Effects of Fe nanoparticles on bacterial growth and biosurfactant production

Liu, Jia; Vipulanandan, C.; Cooper, Tim F.; Vipulanandan, Geethanjali

doi:10.1007/s11051-012-1405-4

Cited by 28 publications

(22 citation statements)

References 28 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…As shown in Figs. 4 a and 5 b , Au nanoparticles did not influence the bacteria growth and biosurfactant production in the range of 500 and 1000 mg/l, which was similar to the observations by Liu et al [11, 27] and Chatterjee et al [26]. It can be seen that Fe/SDS nanoparticles were more toxic than Au nanoparticles.…”

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

“…These obtained results were similar to the observation made by Liu et al [11,27] on Serratia bacteria. Liu reported Au/Fe nanoparticles showed less toxicity compared with Fe nanoparticles on Serratia.…”

Section: Nanoparticles Effect On Biomass and Biosurfactant Productionsupporting

confidence: 93%

“…For example, in 2013 researchers reported Fe nanoparticles coated with Au reduce oxidation compared with the uncoated Fe nanoparticles. Fe/Au nanoparticles not only did not show any negative effect on bacteria but also they showed a positive effect on bacterial growth and production of biosurfactant [11,[26][27][28].…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Effects of Fe/SDS and Au nanoparticles on P. aeruginosa bacterial growth and biosurfactant production

Alamdar

Rasekh²,

Yazdian

2018

IET nanobiotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The aim of this study was to evaluate the effects of iron (Fe)/SDS and gold (Au) nanoparticles on growth and biosurfactant production of . The concentrations of the nanoparticles used were 1, 500 and 1000 mg/l. In this research, the surface tension of biosurfactant, dry weight of biosurfactant and biomass, emulsification indexes (E) were measured and transmission electron microscopy analysis was used to monitor the nanoparticles. The test results showed that the effect of nanoparticles on the bacterial growth and biosurfactant production varied corresponding to the type and concentration of nanoparticles. Fe/SDS nanoparticles showed no bacterial toxicity when the concentration of nanoparticles was 1 mg/ml and increased the growth and biosurfactant production, 23.21 and 20.73%, respectively. While at higher concentrations (500, 1000 mg/l), the nanoparticles suppressed bacterial growth as well as biosurfactant production. Similarly, Au nanoparticles had no bacterial toxicity and also increased bacterial growth and biosurfactant production The surface tensions of all samples decreased from 72 of distiled water to 32-35 mN/m.

show abstract

Section: Resultssupporting

confidence: 86%

Section: Nanoparticles Effect On Biomass and Biosurfactant Productionsupporting

confidence: 93%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Effects of Fe/SDS and Au nanoparticles on P. aeruginosa bacterial growth and biosurfactant production

Alamdar

Rasekh²,

Yazdian

2018

IET nanobiotechnol.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…In terms of the behavior of polymer during cement hydration process, some researchers believe that the improvement of polymer to cement and concrete performance is based on its physical behavior in the cement hydration process, the polymer film covered the cement gel surface or polymer particles filled in the gap between the hydration products, blocking the pore channels and increasing the density of the cement gel, eventually enhancing its impermeability and improving the compressive strength. But this interpretation of the physical behavior of SD and PAM interaction mechanism is not appropriate here, because the dosage of polymer mentioned in the viewpoint above reaches to 10%.…”

Section: Resultsmentioning

confidence: 99%

Synergistic interactions of chemical additives on the strength development of silicate cement by a box‐behnken model optimization

Zheng

Shao

Shen

2014

J of Applied Polymer Sci

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The effect of water-soluble polymers (polyvinyl alcohol (PVA), polyacrylamide (PAM)) and chemical additives (silicone defoamer (SD), polycarboxylate superplasticizer (PC)), on the development of the strength of mortar was investigated using the BoxBehnken design (BBD). Quadratic equations were obtained for the correlation between dosages of chemicals and the strength of the mortar, and the order of the effectiveness of the chemicals was validated in Pareto charts with contour plots to illustrate the chemicals and their interactions on the strength enhancement of mortar. The results showed that the interaction effects of SD and PAM enhanced the strength of cement mortar for all curing times, and the rates of contribution were 16.5%, 20.1%, and 19.4%, respectively. On the basis of the performance analysis of the four additives, optimized formulations were highlighted via overlapped contour plots. Heat of hydration and scanning electron microscope (SEM) images were introduced to confirm the interaction between SD and PAM. The improvement of compressive strength attributes to the synergistic interactions between SD and PAM, including the physical interaction resulted from the doping of SD, which promoting the damage of air bubble, decreasing the porosity and increasing the compressive strength, and the chemical interaction resulted from the doping of PAM, which producing ionic compounds and forming dense structure.

show abstract

“…However, the growth of the producing organism was inhibited at higher concentrations of Fe‐NP confirming the requirement for limiting Fe ions in the media for optimum glycolipid biosurfactant production (Liu et al . ). In a recent study, 1 mg l −1 of Fe‐silica NP (Fe‐Si‐NP) at 6 h addition time was found to increase rhamnolipid production by P. aeruginosa strain by 57% as compared to a medium free of NPs (Sahebnazar et al .…”

Section: Promising Strategiesmentioning

confidence: 97%

Biosurfactant production: emerging trends and promising strategies

2018

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Biosurfactants are economically most sought after biotechnological compounds of the 21st century. However, inefficient bioprocessing has mitigated the economical commercial production of these compounds. Although much work is being done on the use of low-cost substrates for their production, a paucity of literature exists on the upcoming bioprocess optimization strategies and their successes and potential for economical biosurfactant production. This review discusses some of the latest developments and most promising strategies to enhance and economize the biosurfactant production process. Recent market analysis, developments in the field of optimally formulated cost credit substrates for enhanced product formation and subsequent process economization are few of the critical aspects highlighted here. Use of nanoparticles and coproduction of biosurfactant along with other commercially important compounds like enzymes, are other upcoming bioprocess intensification strategies. The recent developments discussed here would not only give an overview of pertinent parameters for economic biosurfactant production but would also bring to fore multiple strategies that would open up new avenues of research on biosurfactant production. This would go a long way in making biosurfactants a commercially successful compound of the current century.

show abstract

Effects of Fe nanoparticles on bacterial growth and biosurfactant production

Cited by 28 publications

References 28 publications

Effects of Fe/SDS and Au nanoparticles on P. aeruginosa bacterial growth and biosurfactant production

Effects of Fe/SDS and Au nanoparticles on P. aeruginosa bacterial growth and biosurfactant production

Synergistic interactions of chemical additives on the strength development of silicate cement by a box‐behnken model optimization

Biosurfactant production: emerging trends and promising strategies

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About