ArticleFolia microbiologica2023
Influence of light regulation on growth and enzyme production in rare endolichenic fungi.
Article in Folia microbiologica, 2023. 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, 8 citations in OpenAlex.
- Four novel endolichenic fungi fromMycoKeys · 2025Article
- The development and nutritional quality ofFrontiers in nutrition · 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
3 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The influence of light regulation on the growth and enzyme production of three endolichenic fungal isolates, i.e. Pseudopestalotiopsis theae (EF13), Fusarium solani (EF5), and Xylaria venustula (PH22), was determined. The isolates were exposed to blue, red, green, yellow, white fluorescent light (12 h light-12 h dark photoperiod) (test), and 24 h dark (control) conditions. Results revealed that the alternating light-dark conditions resulted in the formation of dark rings in most fungal isolates but was absent in PH22. Red light induced sporulation while yellow light elicited higher biomass in all isolates (0.19 ± 0.01 g, 0.07 ± 0.00 g, and 0.11 ± 0.00 g, for EF13, PH22, and EF5, respectively) as compared to incubation in the dark. Results also showed that blue light induced higher amylase activity in PH22 (15.31 ± 0.45 U/mL) and L-asparaginase activity in all isolates (0.45 ± 0.01 U/mL, 0.55 ± 0.39 U/mL, and 0.38 ± 0.01 U/mL, for EF13, PH22, and EF5, respectively) compared to both control conditions. Green light enhanced the production of xylanase (6.57 ± 0.42 U/mL, 10.64 ± 0.12 U/mL, and 7.55 ± 0.56 U/mL for EF13, PH22, and EF5, respectively) and cellulase (6.49 ± 0.48 U/mL, 9.57 ± 0.25 U/mL, and 7.28 ± 0.63 U/mL, for EF13, PH22, and EF5, respectively). In contrast, red light was the least effective light treatment as production of enzymes was the least, with lower levels of amylase, cellulase, xylanase, and L-asparaginase detected. To conclude, all three endolichenic fungi are light-responsive, with fungal growth regulated with the use of red light and yellow light, and manipulation of enzyme production via blue and green light.
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.