Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35314727›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2022

Bioconversion of chitin waste through Stenotrophomonas maltophilia for production of chitin derivatives as a Seabass enrichment diet.

Kumaran Subramanian, Deivasigamani Balaraman, Mani Panangal, Tentu Nageswara Rao, Elumalai Perumal, Amutha R, Alagappan Kumarappan, Pugazhvendan Sampath Renuga, Suresh Arumugam, Rajasekar Thirunavukkarasu and 2 more

Open access · goldAbstract readClinical Trial, Veterinary
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
1.0field-weighted citation impact, top 26% 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

5 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Display of Bacterial Exochitanase onMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  4. Article
  5. Identification of a Novel Chitinase fromFoods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    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

12 authors at 8 institutions in 3 countries.

Kumaran SubramanianCentre for Drug Discovery and Development, Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, 600119, India. kumarun23@gmail.com.
Deivasigamani BalaramanCAS in Marine Biology, Annamalai University, Cuddalore, Tamilnadu, India.
Mani PanangalDepartment of Biotechnology, Annai College of Arts & Science, Kumbakonam, Tamil Nadu, India. master.maniji@gmail.com.
Tentu Nageswara RaoDepartment of Chemistry, Krishna University, Machilipatnam, Andra Pradesh, India.
Elumalai PerumalDepartment of Pharmacology, Saveetha Dental College and Hospital, Chennai, Tamil Nadu, India.
Amutha RDepartment of Biotechnology, Periyar University PG Extension Center, Dharmapuri, Tamil Nadu, India.
Alagappan KumarappanMolecular Biology Laboratory (Pure Health), Al Qassimi Women's and Children's Hospital, Wasit Street, Sharjah, United Arab Emirates.
Pugazhvendan Sampath RenugaDepartment of Zoology, Annamalai University, Annamalai Nagar, Cuddalore, Tamilnadu, 608002, India.
Suresh ArumugamCentral Research Laboratory, Meenakshi Medical College Hospital & Research Institute, Kanchipuram, Tamil Nadu, India.
Rajasekar ThirunavukkarasuCentre for Drug Discovery and Development, Sathyabama Institute of Science and Technology, Chennai, Tamilnadu, 600119, India.
Wilson AruniUnited States Department of Veterans Affairs, Loma Linda University, Loma Linda, CA, 92354, USA.
Suliman Yousef AlOmarZoology Department, College of Science, Kind Saud University, Riyadh, 11451, Kingdom of Saudi Arabia. syalomar@ksu.edu.sa.
Annamalai University · INSathyabama Institute of Science and Technology · INKing Saud University · SAKrishna University · INLoma Linda University · USMeenakshi Medical College Hospital and Research Institute · INPeriyar University · INSaveetha University · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Marine wastes pose a great threat to the ecosystem leading to severe environmental hazards and health issues particularly the shellfish wastes. The shellfish waste which contains half of the amount of chitin can be efficiently transformed into useful products. Various approaches for the hydrolysis of chitin like physical, chemical, and enzymatic processes are there. Still, the use of enzyme chitinase is well documented as an effective and eco-friendly method. The present study summarizes the isolation of chitinase enzyme producing bacteria from different shrimp waste disposal sites in Parangipettai (India), and the possible use of an enzyme hydrolyzate as an immunostimulant to Asian Seabass (Lates calcarifer). The potential chitinase-producing bacteria were identified by 16S rRNA gene sequencing as Stenotrophomonas maltophilia. After purification, the chitinase specific activity was 5.01 (U/ml) and the protein content was 72 mg and the recovery rate was 48.06%. The optimum pH and temperature for the chitinolytic activity were 6.5 and at 35-50 °C, respectively. The animal experiment trial was done with our feed supplements which included 0.0 (control), 0.5%, 1% and 2% of chitin degraded product. All the supplementary feed had an optimal 42% (w/w) of crude protein. The feed protein level was 41-43% on average and gross energy was 13-17 kcal/g and the feed was observed to exhibit a significantly higher (p < 0.05) survival rate, condition factor, specific growth rates, and body weight gain was also found to be promising compared to other fishes fed with control diet only. The red blood cells (RBC) and white blood cell (WBC) counts were found to increase significantly after being challenged with infection in animals fed with chitin derivatives from 1st week to 3rd week when compared to the control. The hematocrit (Hct) values were low on the 2nd and 3rd week in infected fish fed with chitin derivatives. This low level was due to infection lyses of the red blood cells and increased nitro blue tetrazolium reduction. The control diet-fed fish showed 70% mortality but the chitin derivative supplemented fishes showed only 20% mortality post-infection. The results of the study encompass that the use of chitin-derivate enriched feed further is taken into large-scale approaches thereby benefitting the aquaculture sector.

Indexed as

ChitinasesPerciformesStenotrophomonas maltophiliaAnimalsChitinDietEcosystemFishesRNA, Ribosomal, 16SChitinChitinasesRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID35314727
PMCPMC8938544
OpenAlexW4221100957

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.