ArticleToxics2022
Isolation and Characterization of
Article in Toxics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Transcriptomic and Metabolomic Analyses of the Mechanisms Underlying Zearalenone Removal byToxins · 2026Article
- Biological Detoxification of Mycotoxins by Lactic Acid Bacteria: Safeguarding Food from Fungal Contaminants.Toxins · 2026Review
- Microbial Composition of Water Kefir Grains and Their Application for the Detoxification of Aflatoxin B1.Toxins · 2024Article
- [Research advances of porous organic framework materials on enrichment and detection of mycotoxins].Se pu = Chinese journal of chromatography · 2023Review
- Research advances in the degradation of aflatoxin by lactic acid bacteria.The journal of venomous animals and toxins including tropical diseases · 2023Review
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 4 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
As one of the most prevalent estrogenic mycotoxins in cereals and animal feed, zearalenone (ZEN) can cause serious reproductive disorders. ZEN control in food and feed commodities has been an imperative area of research. In this study, 87 lactic acid bacteria (LAB) were isolated from pickles and their ZEN (5 mg/L) removal abilities ranged from 0% to 68.4%. Then, five strains with potent ZEN removal ability (>50%) were identified: Lactobacillus plantarum 22, L. plantarum 37, L. plantarum 47, L. paracasei 85, and L. buchneri 93. Under optimization conditions (48 h, pH 4.0, 37 °C, and 5 mg/L), the highest ZEN removal abilities of L. paracasei 85 and L. buchneri 93 reached 77.7% and 72.8%, respectively. Moreover, the two lactic acid bacteria decreased the toxicity of ZEN, because the levels of β-zearalenol (β-ZOL) transformed from ZEN were more than two-fold higher than α-zearalenol (α-ZOL). Additionally, cell free supernatant and pellet biotransformation of ZEN to α-ZOL and β-ZOL in LAB were detected for the first time. Furthermore, chemical and enzymatical treatments combined with Fourier-transform infrared spectroscopy analysis indicated that exopolysaccharides, proteins, and lipids on the cell wall could bond to ZEN through hydrophobic interactions. Scanning electron microscopy indicated that cell structure damage occurred during the ZEN clearance to L. buchneri 93, but it did not with L. paracasei 85. In addition, various organic acids, alcohols, and esters of the two LAB participated in ZEN removal. Hence, L. paracasei 85 and L. buchneri 93 can be considered as potential detoxification agents for ZEN removal for food and feedstuff.
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.