Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42334221›Full record

ReviewJournal of the American Chemical Society2026

Tangled Tail of Mechanically Interlocked Peptides.

Toby G Johnson, A James Link

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of the American Chemical Society, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

2 authors.

Toby G JohnsonDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-6475-769X
A James LinkDepartment of Chemical and Biological Engineering, Princeton University, Princeton, New Jersey 08544, United States.ORCID 0000-0001-5066-9691

Funding

Lasso Peptide DiscoveryR01GM107036 · NIGMS · PRINCETON UNIVERSITY · PI LINK, AARON JAMES · 2014 to 2022
$2.9M
NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM107036
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

First synthesized by chemists in the 1960s, mechanically interlocked molecules (MIMs) were created out of scientific curiosity and thought only to be academic oddities. However, naturally occurring interlocked biomolecules were subsequently discovered, highlighting the potential of the mechanical bond to serve a biological function. Interlocked structures have been identified in different classes of biomolecules; for example, catenated DNA serves to regulate DNA transcription; and the capsid of the HK97 bacteriophage consists of 72 protein macrocycles interlocked into a catenated chainmail sphere for the storage of viral DNA. The fields of molecular biology, which focuses on characterizing naturally occurring interlocked biomolecules, and supramolecular chemistry, which strives to chemically synthesize ever more complex molecular topologies, have historically run orthogonally to one another. However, as the conventional subject areas blend into synthetic biology, the benefits of a combined, interdisciplinary approach are evidenced by the bioengineering of new-to-nature mechanically interlocked peptides (MIPs). As the field evolves to attract increasingly diverse and interdisciplinary interest, we feel the time is right to provide an overview of these advances and establish a unified nomenclature. By systematically reviewing the MIPs currently found in nature, and the MIMs synthesized by chemists from peptidyl components, drawing chemical comparisons between the two we hope to bridge the gap between these fields and lay the foundations for future interdisciplinary work.

Indexed as

PeptidesPeptides

Identifiers

PMID42334221
PMCPMC13352647

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.