ArticleScientific reports2025
Isolation, characterization, and bioremediation potential of oil-degrading bacteria from contaminated soils in Shiraz and Bandar Abbas, Iran.
Article in Scientific reports, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.
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
1 citing paper in PubMed.
- Article
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
Petroleum hydrocarbons are among the most persistent environmental pollutants, posing serious risks to soil and aquatic ecosystems. Bioremediation using indigenous hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria provides a cost-effective and environmentally sustainable alternative to physical and chemical treatments. In this study, oil-degrading bacteria were isolated from contaminated soils collected near oil refineries in Shiraz and Bandar Abbas, Iran, and screened for their biodegradation potential. A total of twenty-four bacterial isolates were obtained, among which four showed the highest growth rates and crude-oil degradation efficiency. These isolates were further evaluated for biosurfactant production using hemolysis, drop-collapse, oil displacement, emulsification (E24), and bacterial adherence to hydrocarbon (BATH) assays, as well as for hydrocarbon removal by spectrophotometry and gas chromatography with flame ionization detection (GC-FID). In biosurfactant assays, SHA showed significantly higher E24 and BATH values than the other isolates (P < 0.05; Table 3). By spectrophotometry and GC-FID, SHA and SWOC achieved the highest crude-oil removal after seven days (84.2% and 85.8%, respectively), and GC-FID confirmed degradation across C13-C32 n-alkanes.Molecular identification based on 16S rRNA sequencing revealed that isolate SHA belonged to Acinetobacter junii (Gram-negative) and isolate SWOC to Lysinibacillus boronitolerans (Gram-positive). Interestingly, co-cultivation of the two isolates resulted in reduced degradation efficiency (55%), indicating an antagonistic interaction between them. These findings suggest that both isolates possess strong individual potential for the bioremediation of oil-contaminated soils, and further studies are warranted to investigate the mechanistic basis of antagonism and to validate their performance under field conditions.
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.