4.6 Review

Exopolysaccharides produced by marine bacteria and their applications as glycosaminoglycan-like molecules

期刊

FRONTIERS IN CHEMISTRY
卷 2, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

FRONTIERS MEDIA SA
DOI: 10.3389/fchem.2014.00085

关键词

marine-derived polysaccharide; biodiversity; biological activity; structure; modification; GAG-mimetic; biosynthesis

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Although polysaccharides are ubiquitous and the most abundant renewable bio-components, their studies, covered by the glycochemistry and glycobiology fields, remain a challenge due to their high molecular diversity and complexity. Polysaccharides are industrially used in food products; human therapeutics fall into a more recent research field and pharmaceutical industry is looking for more and more molecules with enhanced activities. Glycosaminoglycans (GAGs) found in animal tissues play a critical role in cellular physiological and pathological processes as they bind many cellular components. Therefore, they present a great potential for the design and preparation of therapeutic drugs. On the other hand, microorganisms producing exopolysaccharides (EPS) are renewable resources meeting well the actual industrial demand. In particular, the diversity of marine microorganisms is still largely unexplored offering great opportunities to discover high value products such as new molecules and biocatalysts. EPS-producing bacteria from the marine environment will be reviewed with a focus on marine-derived EPS from bacteria isolated from deep-sea hydrothermal vents. Information on chemical and structural features, putative pathways of biosynthesis, novel strategies for chemical and enzymatic modifications and potentialities in the biomedical field will be provided. An integrated approach should be used to increase the basic knowledge on these compounds and their applications; new clean environmentally friendly processes for the production of carbohydrate bioactive compounds should also be proposed for a sustainable industry.

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

4.6
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