4.5 Article

Isolation and characterization of sulfonamide-degrading bacteria Escherichia sp HS21 and Acinetobacter sp HS51

Journal

WORLD JOURNAL OF MICROBIOLOGY & BIOTECHNOLOGY
Volume 28, Issue 2, Pages 447-452

Publisher

SPRINGER
DOI: 10.1007/s11274-011-0834-z

Keywords

Sulfonamides; Escherichia sp.; Acinetobacter sp.; Degradation; Cytotoxicity

Funding

  1. Chinese Academy of Sciences [KZCX2-EW-206]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China (NSFC) [20975089]
  3. Key Laboratory of Experimental Marine Biology, Institute of Oceanology, Chinese Academy of Sciences [Kf201012]
  4. Department of Science and Technology of Yantai City of China [2010235]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

With the intensive application of sulfonamides in aquaculture and animal husbandry and the increase of sulfonamides discharged into the environments, there is an increasing need to find a way to remediate sulfonamide-contaminated environments. Two bacterial strains capable of degrading sulfonamides, HS21 and HS51, were isolated from marine environments. HS21 and HS51 were identified as members of Escherichia sp. and Acinetobacter sp., respectively, based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing. Degradation of each sulfonamide by Escherichia sp. HS21 and Acinetobacter sp. HS51 was characterized using capillary electrophoresis. About 66 or 72% of sulfapyridine and 45 or 67% of sulfathiazole contained in the media was degraded by Escherichia sp. HS21 or Acinetobacter sp. HS51, respectively, after incubation for 2 days. The supernatant from culture of Escherichia sp. HS21 or Acinetobacter sp. HS51 grown in sulfapyridine or sulfathiazole contained media had much attenuated cytotoxicity against HeLa cells. These results suggest that Escherichia sp. HS21 and Acinetobacter sp. HS51 are new bacterial resources for biodegrading sulfonamides and indicate the potential of isolated strains for the bioremediation of sulfonamide-polluted environments.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.5
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available