Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35796946›Full record

ReviewApplied biochemistry and biotechnology2023

Resource Recycling, Recovery, and Xenobiotic Remediation from E-wastes Through Biofilm Technology: A Review.

Sundaram Deepika Bharathi, Aswin Dilshani, Srinivasan Rishivanthi, Pratham Khaitan, Adhinarayan Vamsidhar, Samuel Jacob

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Applied biochemistry and biotechnology, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing papers in PubMed
0.4field-weighted citation impact, top 49% 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

1 citing paper in PubMed, 8 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Transcriptional and cellular reprogramming inCurrent research in microbial sciences · 2026
    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

6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.

Sundaram Deepika BharathiDepartment of Biotechnology, School of Bioengineering, College of Engineering and Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, Chengalpattu Dist., 603203, Tamil Nadu, India.
Aswin DilshaniDepartment of Biotechnology, School of Bioengineering, College of Engineering and Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, Chengalpattu Dist., 603203, Tamil Nadu, India.
Srinivasan RishivanthiDepartment of Biotechnology, School of Bioengineering, College of Engineering and Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, Chengalpattu Dist., 603203, Tamil Nadu, India.
Pratham KhaitanDepartment of Biotechnology, School of Bioengineering, College of Engineering and Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, Chengalpattu Dist., 603203, Tamil Nadu, India.
Adhinarayan VamsidharDepartment of Biotechnology, School of Bioengineering, College of Engineering and Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, Chengalpattu Dist., 603203, Tamil Nadu, India.
Samuel JacobDepartment of Biotechnology, School of Bioengineering, College of Engineering and Technology, Faculty of Engineering and Technology, SRM Institute of Science and Technology, SRM Nagar, Kattankulathur, Chengalpattu Dist., 603203, Tamil Nadu, India. samueljb@srmist.edu.in.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-9615-153X
SRM Institute of Science and Technology · IN

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Around 50 million tonnes of electronic waste has been generated globally per year, causing an environmental hazard and negative effects on human health, such as infertility and thyroid disorders in adults, endocrine and neurological damage in both animals and humans, and impaired mental and physical development in children. Out of that, only 15% is recycled each year and the remaining is disposed of in a landfill, illegally traded or burned, and treated in a sub-standard way. The processes of recycling are challenged by the presence of brominated flame retardants. The different recycling technologies such as the chemical and mechanical methods have been well studied, while the most promising approach is the biological method. The process of utilizing microbes to decontaminate and degrade a wide range of pollutants into harmless products is known as bioremediation and it is an eco-friendly, cost-effective, and sustainable method. The bioremediation process is significantly aided by biofilm communities attached to electronic waste because they promote substrate bioavailability, metabolite transfer, and cell viability, all of which accelerate bioleaching and biodegradation. Microbes existing in biofilm mode relatable to free-floating planktonic cells are advantageous of bioremediation due to their tolerant ability to environmental stress and pollutants through diverse catabolic pathways. This article discusses the harmful effects of electronic waste and its management using biological strategies especially biofilm-forming communities for resource recovery.

Indexed as

Environmental PollutantsXenobioticsAdultAnimalsBiodegradation, EnvironmentalChildHumansRecyclingWaste Disposal FacilitiesEnvironmental PollutantsXenobioticsBiodegradationBiofilm communityBioleachingBioremediationBrominated flame retardantsElectronic waste

Identifiers

PMID35796946
OpenAlexW4284677047

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.