Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36985795›Full record

ReviewMolecules (Basel, Switzerland)2023

Biosurfactants: Forthcomings and Regulatory Affairs in Food-Based Industries.

Deepansh Sharma, Deepti Singh, Gadhwal Monika Sukhbir-Singh, Bhoomika M Karamchandani, Gajender Kumar Aseri, Ibrahim M Banat, Surekha K Satpute

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Molecules (Basel, Switzerland), 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
8citing papers in PubMed
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% 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

8 citing papers in PubMed, 49 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. 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

7 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.

Deepansh SharmaDepartment of Life Sciences, J. C Bose University of Science & Technology, YMCA Faridabad-Haryana, Haryana 121006, India.ORCID 0000-0001-6603-2812
Deepti SinghAmity Institute of Microbial Technology, Amity University Rajasthan, Jaipur 303002, India.
Gadhwal Monika Sukhbir-SinghAmity Institute of Microbial Technology, Amity University Rajasthan, Jaipur 303002, India.
Bhoomika M KaramchandaniDepartment of Microbiology, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune 411007, India.
Gajender Kumar AseriAmity Institute of Microbial Technology, Amity University Rajasthan, Jaipur 303002, India.
Ibrahim M BanatSchool of Biomedical Sciences, Faculty of Life and Health Sciences, University of Ulster, Coleraine BT52 1SA, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-8964-2840
Surekha K SatputeDepartment of Microbiology, Savitribai Phule Pune University, Pune 411007, India.
Institute of Microbial Technology · INSavitribai Phule Pune University · INJ.C. Bose University of Science & Technology, YMCA · INUniversity of Ulster · GB

Funding

Rashtriya Uchchatar Shiksha Abhiyan (RUSA) Maharashtra, India (Ref. No. RUSA-CBS-TH-3.2)
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The terms discussed in this review-biosurfactants (BSs) and bioemulsifiers (BEs)-describe surface-active molecules of microbial origin which are popular chemical entities for many industries, including food. BSs are generally low-molecular-weight compounds with the ability to reduce surface tension noticeably, whereas BEs are high-molecular-weight molecules with efficient emulsifying abilities. Some other biomolecules, such as lecithin and egg yolk, are useful as natural BEs in food products. The high toxicity and severe ecological impact of many chemical-based surfactants have directed interest towards BSs/BEs. Interest in food surfactant formulations and consumer anticipation of "green label" additives over synthetic or chemical-based surfactants have been steadily increasing. BSs have an undeniable prospective for replacing chemical surfactants with vast significance to food formulations. However, the commercialization of BSs/BEs production has often been limited by several challenges, such as the optimization of fermentation parameters, high downstream costs, and low yields, which had an immense impact on their broader adoptions in different industries, including food. The foremost restriction regarding the access of BSs/BEs is not their lack of cost-effective industrial production methods, but a reluctance regarding their potential safety, as well as the probable microbial hazards that may be associated with them. Most research on BSs/BEs in food production has been restricted to demonstrations and lacks a comprehensive assessment of safety and risk analysis, which has limited their adoption for varied food-related applications. Furthermore, regulatory agencies require extensive exploration and analysis to secure endorsements for the inclusion of BSs/BEs as potential food additives. This review emphasizes the promising properties of BSs/BEs, trailed by an overview of their current use in food formulations, as well as risk and toxicity assessment. Finally, we assess their potential challenges and upcoming future in substituting chemical-based surfactants.

Indexed as

Food IndustrySurface-Active AgentsAlkanesulfonic AcidsFood AdditivesProspective StudiesAlkanesulfonic AcidsBESFood AdditivesSurface-Active Agentsacute toxicityantimicrobialbiosurfactantsfood additivesgenerally regarded as safe (GRAS) strains

Identifiers

PMID36985795
PMCPMC10055102
OpenAlexW4328122050

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.