Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42774240›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in systems biology2026

Engineering

Neo Su, Dylan Bo Huang, Tzu-Chun Pu, Ian Cheng, Pin-Hua Chen, Chi-Cheng Hsieh, YuTing Lin, Chi Hou Ng, Ya-Shan Yu, Jakie Ting and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in systems biology, 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

12 authors.

Neo SuGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Dylan Bo HuangGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Tzu-Chun PuGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Ian ChengGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Pin-Hua ChenGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Chi-Cheng HsiehGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
YuTing LinGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Chi Hou NgGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Ya-Shan YuGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Jakie TingGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Yu-Chuen LaiGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.
Jason WangGEMS Academy, Taipei City, Taiwan.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: Recycling polyethylene terephthalate (PET) from cotton-blended fabrics is constrained by substrate access. Textile PET is more crystalline and occluded than the amorphous film on which most PET hydrolases are optimized, and whether engineered enzymes retain their advantage as substrate complexity rises remains untested. Methods: Six Results: Under a unified condition (51.8 °C, pH 7.5), five variants were active on PET film, and MC-nc27 was inactive throughout. Advantage over wild-type widened with substrate complexity, reaching 14.3-fold for A65H/L90A/I213S on pretreated mesh textile and an A260 of 1.043 ± 0.186 on pretreated CP55/45 against -0.007 ± 0.033 for wild-type. Esterase ranking did not predict textile performance. Discussion: Fold improvements over wild-type were preserved whether or not textiles were pretreated, with no hierarchy change detected across substrate formats, indicating that crystallinity is not the dominant variable governing relative variant performance. Physical features that persist regardless of crystallinity state are the more probable constraints on enzyme-substrate engagement. Wild-type gained little from crystallinity reduction alone. These results suggest that the capacity to engage a physically constrained polymer surface may be a productive target for engineering textile-active PET hydrolases.

Indexed as

blend textile degradationenzyme engineeringmutagenesispolyethylene terephthalate (PET)Thermobifida fusca cutinase

Identifiers

PMID42774240
PMCPMC13593842

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.