MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W3107539693 · doi:10.3389/fmicb.2020.580709

Microbial and Enzymatic Degradation of Synthetic Plastics

2020· review· en· W3107539693 on OpenAlexafffund
M. Nisha, Zahra Montazer, Parveen Sharma, David B. Levin

Bibliographic record

VenueFrontiers in Microbiology · 2020
Typereview
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicMicroplastics and Plastic Pollution
Canadian institutionsUniversity of Manitoba
FundersNatural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada
KeywordsBiodegradationPolymerCrystallinityPolyethyleneDepolymerizationPolymer degradationMaterials scienceMicrobial biodegradationPolyethylene terephthalateDegradation (telecommunications)PolypropylenePolyesterChemical engineeringChemistryOrganic chemistryMicroorganismComposite materialBacteria

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Synthetic plastics are pivotal in our current lifestyle and therefore, its accumulation is a major concern for environment and human health. Petroleum-derived (petro-)polymers such as polyethylene (PE), polyethylene terephthalate (PET), polyurethane (PU), polystyrene (PS), polypropylene (PP), and polyvinyl chloride (PVC) are extremely recalcitrant to natural biodegradation pathways. Some microorganisms with the ability to degrade petro-polymers under in vitro conditions have been isolated and characterized. In some cases, the enzymes expressed by these microbes have been cloned and sequenced. The rate of polymer biodegradation depends on several factors including chemical structures, molecular weights, and degrees of crystallinity. Polymers are large molecules having both regular crystals (crystalline region) and irregular groups (amorphous region), where the latter provides polymers with flexibility. Highly crystalline polymers like polyethylene (95%), are rigid with a low capacity to resist impacts. PET-based plastics possess a high degree of crystallinity (30–50%), which is one of the principal reasons for their low rate of microbial degradation, which is projected to take more than 50 years for complete degraded in the natural environment, and hundreds of years if discarded into the oceans, due to their lower temperature and oxygen availability. The enzymatic degradation occurs in two stages: adsorption of enzymes on the polymer surface, followed by hydro-peroxidation/hydrolysis of the bonds. The sources of plastic-degrading enzymes can be found in microorganisms from various environments as well as digestive intestine of some invertebrates. Microbial and enzymatic degradation of waste petro-plastics is a promising strategy for depolymerization of waste petro-plastics into polymer monomers for recycling, or to covert waste plastics into higher value bioproducts, such as biodegradable polymers via mineralization. The objective of this review is to outline the advances made in the microbial degradation of synthetic plastics and, overview the enzymes involved in biodegradation.

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 machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.001
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0010.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.011
GPT teacher head0.218
Teacher spread0.207 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations1,060
Published2020
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueFrontiers in MicrobiologySame topicMicroplastics and Plastic PollutionFrench-language works237,207