4.6 Article

Analysis and characterization of cultivable extremophilic hydrolytic bacterial community in heavy-metal-contaminated soils from the Atacama Desert and their biotechnological potentials

期刊

JOURNAL OF APPLIED MICROBIOLOGY
卷 113, 期 3, 页码 550-559

出版社

WILEY
DOI: 10.1111/j.1365-2672.2012.05366.x

关键词

Atacama Desert; halophiles; halotolerants; heavy-metal-contaminated soils; hydrolytic extremophilic bacteria

资金

  1. Spanish Ministry of Science and Education [CTM 2006-03310]
  2. Junta de Andalucia [P08-RMN-3515]
  3. University of Sevilla
  4. Coordination of Improvement of Higher Education Personnel (Capes)

向作者/读者索取更多资源

Aims To isolate and characterize the cultivable community of hydrolase producers (amylase, protease, lipase, DNase, xylanase and pullulanase) inhabiting heavy-metal-contaminated soils in extreme conditions from the Atacama Desert. Methods and Results A total of 25 bacterial strains showing hydrolytic activities have been selected including halotolerants, extremely halotolerants and moderate halophiles. Most hydrolase producers were assigned to the family B acillaceae, belonging to the genera Bacillus (nine strains), Halobacillus (seven strains) and Thalassobacillus (five strains) and four isolates were related to members of the families Pseudomonadaceae, Halomonadaceae and Staphylococcaceae. The selected strains were then characterized for their tolerance pattern to six heavy metals, measured as minimal inhibitory concentrations (MICs). Conclusions The diversity found in the cultivable bacterial community analysed is more limited than that detected in other ecological studies owing to the restrictive conditions used in the screening. The dominant bacteria were Firmicutes and particularly, species related to the genus Bacillus. Significance and Impact of the Study This study is focused on the characterization of extremophilic hydrolytic bacteria, providing candidates as a source of novel enzymes with biotechnological applications.

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