| Title |
Single-molecule study of oxidative enzymatic deconstruction of cellulose
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
Nature Communications, October 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1038/s41467-017-01028-y |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Manuel Eibinger, Jürgen Sattelkow, Thomas Ganner, Harald Plank, Bernd Nidetzky |
| Abstract |
LPMO (lytic polysaccharide monooxygenase) represents a unique paradigm of cellulosic biomass degradation by an oxidative mechanism. Understanding the role of LPMO in deconstructing crystalline cellulose is fundamental to the enzyme's biological function and will help to specify the use of LPMO in biorefinery applications. Here we show with real-time atomic force microscopy that C1 and C4 oxidizing types of LPMO from Neurospora crassa (NcLPMO9F, NcLPMO9C) bind to nanocrystalline cellulose with high preference for the very same substrate surfaces that are also used by a processive cellulase (Trichoderma reesei CBH I) to move along during hydrolytic cellulose degradation. The bound LPMOs, however, are immobile during their adsorbed residence time ( ~ 1.0 min for NcLPMO9F) on cellulose. Treatment with LPMO resulted in fibrillation of crystalline cellulose and strongly ( ≥ 2-fold) enhanced the cellulase adsorption. It also increased enzyme turnover on the cellulose surface, thus boosting the hydrolytic conversion.Understanding the role of enzymes in biomass depolymerization is essential for the development of more efficient biorefineries. Here, the authors show by atomic force microscopy the real-time mechanism of cellulose deconstruction by lytic polysaccharide monooxygenases. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 11 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Japan | 2 | 18% |
| France | 2 | 18% |
| Denmark | 1 | 9% |
| United States | 1 | 9% |
| Unknown | 5 | 45% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 8 | 73% |
| Scientists | 3 | 27% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 158 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 158 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 33 | 21% |
| Researcher | 25 | 16% |
| Student > Master | 21 | 13% |
| Student > Bachelor | 12 | 8% |
| Student > Postgraduate | 7 | 4% |
| Other | 21 | 13% |
| Unknown | 39 | 25% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 41 | 26% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 24 | 15% |
| Chemistry | 16 | 10% |
| Physics and Astronomy | 6 | 4% |
| Chemical Engineering | 5 | 3% |
| Other | 11 | 7% |
| Unknown | 55 | 35% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 71. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 25 January 2018.
All research outputs
#534,908
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from Nature Communications
#9,351
of 49,102 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#12,334
of 326,066 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Nature Communications
#298
of 1,363 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 97th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 49,102 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 56.2. This one has done well, scoring higher than 80% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 326,066 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 96% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,363 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 78% of its contemporaries.