↓ Skip to main content

A bacterium that degrades and assimilates poly(ethylene terephthalate)

Overview of attention for article published in Science, March 2016
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • Among the highest-scoring outputs from this source (#16 of 53,627)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (99th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (99th percentile)

Citations

dimensions_citation
128 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
150 Mendeley
Title
A bacterium that degrades and assimilates poly(ethylene terephthalate)
Published in
Science, March 2016
DOI 10.1126/science.aad6359
Pubmed ID
Authors

Shosuke Yoshida, Kazumi Hiraga, Toshihiko Takehana, Ikuo Taniguchi, Hironao Yamaji, Yasuhito Maeda, Kiyotsuna Toyohara, Kenji Miyamoto, Yoshiharu Kimura, Kohei Oda, Yoshida, Shosuke, Hiraga, Kazumi, Takehana, Toshihiko, Taniguchi, Ikuo, Yamaji, Hironao, Maeda, Yasuhito, Toyohara, Kiyotsuna, Miyamoto, Kenji, Kimura, Yoshiharu, Oda, Kohei, Yoshida S, Hiraga K, Takehana T, Taniguchi I, Yamaji H, Maeda Y, Toyohara K, Miyamoto K, Kimura Y, Oda K

Abstract

Poly(ethylene terephthalate) (PET) is used extensively worldwide in plastic products, and its accumulation in the environment has become a global concern. Because the ability to enzymatically degrade PET has been thought to be limited to a few fungal species, biodegradation is not yet a viable remediation or recycling strategy. By screening natural microbial communities exposed to PET in the environment, we isolated a novel bacterium, Ideonella sakaiensis 201-F6, that is able to use PET as its major energy and carbon source. When grown on PET, this strain produces two enzymes capable of hydrolyzing PET and the reaction intermediate, mono(2-hydroxyethyl) terephthalic acid. Both enzymes are required to enzymatically convert PET efficiently into its two environmentally benign monomers, terephthalic acid and ethylene glycol.

Twitter Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 1,195 tweeters who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 150 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 147 98%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Bachelor 44 29%
Student > Ph. D. Student 24 16%
Student > Master 18 12%
Researcher 17 11%
Unspecified 12 8%
Other 35 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 46 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 30 20%
Unspecified 17 11%
Engineering 13 9%
Environmental Science 11 7%
Other 33 22%

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2732. 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 13 October 2018.
All research outputs
#229
of 11,928,669 outputs
Outputs from Science
#16
of 53,627 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#10
of 287,046 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Science
#1
of 1,134 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 11,928,669 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 99th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 53,627 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 35.7. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% 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 287,046 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 99% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 1,134 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 99% of its contemporaries.