ArticleMicrobial biotechnology2020
Azo dying of α-keratin material improves microbial keratinase screening and standardization.
Article in Microbial biotechnology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
4 citing papers in PubMed, 15 citations in OpenAlex.
- Targeted pathway mining reveals novel modified hexapeptides from the demiguisin family.Communications chemistry · 2026Article
- Structure, Application, and Biochemistry of Microbial Keratinases.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Review
- Microbial enzymes catalyzing keratin degradation: Classification, structure, function.Biotechnology advances · 2020Review
- Azo dying of α-keratin material improves microbial keratinase screening and standardization.Microbial biotechnology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
8 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microbial conversion through enzymatic reactions has received a lot of attention as a cost-effective and environmentally friendly way to recover amino acids and short peptides from keratin materials. However, accurate assessment of microbial keratinase activity is not straightforward, and current available methods lack sensitivity and standardization. Here, we suggest an optimized Azokeratin assay, with substrate generated directly from azo-dyed raw keratin material. We introduced supernatant filtration in the protocol for optimal stopping of keratinase reactions instead of the widely used trichloroacetic acid (TCA), as it generated biases and impacted the sensitivity. We furthermore suggest a method for standardization of keratinase activity signals using proteinase K, a well-known keratinase, as a reference enabling reproducibility between studies. Lastly, we evaluated our developed method with several bacterial isolates through benchmarking against a commercial assay (Keratin Azure). Under different setups, the Azokeratin method was more sensitive than commonly used Keratin Azure-based assays (3-fold). We argue that this method could be applied with any type of keratin substrate, enabling more robust and sensitive results which can be used for further comparison with other studies, thus representing an important progress within the field of microbial keratin degradation.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.