Bacterial cellulose cookbook: A systematic review on sustainable and cost-effective substrates

IF 20.2 Q1 MATERIALS SCIENCE, PAPER & WOOD
Luis Quijano , Raquel Rodrigues , Dagmar Fischer , Jorge David Tovar-Castro , Alice Payne , Laura Navone , Yating Hu , Hao Yan , Phitsanu Pinmanee , Edgar Poon , Jinghe Yang , Eve Barro
{"title":"Bacterial cellulose cookbook: A systematic review on sustainable and cost-effective substrates","authors":"Luis Quijano ,&nbsp;Raquel Rodrigues ,&nbsp;Dagmar Fischer ,&nbsp;Jorge David Tovar-Castro ,&nbsp;Alice Payne ,&nbsp;Laura Navone ,&nbsp;Yating Hu ,&nbsp;Hao Yan ,&nbsp;Phitsanu Pinmanee ,&nbsp;Edgar Poon ,&nbsp;Jinghe Yang ,&nbsp;Eve Barro","doi":"10.1016/j.jobab.2024.05.003","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><div>Bacterial cellulose is a versatile material with applications in many industries. However, the widespread uptake of bacterial cellulose faces challenges including high production costs and lack of scalability. One approach to address these obstacles is the use of alternative substrates and media, compared to the Hestrin–Schramm (HS) media. By evaluating and selecting appropriate media and substrates, the production of bacterial cellulose can be more efficient: enabling sustainable systems and supply chains where less energy and materials are lost, and the output production is increased. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the current landscape of bacterial cellulose alternative media and substrates (ingredients). Through a systematic review of 198 papers, this review identifies 299 alternative substrates from 12 industries and 101 bacterial cellulose-producing strains, which were systematically compared. This review also finds that there are methodological gaps in this field such as data variability, papers mislabelling the HS media or not using a comparison media, and a lack of strain names. This alternative substrate analysis for bacterial cellulose production demonstrates that overall, for some applications alternative substrates can be taken into consideration that are not only cheaper, but also produce higher yields than HS media.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":52344,"journal":{"name":"Journal of Bioresources and Bioproducts","volume":"9 4","pages":"Pages 379-409"},"PeriodicalIF":20.2000,"publicationDate":"2024-05-27","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Journal of Bioresources and Bioproducts","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S2369969824000380","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"MATERIALS SCIENCE, PAPER & WOOD","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Bacterial cellulose is a versatile material with applications in many industries. However, the widespread uptake of bacterial cellulose faces challenges including high production costs and lack of scalability. One approach to address these obstacles is the use of alternative substrates and media, compared to the Hestrin–Schramm (HS) media. By evaluating and selecting appropriate media and substrates, the production of bacterial cellulose can be more efficient: enabling sustainable systems and supply chains where less energy and materials are lost, and the output production is increased. The purpose of this paper is to analyze the current landscape of bacterial cellulose alternative media and substrates (ingredients). Through a systematic review of 198 papers, this review identifies 299 alternative substrates from 12 industries and 101 bacterial cellulose-producing strains, which were systematically compared. This review also finds that there are methodological gaps in this field such as data variability, papers mislabelling the HS media or not using a comparison media, and a lack of strain names. This alternative substrate analysis for bacterial cellulose production demonstrates that overall, for some applications alternative substrates can be taken into consideration that are not only cheaper, but also produce higher yields than HS media.

Abstract Image

细菌纤维素食谱:关于可持续和具有成本效益的基质的系统综述
细菌纤维素是一种多功能材料,可应用于许多行业。然而,细菌纤维素的广泛应用面临着生产成本高和缺乏可扩展性等挑战。与 Hestrin-Schramm (HS) 培养基相比,解决这些障碍的方法之一是使用替代基质和培养基。通过评估和选择合适的培养基和基质,可以提高细菌纤维素的生产效率:实现可持续系统和供应链,减少能源和材料损失,提高产量。本文旨在分析细菌纤维素替代培养基和基质(成分)的现状。通过对 198 篇论文的系统综述,本综述确定了来自 12 个行业的 299 种替代基质和 101 种生产纤维素的细菌菌株,并对这些菌株进行了系统比较。本综述还发现,该领域存在方法上的不足,如数据多变、论文错误标注 HS 培养基或未使用对比培养基,以及缺乏菌株名称。对细菌纤维素生产的替代底物分析表明,总体而言,在某些应用中可以考虑使用替代底物,这些底物不仅比 HS 培养基便宜,而且产量也更高。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Journal of Bioresources and Bioproducts
Journal of Bioresources and Bioproducts Agricultural and Biological Sciences-Forestry
CiteScore
39.30
自引率
0.00%
发文量
38
审稿时长
12 weeks
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术官方微信