Enzymatic processes for biodegradation of poly(hydroxyalkanoate)s crystals
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Poly(hydroxyalkanoate)s (PHAs) have attracted much attention as environmentally compatible polymeric materials that can be produced from renewable carbon resources. Biodegradation of PHA materials occurs by the function of extracellular PHA depolymerase secreted from microorganisms. Thus, elucidation of the enzymatic degradation mechanism for PHA materials is important to design PHA materials with desirable properties and controlled biodegradability. The solid PHA polymer is a water-insoluble substrate but PHA depolymerases are soluble in water. Therefore, the enzymatic degradation of PHA materials is a heterogeneous reaction on the material’s surface. Two distinct processes are involved during the degradation, namely, adsorption of the enzyme on the surface of PHA material and the subsequent hydrolysis of polymer chains. Atomic force microscopy (AFM) is a powerful tool that has been used for the quantitative analysis of PHA crystal degradation. AFM enables the characterization of the crystal surface nanostructure in a buffer solution. By using in-situ (real-time) AFM observations, we recently succeeded in observing the degradation processes of PHA crystals. Subsequently, we were also able to investigate the degradation rates of PHA crystals using the same technique. In this review, we have attempted to give an overview concerning the direct visualization of the adsorption, as well as the hydrolysis reactions of PHA depolymerases at the nanometer scale. In addition, we present other analytical techniques besides AFM as a complimentary approach to analyze the effect of enzyme adsorption on PHA crystals.Key words: poly(hydroxyalkanoate) (PHA), enzymatic degradation, lamellar crystal, PHA depolymerase.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".