ArticleJournal of biological engineering2024
Biovalorization of whey waste as economic nutriment for mycogenic production of single cell oils with promising antibiofilm and anticancer potentiality.
Article in Journal of biological engineering, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
4 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The production of value-added bio-compounds from rejuvenated sources and their recruitment for healthcare services are paramount objectives in the agenda of white biotechnology. Hereupon, the current study focused on economic production of single cell oils (SCOs) from oleaginous fungi Alternaria sp. (A-OS) and Drechslera sp. (D-OS) using cheese whey waste stream, followed by their evaluation as antibiofilm and anticancer agents, for the first time. As a sole substrate for growth, the whey aided in lipid accumulation by 3.22 and 4.33 g/L, which representing 45.3 and 48.2% lipid content in Drechslera sp. (D-OS) and Alternaria sp. (A-OS), respectively. Meanwhile, a higher unsaturation degree was detected in A-OS by 62.18% comparing to 53.15% of D-OS, with advantageous presence of omega-6 poly unsaturated fatty acid by 22.67% and 15.04% for A-OS and D-OD, respectively, as revealed by GC-MS and FTIR characterization analysis. Interestingly, an eminent and significant (P ≤ 0.05) antibiofilm potency was observed in a dose-dependent modality upon employing both SCOs as antibiofilm agents. Whereas, 100 µg/mL of A-OS recorded superior inhibition of P. aeruginosa, S. aureus and C. albicans biofilms development by 84.10 ± 0.445, 90.37 ± 0.065 and 94.96 ± 0.21%, respectively. Whereas, D-OS (100 µg/mL) thwarted the biofilms of P. aeruginosa, S. aureus and C. albicans by 47.41 ± 2.83, 62.63 ± 5.82 and 78.67 ± 0.23%, correspondingly. Besides, the metabolic performance of cells within biofilm matrix, protein, carbohydrate contents and hydrophobicity of examined biofilms were also curtailed in a significant correlation with biofilm biomass (r ≥ 0.9). Further, as anticancer agents, D-OS recorded higher potency against A549 and CaCo-2 cell lines with IC50 values of 2.55 and 3.425% and SI values of 10.1 and 7.5, respectively. However, A-OS recorded 8.275% and 2.88 for IC50 and SI of Caco-2 cells, respectively. Additionally, A-OS activated caspase 3 by 64.23 ± 1.18% and 53.77 ± 0.995% more than D-OS (52.09 ± 0.222% and 49.72 ± 0.952%) in A549 and Caco-2 cells, respectively. Furthermore, the enzymes, which associated with cancer invasion, metastasis, and angiogenesis (i.e., MMP2 and MMP9) were strongly inhibited by A-OS with 18.58% and 8.295%, respectively as IC50 values; while D-OS results recorded 23.61% and 13.16%, respectively, which could be ascribed to the higher ω-6/ω-3 contents of A-OS. The promising results of the current study opens up the vision to employ SCOs as anti-infective nutraceuticals and in complementary/alternative therapy and prophylactic programs as well.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the Socratic graph.