ArticleApplied biochemistry and biotechnology2022
Characterization of Cellulose-Degrading Bacteria Isolated from Soil and the Optimization of Their Culture Conditions for Cellulase Production.
Article in Applied biochemistry and biotechnology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 11 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
11 citing papers in PubMed, 37 citations in OpenAlex.
- Fiber-Degrading Microorganisms: Types, Screening and Applications.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Exploration of Multi-Source Lignocellulose-Degrading Microbial Resources and Bioaugmentation Strategies: Implications for Rumen Efficiency.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2025Review
- Application of a Synthetic Microbial Community to Enhance Pepper Resistance AgainstPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Article
- Characterization and Optimization of Cellulose-Degrading Bacteria Isolated from Fecal Samples ofMicroorganisms · 2025Article
- Intercropping grapevine withFrontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- Optimized production and characterization of a thermostable cellulase from Streptomyces thermodiastaticus strain.AMB Express · 2024Article
- CellulolyticMicrobiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Characterization of bacterial diversity and screening of cellulose-degrading bacteria in the gut system ofFrontiers in bioengineering and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Characterization of Cellulose-Degrading Bacteria Isolated from Silkworm Excrement and Optimization of Its Cellulase Production.Polymers · 2023Article
- Enhancing the Activity of Carboxymethyl Cellulase Enzyme Using Highly Stable Selenium Nanoparticles Biosynthesized byMolecules (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
The characterization of bacteria with hydrolytic potential significantly contributes to the industries. Six cellulose-degrading bacteria were isolated from mixture soil samples collected at Kingfisher Lake and the University of Manitoba campus by Congo red method using carboxymethyl cellulose agar medium and identified as Paenarthrobacter sp. MKAL1, Hymenobacter sp. MKAL2, Mycobacterium sp. MKAL3, Stenotrophomonas sp. MKAL4, Chryseobacterium sp. MKAL5, and Bacillus sp. MKAL6. Their cellulase production was optimized by controlling different environmental and nutritional factors such as pH, temperature, incubation period, substrate concentration, nitrogen, and carbon sources using the dinitrosalicylic acid and response surface methods. Except for Paenarthrobacter sp. MKAL1, all strains are motile. Only Bacillus sp. MKAL6 was non-salt-tolerant and showed gelatinase activity. Sucrose enhanced higher cellulase activity of 78.87 ± 4.71 to 190.30 ± 6.42 U/mL in these strains at their optimum pH (5-6) and temperature (35-40 °C). The molecular weights of these cellulases were about 25 kDa. These bacterial strains could be promising biocatalysts for converting cellulose into glucose for industrial purposes.
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.