ReviewGerms2024
Comparison of microbial preservation methods: a narrative review.
Review in Germs, 2024. 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.
- A roadmap to create FAIR collections of microbial strains.Nature microbiology · 2026Review
- Comparison of physical preservation strategies for accurate characterization of the coffee fruit microbiome.Archives of microbiology · 2026Article
- Microbial biobanking: safeguarding the tiny treasures for sustainable human welfare.Folia microbiologica · 2026Review
- A Systematic Review of Bacterial Sampling Collection for Veterinary Microbiology in Companion Animals.Veterinary sciences · 2026Review
- A Comprehensive Review of Digestive Endoscopy-Associated Infections: Bacterial Pathogens, Host Susceptibility, and the Impact of Viral Hepatitis.Microorganisms · 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Many microorganisms are used to produce antibiotics, vaccines, and medicines for various diseases, and preserving these microorganisms and viruses can ensure that the development process is streamlined. We have reviewed the short-term and long-term microbial and viral preservation methods including novel and emerging technologies. Short-term preservation methods of microorganisms are designed to maintain the viability of the organisms for periods ranging from a few days up to one year. The novel microfluid systems allow for the creation of microenvironments that support the growth and proliferation of specific microorganisms and the isolation of individual cells or small populations of microorganisms for studying microbial behavior and interactions. Long-term preservation involves storing the organisms for an extended period, ranging from months to decades, while retaining their viability and genetic stability. The mineral oil or liquid paraffin storage, storage in distilled water, storage in sterile soil, lyophilization, and cryopreservation are well known, and encapsulation of nanoparticles to preserve microorganisms, electrospinning, and electro spraying and supercooling are novel and emerging methods. Each short and long-term microbial and viral preservation method has advantages and disadvantages, and, based on the requirement, the appropriate method can be chosen.
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.