ReviewNature communications2025
Microbial consortia for the conversion of biomass into fuels and chemicals.
Review in Nature communications, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 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
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- To Biotic or Abiotic: Biohybrid Systems for Artificial Photosynthesis.Chemical reviews · 2026Review
- Harnessing the potential of lignocellulosic biomass for biofuels production.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2026Review
- Engineering a robust and autonomous biological funneling for efficient valorization of lignin-related aromatics.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Active Chitosan Films Enriched with Yerba Mate Kombucha Infusion: Formulation and Characterization.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Machine learning-based linking of bacterial genomes to optimal growth pH: a foundation for rational microbial engineering.Journal of animal science and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Fermented feed-rumen microbiota axis mediates goat kid growth via microbial amino acid synthesis and ruminal epithelial energy metabolism.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2026Article
- Recent Advances of Controllable Production of PHA Biosynthesis in Chain Length, Monomers and Special Functional Groups.Current microbiology · 2026Review
- Fungal-bacterial interaction networks in lignocellulose degradation: an integrated ecological and mechanistic perspective.Biotechnology for biofuels and bioproducts · 2026Review
- Enhanced Low-Temperature Corn Straw Degradation Using a Synthetic Microbial Mixture.Life (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Current advances and challenges in microbiome-based mitigation of volatile organic compounds from livestock waste systems.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026Review
- Waking up of sleeping giant ligno-cellulosic biomass for biofuel production.Sustainable microbiology · 2026Article
- Roles of microbial interactions in determining the establishment and function of synthetic consortium inoculants for soil applications.The ISME journal · 2025Article
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
Abstract
There is currently significant interest in employing microbial communities for converting lignocellulosic feedstock into chemicals, fuels, and other products of use to humans. Both naturally occurring microbial communities, which can be prohibitively complex, and synthetic consortia, which are simple though can be unstable and unpredictable, have been employed to that end. Recent work has focused on developing tools for enabling wider application of microbial consortia in both lignocellulose valorization and bioprocesses in general. Together with improved methods of process monitoring and creative process design, newly developed biosynthetic tools may represent key facilitators for commercial realization of consortia-based lignocellulose conversion processes.
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.