Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25635814›Full record

ArticlePloS one2015

Differentiations of chitin content and surface morphologies of chitins extracted from male and female grasshopper species.

Murat Kaya, Evaldas Lelešius, Radvilė Nagrockaitė, Idris Sargin, Gulsin Arslan, Abbas Mol, Talat Baran, Esra Can, Betul Bitim

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing papers in PubMed
5.0field-weighted citation impact, top 4% of its field
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

20 citing papers in PubMed, 137 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Biowaste-Derived Triboelectric Nanogenerators for Emerging Bioelectronics.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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

9 authors at 3 institutions in 2 countries.

Murat KayaDepartment of Biotechnology and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Science and Letters, Aksaray University, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey; Aksaray University, Science and Technology Application and Research Center, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey.
Evaldas LelešiusAksaray University, Science and Technology Application and Research Center, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey; Department of Biology, Vytautas Magnus University, 44404 Kaunas, Lithuania.
Radvilė NagrockaitėAksaray University, Science and Technology Application and Research Center, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey; Department of Biology, Vytautas Magnus University, 44404 Kaunas, Lithuania.
Idris SarginSelcuk University, Faculty of Science, Department of Chemistry, 42075, Konya, Turkey.
Gulsin ArslanSelcuk University, Faculty of Science, Department of Biochemistry, 42075, Konya, Turkey.
Abbas MolGuzelyurt Vocational School, Aksaray University, Guzelyurt, Aksaray, Turkey.
Talat BaranAksaray University, Science and Technology Application and Research Center, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey; Department of Chemistry, Faculty of Science and Letters, Aksaray University, Aksaray, Turkey.
Esra CanDepartment of Biotechnology and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Science and Letters, Aksaray University, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey; Aksaray University, Science and Technology Application and Research Center, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey.
Betul BitimDepartment of Biotechnology and Molecular Biology, Faculty of Science and Letters, Aksaray University, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey; Aksaray University, Science and Technology Application and Research Center, 68100, Aksaray, Turkey.
Aksaray University · TRSelçuk University · TRVytautas Magnus University · LT

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

In this study, we used Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR), elemental analysis (EA), thermogravimetric analysis (TGA), X-ray diffractometry (XRD), and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) to investigate chitin structure isolated from both sexes of four grasshopper species. FT-IR, EA, XRD, and TGA showed that the chitin was in the alpha form. With respect to gender, two main differences were observed. First, we observed that the quantity of chitin was greater in males than in females and the dry weight of chitin between species ranged from 4.71% to 11.84%. Second, using SEM, we observed that the male chitin surface structure contained 25-90 nm wide nanofibers and 90-250 nm nanopores, while no pores or nanofibers were observed in the chitin surface structure of the majority of females (nanofibers were observed only in M. desertus females). In contrast, the elemental analysis, thermal properties, and crystalline index values for chitin were similar in males and females. Also, we carried out enzymatic digestion of the isolated chitins using commercial chitinase from Streptomyces griseus. We observed that there were no big differences in digestion rate of the chitins from both sexes and commercial chitin. The digestion rates were for grasshoppers' chitins; 88.45-95.48% and for commercial chitin; 94.95%.

Indexed as

Sex CharacteristicsAnimalsChitinChitinasesFemaleGrasshoppersMaleMicroscopy, Electron, ScanningSpectroscopy, Fourier Transform InfraredX-Ray DiffractionChitinChitinases

Identifiers

PMID25635814
PMCPMC4312026
OpenAlexW2006546860

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.