ReviewPolymers2025
Devulcanization of Waste Tire Rubber via Microwave and Biological Methods: A Review.
Review in Polymers, 2025. 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.
- Review
- Compatibility between twin-screw desulphurized crumb rubber and asphalt binder based on molecular dynamics simulation.Journal of molecular modeling · 2026Article
- Article
- Comparative Analysis of Pavement Performance-Environmental-Cost Nexus for Desulfurized Rubber Powder Composite SBS-Modified Asphalt Mixture.Materials (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Deep eutectic solvent-assisted bacterial devulcanization, detoxification, and degradation of waste tyre rubber.RSC advances · 2026Article
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.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
This paper presents a thorough literature review on devulcanization methods applied to waste tire rubber: "microwave devulcanization" and "biological desulfurization". To do so, 80 papers published from the year 1990 to 2024 in journals with subscription and open access status across 12 databases were reviewed. This paper compares the efficacy and reviews the basic concepts, advantages, processes, and variable parameters of these two methods. In microwave devulcanization, microwave energy breaks the sulfur crosslinks between polymer chains. The latter breakage is mainly enabled by the presence of carbon black in the tire, which is an excellent microwave absorbent. In biological desulfurization, bacteria or fungi convert the crosslinks to elemental sulfur substances or sulfate. In general, microwave devulcanization of rubber leads to a lower crosslink density and thus a higher degree of devulcanization. On the one hand, breaking the crosslinks requires a significantly shorter time than biological desulfurization. Crosslink scission occurs throughout the sample in microwave devulcanization but only on the sample surface in biological desulfurization. Microwave devulcanization is not sensitive to rubber additives and does not require detoxification before devulcanization. On the other hand, biological desulfurization requires detoxification before devulcanization since it involves living organisms that may not tolerate certain rubber additives.
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.