ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2025
Current Approaches to Microplastics Detection and Plastic Biodegradation.
Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
5 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Exploring the role of advanced oxidation processes in microplastics pollution research: A systematic literature review.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2026Pooled it
- A Multispectral Pulsed-Transmission Laser-Diode Sensor Concept for Real-Time In Situ Assessment of Microplastics in Water.Sensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Plastic-Degrading Microorganisms: Biodegradation Pathways and Habitat Origins.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Assessing the mechanism of osteosarcoma induced by long-term PET exposure: prediction from combined network toxicology, machine learning and molecular docking.Journal of bone oncology · 2025Article
- Pyrolysis of Polypropylene and Nitrile PPE Waste: Insights into Oil Composition, Kinetics, and Steam Cracker Integration.Molecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Environmental concerns about the widespread use of non-biodegradable plastic have generated interest in developing quick and effective methods to degrade synthetic polymers. With millions of tons of plastic waste generated annually, biodegradation by microorganisms presents a promising and eco-friendly solution. However, a bottleneck has arisen due to the lack of standardized methods for verification of the biodegradation process. Based on this literature review, he techniques most commonly employed for this purpose currently include measuring mass loss, examining the surface of plastic fragments by scanning electron microscopy (SEM) and atomic force microscopy (AFM), and using analytical methods such as Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR), pyrolysis-gas chromatography-mass spectrometry (Pyr-GC/MS) or high-performance liquid chromatography (HPLC). Each of these methods has its advantages and disadvantages. Nevertheless, currently, there is no universal approach to accurately assess the ability of individual microorganisms to degrade plastics. In this review, we summarize the latest advances in techniques for detecting biodegradation of synthetic polymers and future directions in the development of sustainable strategies for mitigating plastic pollution.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.