technology combines the benefits of an STR and a packed bed and has been scaled up successfully to more than 100 litres scale.” Key learnings from the paper (1) The advantages and limitations of immobilised enzymes in industrial applications (2) The different technical and regulatory requirements using immobilised enzymes (3) The different enzyme immobilisation methods (4) The different reactor technologies for immobilised enzymes and biocatalysis in general (5) Recent advances in enzyme immobilisation for better production economy
In biotransformations, obstacles commonly encountered are product inhibition, product toxicity, and reaction equilibria that prevents complete conversion. Enzyme engineering has made tremendous progress in alleviating these problems. The concept of in situ product removal (ISPR) may still be an attractive alternative or complement. The authors have demonstrated concurrent enzymatic reaction and ISPR, referred to as 'extractive biocatalysis'. For the ISPR, the authors evaluated the use of aqueous micellar two-phase systems (ATPMS) as an extraction medium. For the model reaction, Penicillin G hydrolysis by CalB lipase, the demonstrated process was thus a continuous, heterogeneous extractive biocatalysis with cloud point extraction. An RBR was used during the process development work to determine the Michaelis-Menten kinetics of the CalB immobilized in gel coatings on column packing material. Also, the particles were easily re-used in stability experiments.
Alexandra V. Chatzikonstantinou, Αrchontoula Giannakopoulou, Stamatia Spyrou, Yannis V. Simos, Vassiliki G. Kontogianni, Dimitrios Peschos, Petros Katapodis, Angeliki C. Polydera, and Haralambos Stamatis Environ. Sci. Pollut. Res., 2022, 29, pp. 29624-29637.
S. Lokesha, Y. S. Ravi Kumar, P. S. Sujan Ganapathy, Prashant Gaur, and H. M. Arjun 3 Biotech, 2021, 11, 410.
Pobitra Halder, Sazal Kundu, Savankumar Patel, Adi Setiawan, Rob Atkin, Rajarathinam Parthasarthy, Jorge Paz-Ferreiro, Aravind Surapaneni, and Kalpit Shah Renewable Sustainable Energy Rev., 2019, 105, pp. 268-292.
Ingeborg Heuschkel, Selina Hanisch, Daniel C. Volke, Erik Löfgren, Anna Hoschek, Pablo I. Nikel, Rohan Karande, and Katja Bühler Eng. Life Sci., 2021, 21(3-4), pp. 258-269.
M. Aßmann, A. Stöbener, C. Mügge, S. K. Gaßmeyer, L. Hilterhaus, R. Kourist, A. Liese, and S. Kara React. Chem. Eng., 2017, 2(4), pp. 531-540.
Jochen Wachtmeister and Dörte Rother Curr. Opin. Biotechnol., 2016, 42, pp. 169-177.
Roger A. Sheldon and John M. Woodley Chem. Rev., 2018, 118(2), pp. 801-838.
Correlation data between extracted anthocyanidins/ anthocyanins vs time, temperature, and ethanol concentration was collected and analyzed. RBR extraction was deemed advantageous, in the authors’ own words: “The RBR was better than traditional extraction and 16 min sufficed.” Bilberry press cake is the major by-product from the production of bilberry juice. To valorize the press cake, the authors describe their work to extract antioxidant antocyanidins/ antocyanins from the cake. Different solvent compositions were compared as well as traditional extraction vs extraction by use of RBR. The methods used were as follows: “To summarize, the compared extraction methods were as follows: 1. Traditional extraction using different concentrations of ethanol dissolved in water, different masses of material, and different temperatures. 2. RBR extraction using different concentrations of ethanol dissolved in water, different masses, and temperatures. 3. RBR extraction using two-phase system, method 3 only mass and temperature were changed. 4. RBR extraction using two-phase system method 4, only mass and temperature were changed.”
Subhash Pithani, Staffan Karlsson, Hans Emtenäs, and Christopher T. Öberg Org. Process Des. Dev., 2019, 23(9), pp. 1926-1931.
Shuke Wu and Zhi Li ChemCatChem, 2018, 10(10), pp. 2164-2178.
Teng Ma, Weixi Kong, Yunting Liu, Hao Zhao, Yaping Ouyang, Jing Gao, Liya Zhou, and Yanjun Jiang Appl. Biochem. Biotechnol., 2022, 194, pp. 4999–5016.
Adriana Freites Aguilera, Pontus Lindroos, Jani Rahkila, Mark Martinez Klimov, Pasi Tolvanen, and Tapio Salmi Chem. Eng. Process. Process Intensif., 2022, 174, 108882.
Markus Hobisch, Piera De Santis, Simona Serban, Alessandra Basso, Emil Byström, and Selin Kara Org. Process Res. Dev., 2022, 26(9), pp. 2761-2765.
Tobias Heinks, Nicolai Montua, Michelle Teune, Jan Liedtke, Matthias Höhne, Uwe T. Bornscheuer, and Gabriele Fischer von Mollard Catalysts, 2023, 13(2), 300.
Wilhelm Wikström, Adriana Freites Aguilera, Pasi Tolvanen, Robert Lassfolk, Ananias Medina, Kari Eränen, and Tapio Salmi Ind. Eng. Chem. Res., 2023, 62(23), pp. 9169-9187.
Christopher K. Prier, Karla Camacho Soto, Jacob H. Forstater, Nadine Kuhl, Jeffrey T. Kuethe, Wai Ling Cheung-Lee, Michael J. Di Maso, Claire M. Eberle, Shane T. Grosser, Hsing-I Ho, Erik Hoyt, Anne Maguire, Kevin M. Maloney, Amanda Makarewicz, Jonathan P. McMullen, Jeffrey C. Moore, Grant S. Murphy, Karthik Narsimhan, Weilan Pan, Nelo R. Rivera, Anumita Saha-Shah, David A. Thaisrivongs, Deeptak Verma, Adeya Wyatt, and Daniel Zewge ACS Catal., 2023, 13(12), pp. 7707-7714.
Daria Kowalczykiewicz, Katarzyna Szymańska, Danuta Gillner, and Andrzej B. Jarzębsk Microporous Mesoporous Mater., 2021, 312, 110789.
Adriana Freites Aguilera, Roosa Hämäläinen, Kari Eränen, Pasi Tolvanen, and Tapio Salmi J. Chem. Technol. Biotechnol., 2021, 96(7), pp. 1874-1881.
Tapio Salmi, Kari Eränen, Pasi Tolvanen, J.-P. Mikkola, and Vincenzo Russo Chem. Eng. Sci., 2020, 215, 115393.
This website uses cookies to ensure you get the best experience on our website. If you continue browsing, you agree to the privacy policy.