4.7 Review

New insights into the microbial degradation and catalytic mechanism of synthetic pyrethroids

期刊

ENVIRONMENTAL RESEARCH
卷 182, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ACADEMIC PRESS INC ELSEVIER SCIENCE
DOI: 10.1016/j.envres.2020.109138

关键词

Pyrethroids; Biodegradation pathways; Carboxylesterase; Hydrolysis; Bioremediation

资金

  1. Key-Area Research and Development Program of Guangdong Province, China [2018B020206001]
  2. National Natural Science Foundation of China, China [31401763]
  3. Guangdong Special Branch Plan for Young Talent with Scientific and Technological Innovation, China [2017TQ04N026]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The significant applications of pyrethroid insecticides in agro-ecosystem and household environments have raised serious environmental concerns. Environmental bioremediation has emerged as an effective and eco-friendly approach to remove or neutralize hazardous compounds. Bioaugmentation accelerates pyrethroid degradation in liquid cultures and soil. Pyrethroid-degrading microorganisms have been extensively studied to cope with pyrethroid residues. Microorganisms primarily hydrolyze the ester bonds of pyrethroids, and their degradation pathways have been elaborated. The functional genes and enzymes involved in microbial degradation have also been screened and studied. Carboxylesterase plays a key role in pyrethroid degradation by cleaving its carboxylester linkage. The catalytic mechanism is dependent on a specific catalytic triad, consisting of three amino acid residues (glutamine, histidine, and serine) within the active site of the carboxylesterase enzyme. Pyrethroid-degrading strains and enzymes have proven to be effective for the bioremediation of pyrethroid-contaminated environments. In this review, we have summarized newly isolated pyrethroid-degrading strains and proposed the degradation pathways along with key functional genes/enzymes. To develop an efficient bioremediation strategy, pyrethroid-degrading microorganisms should be comprehensively explored.

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