ArticleScientific reports2024
Evaluation of encapsulated Bacillus subtilis bio-mortars for use under acidic conditions.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. 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.
- Molecular and Biosafety Perspectives of Bacterial Self-Healing Concrete: From Sporulation and Biomineralization to Public Health Implications.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Review
- Unveiling the role of microbial rease in ureolysis-induced calcium carbonate precipitation, Its mechanistic insights, and emerging applications.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2025Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This research aimed to examine the effects of an acidic environment on the mechanical properties and durability of bio-mortar (BM) encapsulated with Bacillus subtilis bacteria, in comparison to normal mortar (NM). The results at 28 days indicated that both 3% and 6% HCl significantly increased the compressive strength of the BM by 25% and 50%, respectively, compared with that of the NM. However, when 11% HCl was introduced, the compressive strength of the BM decreased to 50% lower than that of the NM. Furthermore, the water absorption rate of the BM was 33% lower than that of the NM. The mass loss for both 3% and 6% HCl was comparable, whereas at 11% HCl, BM experienced a mass loss that was 68% greater than that of NM. These findings suggest that with 3% and 6% HCl, the microbially induced calcium carbonate precipitation (MICP) process effectively generated CaCO
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.