ArticlePloS one2022
Anaerobiosis favors biosynthesis of single and multi-element nanostructures.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 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
2 citing papers in PubMed.
- Biosynthesis of Cu-In-S Nanoparticles by a Yeast Isolated from Union Glacier, Antarctica: A Platform for Enhanced Quantum Dot-Sensitized Solar Cells.Nanomaterials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024Article
- Minicells as an Escherichia coli mechanism for the accumulation and disposal of fluorescent cadmium sulphide nanoparticles.Journal of nanobiotechnology · 2024Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
9 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Herein we report the use of an environmental multimetal(loid)-resistant strain, MF05, to biosynthesize single- or multi-element nanostructures under anaerobic conditions. Inorganic nanostructure synthesis typically requires methodologies and conditions that are harsh and environmentally hazardous. Thus, green/eco-friendly procedures are desirable, where the use of microorganisms and their extracts as bionanofactories is a reliable strategy. First, MF05 was entirely sequenced and identified as an Escherichia coli-related strain with some genetic differences from the traditional BW25113. Secondly, we compared the CdS nanostructure biosynthesis by whole-cell in a design defined minimal culture medium containing sulfite as the only sulfur source to obtain sulfide reduction from a low-cost chalcogen reactant. Under anaerobic conditions, this process was greatly favored, and irregular CdS (ex. 370 nm; em. 520-530 nm) was obtained. When other chalcogenites were tested (selenite and tellurite), only spherical Se0 and elongated Te0 nanostructures were observed by TEM and analyzed by SEM-EDX. In addition, enzymatic-mediated chalcogenite (sulfite, selenite, and tellurite) reduction was assessed by using MF05 crude extracts in anaerobiosis; similar results for nanostructures were obtained; however Se0 and Te0 formation were more regular in shape and cleaner (with less background). Finally, the in vitro nanostructure biosynthesis was assessed with salts of Ag, Au, Cd, and Li alone or in combination with chalcogenites. Several single or binary nanostructures were detected. Our results showed that MF05 is a versatile anaerobic bionanofactory for different types of inorganic NS. synthesis.
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.