4.7 Article

Exploring the microbiota dynamics related to vegetable biomasses degradation and study of lignocellulose-degrading bacteria for industrial biotechnological application

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 5, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/srep08161

关键词

-

资金

  1. Ministero dell'Universita e della Ricerca Scientifica Industrial Research [PON01_01966, 01/Ric. 18.1.2010]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The aims of this study were to evaluate the microbial diversity of different lignocellulosic biomasses during degradation under natural conditions and to isolate, select, characterise new well-adapted bacterial strains to detect potentially improved enzyme-producing bacteria. The microbiota of biomass piles of Arundo donax, Eucalyptus camaldulensis and Populus nigra were evaluated by high-throughput sequencing. A highly complex bacterial community was found, composed of ubiquitous bacteria, with the highest representation by the Actinobacteria, Proteobacteria, Bacteroidetes and Firmicutes phyla. The abundances of the major and minor taxa retrieved during the process were determined by the selective pressure produced by the lignocellulosic plant species and degradation conditions. Moreover, cellulolytic bacteria were isolated using differential substrates and screened for cellulase, cellobiase, xylanase, pectinase and ligninase activities. Forty strains that showed multienzymatic activity were selected and identified. The highest endo-cellulase activity was seen in Promicromonospora sukumoe CE86 and Isoptericola variabilis CA84, which were able to degrade cellulose, cellobiose and xylan. Sixty-two percent of bacterial strains tested exhibited high extracellular endo-1,4-beta-glucanase activity in liquid media. These approaches show that the microbiota of lignocellulosic biomasses can be considered an important source of bacterial strains to upgrade the feasibility of lignocellulose conversion for the 'greener' technology of second-generation biofuels.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据