Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41753586›Full record

ReviewMicroorganisms2026

Targeting Microorganisms in Lignocellulosic Biomass to Produce Biogas and Ensure Sanitation and Hygiene.

Christy Echakachi Manyi-Loh, Stephen Loh Tangwe, Ryk Lues

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microorganisms, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from 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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Christy Echakachi Manyi-LohCentre of Applied Food Sustainability and Biotechnology, Central University of Technology, Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-3165-6902
Stephen Loh TangweEstate and Infrastructure, Central University of Technology, Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0002-6936-9629
Ryk LuesCentre of Applied Food Sustainability and Biotechnology, Central University of Technology, Bloemfontein 9301, South Africa.ORCID 0000-0003-0047-4209

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microbial components are part of the composition of all waste, including lignocellulosic biomass (e.g., agricultural, domestic, industrial, and municipal wastes) generated via human activities. If little attention is given to these wastes or if they are not adequately managed, they tend to end up in the environment (soil, water, and farmland), decomposing naturally through microbial activities, producing greenhouse gases, causing eutrophication, preventing sunlight penetration, and depleting oxygen in the water. Several treatment methods are applicable to these wastes. However, anaerobic digestion is presented as the best option to properly treat the waste. It is regarded as the best technique to achieve sustainable energy development in both developing and developed countries. During anaerobic digestion, the organic matter in the waste is converted via the concerted activities of microbes belonging to different trophic levels, in the absence of oxygen, to yield biogas (renewable energy), bio-fertiliser, and sanitisation of the waste, rendering it better and safer for human handling. Varying levels of loss of bacterial viability and their antibiotic-resistance genes are observed with this process, as bacteria differ in susceptibility to temperature, pH, nutrient scarcity, and the presence of antimicrobials. Anaerobic digestion of agricultural residues and the immediate processing (post-treatment) of the digestate help to stabilise the digestate, making it safe for land applications, tackling waste management, and protecting food chains from contamination, in addition to the environment. This review focuses on the anaerobic digestion of lignocellulosic biomass, yielding biogas as energy, alongside sanitising the wastes by inactivating microbial components found therein, therefore reducing the contamination potential of the effluent or digestate discharged from the biodigester following the process. Several findings registered by different researchers through different studies performed in different countries under different scenarios while employing varying methods have been assembled in a chronological fashion to emphasise similarities and divergences or variations that deepen knowledge pertaining to the significance of the anaerobic digestion process in terms of the microbial interactions responsible for producing energy, addressing sanitisation and hygiene crisis, and the post-treatment of the digestate to ensure its use as biofertiliser. In other words, it is a comprehensive review that synthesises knowledge from multiple fields covering comparative aspects of anaerobic digestion in terms of sanitation, hygiene, and energy production and consolidates it in a single document to present and address the problem of waste management through anaerobic digestion technology.

Indexed as

anaerobic digestionbacterial inactivationbiogasbiomasshygienemicroorganismssanitation

Identifiers

PMID41753586
PMCPMC12943641

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.