Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2021 Jun 25;27(36):9414-9421.
doi: 10.1002/chem.202100803. Epub 2021 May 21.

Tailored Mobility in a Zeolite Imidazolate Framework (ZIF) Antibody Conjugate*

Ander Chapartegui-Arias  1   2   3 , Anna Raysyan  1   2 , Ana M Belenguer  4 , Carsten Jaeger  1 , Teodor Tchipilov  1 , Carsten Prinz  1 , Carlos Abad  1 , Sebastian Beyer  5 , Rudolf J Schneider  1   6 , Franziska Emmerling  1   2   3
Affiliations

Tailored Mobility in a Zeolite Imidazolate Framework (ZIF) Antibody Conjugate*

Ander Chapartegui-Arias et al. Chemistry. .

Abstract

Zeolitic imidazolate framework (ZIF) hybrid fluorescent nanoparticles and ZIF antibody conjugates have been synthesized, characterized, and employed in lateral-flow immunoassay (LFIA). The bright fluorescence of the conjugates and the possibility to tailor their mobility gives a huge potential for diagnostic assays. An enzyme-linked immunosorbent assay (ELISA) with horseradish peroxidase (HRP) as label, proved the integrity, stability, and dispersibility of the antibody conjugates, LC-MS/MS provided evidence that a covalent link was established between these metal-organic frameworks and lysine residues in IgG antibodies.

Keywords: antibodies; immunoassays; metal-organic frameworks; nanoparticles; zeolite analogues.

PubMed Disclaimer

Conflict of interest statement

The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Figures

Figure 1
Figure 1
Top: Simplified scheme of the chemistry involved in forming a covalent bond between ZIF‐90 and a mouse IgG antibody resulting in a stable ZIF‐IgG conjugate. Middle: Characterization techniques for ZIF‐antibody conjugates. Bottom: Two applications of the ZIF‐antibody conjugate particles: ELISA and LFIA.
Figure 2
Figure 2
TEM pictures for ZIF‐90. The rhombic dodecahedral shape of ZIF particles can be seen, with some polydispersity in size: between 30 and 350 nm and averaging 150 nm. These sizes were determined from TEM data and are not absolute values.
Figure 3
Figure 3
Powder diffractograms for a) nZIF‐90, b) the modified fluorescent ZIF‐8/ZIF‐90 hybrid [nZ8P], c) the nZIF‐90‐IgG conjugate [nZ90‐IgG] and d) the modified fluorescent ZIF‐8/ZIF‐90 hybrid‐IgG conjugate [nZ8P‐IgG].
Figure 4
Figure 4
Mass spectrometric evidence of assumed covalent bonding in the ZIF‐90‐IgG conjugate. The MS/MS spectrum shows a putative lysine derivative (precursor m/z 227.1503, isolation window 1 Da).
Figure 5
Figure 5
TEM images of nanoparticulate Z8P. a) rhombic dodecahedra characteristic for SOD ZIF systems; b), c) The particles show a polydispersity. c) EDX analysis confirms the presence of Zn (purple).
Figure 6
Figure 6
Proving the integrity of the ZIF‐IgG conjugate: Results from a noncompetitive ELISA. Unmodified anti‐mouse IgG (from sheep) used as reference (•), Z8P‐IgG (▪) and Z90‐IgG (⧫). HRP: horseradish peroxidase.
Figure 7
Figure 7
Fluorescence emission for the noncompetitive indirect assay employing Z8P‐IgG (λ ex=335 nm). Prewash fluorescence with excess nZ8P‐IgG (⧫), post wash (▪), and released aminopyrene fluorophore (•) from acid hydrolysis of the imine.
Figure 8
Figure 8
Experimental setup to demonstrate the aptitude of Z8P‐IgG for application in lateral flow immunoassays (LFIA). Top row: Assay protocol. Middle row: Visualization of the mobility of the ZIF composite and retention of binding specificity of the antibody: Bottom row: Proof of intact ZIF antibody conjugate. TMB: 3,3’,5,5’‐tetramethylbenzidine, HRP: horseradish peroxidase, PVDF: polyvinylidene difluoride.
See this image and copyright information in PMC

References

    1. Dutta S., Kim J., Hsieh P. H., Hsu Y. S., Kaneti Y. V., Shieh F. K., Yamauchi Y., Wu K. C. W., Small Methods 2019, 3, 1900213.
    1. Batten S. R., Champness N. R., Chen X. M., Garcia-Martinez J., Kitagawa S., Ohrstrom L., O′Keeffe M., Suh M. P., Reedijk J., CrystEngComm 2012, 14, 3001–3004.
    1. Troyano J., Carne-Sanchez A., Avci C., Imaz I., Maspoch D., Chem. Soc. Rev. 2019, 48, 5534–5546. - PubMed
    1. Lustig W. P., Mukherjee S., Rudd N. D., Desai A. V., Li J., Ghosh S. K., Chem. Soc. Rev. 2017, 46, 3242–3285. - PubMed
    1. Chen B. L., Yang Z. X., Zhu Y. Q., Xia Y. D., J. Mater. Chem. A 2014, 2, 16811–16831.

LinkOut - more resources