ArticleFood science & nutrition2024
Hurdle technology using enzymes and essential oil to remove biofilm and increase the effectiveness of this process with the microencapsulation method.
Article in Food science & nutrition, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled 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.
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
6 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.
- Pooled it
- Bacterial adaptation to essential oils and their main compounds in food systems: mechanisms related to antibacterial resistance.NPJ science of food · 2026Review
- Food preservatives: natural or synthetic?Archives of microbiology · 2026Review
- Protease-assisted microencapsulation of carvacrol in pea protein systems for enhanced and durable antibiofilm activity.Current research in food science · 2026Article
- Toxicological Evaluation and Antimicrobial Activity of a Natural Thymol-Eucalyptol-Based Mixture.Toxics · 2025Article
- Hurdle technology using enzymes and essential oil to remove biofilm and increase the effectiveness of this process with the microencapsulation method.Food science & 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The formation of biofilm in different places and the failure to effectively remove it by the usual disinfection methods is due to its structure and the rich genetic resource available in it to deal with disinfectants. These impenetrable structures and diverse microbial genetics have caused biofilm pollution in different industries like the food industry, the medicine industry, the hospitals and the water distribution system, resulting in pathogenicity and reduction of industrial quality. An efficient way to deal with the resistant population of biofilm-forming microbes is the use of hurdle technology including enzymes and essential oils. Enzymes reduce the resistance of the biofilm structure due to degradation of its extracellular polymer matrix (EPS) by their abilities to break down the organic molecules, and then the essential oils weaken the cells by penetrating the lipid membrane of the cell and destroying its integrity; as a result, the biofilm will be destroyed. The advantage of this hurdle technology is the environmental friendly of both methods, which reduces concerns about the use of chemical disinfection methods, but on the other hand, due to the sensitivity of enzymes as biological agents also the expensiveness of this technique and the considerations of working with essential oils as volatile and unstable liquids should abandon the routine methods of applying this disinfectant to biofilm and go for the microencapsulation method, which as a protective system increases the effectiveness of enzymes and essential oils as antibiofilm agents.
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.