Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42460740›Full record

ArticleChemistry & biodiversity2026

Valorization of Fish Scale Waste Into Composite Films: Physicochemical, Mechanical, Antibacterial, and HET-CAM Angiogenesis Evaluation.

Fareeha Aftab, Nadia Ghani, Sibtain Ahmed, Arifa Tahir, Muhammad Arshad, Oybek Fayziev, Feruza Umirqulova

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Chemistry & biodiversity, 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

7 authors.

Fareeha AftabDepartment of Environmental Science, Lahore College for Women University, Lahore, Pakistan.
Nadia GhaniDepartment of Environmental Science, Lahore College for Women University, Lahore, Pakistan.
Sibtain AhmedDepartment of Biochemistry, Bahauddin Zakariya University, Multan, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-0708-3278
Arifa TahirDepartment of Environmental Science, Lahore College for Women University, Lahore, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-2450-1654
Muhammad ArshadBiochemistry Section, University of Veterinary and Animal Sciences, Jhang, Pakistan.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7199-0118
Oybek FayzievDepartment of Finance, Alfraganus University, Tashkent, Uzbekistan.
Feruza UmirqulovaDepartment of Medicine, Termez University of Economics and Service, Termez, Uzbekistan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Chitosan extracted from Labeo rohita fish scales via chemical demineralization, deproteinization, and deacetylation yields 25% overall from raw scales. The chitosan has 88%-90% deacetylation, a molecular weight (MW) of 109.5 kDa, and low residual ash (0.1%) and protein (0.29%). Composite films (CGP) with fixed gelatin: polyvinylpyrrolidone (PVP, 10:5) and varying chitosan (1%-7% w/v) are prepared. FTIR confirms cross‑linking; SEM shows smooth surfaces for CGP 3% and CGP 5%, but rougher texture for CGP 7%. Water uptake decreases with higher chitosan content (160% for CGP 1% vs. 22% for CGP 7%). PBS buffer uptake is highest for CGP 1%-5% (80%-120%), and lowest for CGP 7% (∼40%). Lower chitosan content slows degradation. Tensile strength increases with chitosan concentration (27 MPa for CGP 1% to 32.8 MPa for CGP 7%), while elongation at break decreases (13% to 4%). Antibacterial activity against Escherichia coli and Staphylococcus aureus is strongest for CGP 3% and CGP 5% (inhibition zones 13-14 mm), outperforming pure chitosan. In the hen's egg test on the chorioallantoic membrane (HET‑CAM) assay, CGP 3% induces the highest angiogenic response (27.2 ± 0.3 vs. 12.9 ± 0.6 vessels in control), with no toxicity. CGP 3% and CGP 5% are optimal for wound‑healing applications.

Indexed as

Animal ScalesAnti-Bacterial AgentsChitosanChorioallantoic MembraneAnimalsChick EmbryoEscherichia coliFishesMicrobial Sensitivity TestsNeovascularization, PhysiologicStaphylococcus aureusTensile StrengthAnti-Bacterial AgentsChitosanangiogenesisantibacterialchick embryochitosan compositesnatural polymerwound‐healing

Identifiers

PMID42460740
PMCPMC13373975

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.