Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42199542›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2026

Bioaugmentation as microbiome engineering: a framework for evaluating functional performance, persistence, and safety.

Mariusz Cycoń

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Review
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

1 author.

Mariusz CycońDepartment of Microbiology, Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Medical University of Silesia, Sosnowiec, Poland.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Bioaugmentation is increasingly applied to enhance the degradation of contaminants in environmental and engineered systems, yet its effectiveness is often evaluated using endpoints that do not establish whether the introduced microbial function was expressed, sustained, or responsible for the observed outcome. This review considers bioaugmentation as an approach to microbiome engineering rather than a discrete inoculation step. It outlines an evaluation framework based on three complementary criteria: functional performance, functional persistence, and safety. Emphasis is placed on the microbiological determinants of successful implementation, including pathway completion, expression of terminal transformation steps, functional redundancy, ecological compatibility, and the maintenance of introduced activity under variable environmental conditions. The analysis also examines how inoculum design, delivery, selective pressure, retention, and biomonitoring influence the establishment of degradative functions within complex microbial communities. A central theme is the need to distinguish genuine inoculum-driven effects from outcomes generated by biostimulation, modified mass transfer, or changes in contaminant bioavailability. Available evidence indicates that robust interpretation requires an integrated assessment of substrate-to-product relationships, functional and activity markers, community-level responses, and, where appropriate, indicators of biological effect. Microbiological safety considerations are also reviewed, including selective pressures and resistance-related consequences in systems exposed to biologically active contaminants. Bioaugmentation should therefore be evaluated as a controlled microbiotechnological intervention in which function, persistence, mechanistic attribution, and safety are assessed collectively.

Indexed as

bioaugmentationbiodegradation pathwaysbiomonitoringfunctional persistencemicrobial consortiamicrobiome engineering

Identifiers

PMID42199542
PMCPMC13199038

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.