TABLE 4.
Comparison between CMF/G. trabeum (Gt) decay and enzymes.
| Sample | Low-q |
Mid-q |
High-q |
|
| P1 | Rg (nm) | P2 | EFs spacing (nm) | |
| 18 dGt | 3.6** | 8.02.2 | 1.80.44 | 7** |
| 18 dGt-LPMO | 3.6** | 81.1 | 1.80.19 | 7** |
| 18 dGt-CTec2-Htec2 | 3.6** | 71.6 | 20.5 | 7** |
| 42 dGt | 3.6** | 8.00.7 | 2.40.30 | 7** |
| 42 dGt-LPMO | 3.6** | 7.251.38 | 2.20.54 | 7** |
| 42 dGt-CTec2-Htec2 | 3.6** | 71.41 | 2.10.45 | 7** |
| UW CMF-1 | 3.720.16* | 91.3 | 1.60.14 | 5.110.17* |
| UW-CMF-1-LPMO | 3.720.18* | 6.380.69 | 2.030.31 | 5.350.29* |
| UW-CMF-1-CTec2 | 3.870.22* | 91.2 | 1.560.15 | 5.300.14* |
| UW CMF-2 | 3.570.21* | 7.890.48 | 2.10.13 | 6.40.44* |
| UW-CMF-2-LPMO | 3.50.2* | 6.940.69 | 2.20.2 | 7.220.62* |
| UW-CMF-2-CTec2-Htec2 | 3.550.12* | 7.270.92 | 2.180.26 | 6.850.44* |
* Parameters were fitted using the anisotropic curve and fixed while fitting the amorphous curve. ** Parameters were fixed while fitting the isotropic curves due to weak features and/or limited q-range.