The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Thermally treated low density polyethylene biodegradation by Penicillium pinophilum and Aspergillus niger
Abstract
Differential scanning calorimetry (DSC), X‐ray diffraction (XRD), Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FTIR) and scanning electron microscopy (SEM) were used to determine morphological, structural and surface changes (biodegradation) on thermo‐oxidized (80°C, 15 days) low‐density polyethylene (TO‐LDPE) incubated with Aspergillus niger and Penicillium pinophilum fungi, with and without ethanol as cosubstrate for 31 months. TO‐LDPE mineralization by fungi was also evaluated. Significantly morphological and structural final changes on biologically treated TO‐LDPE samples were observed. Decreases to three units on crystallinity and crystalline lamellar thickness (0.4–1.8 Å), and increases in small‐crystals content (up to 3.2%) and mean crystallite size (8.4–14 Å) were registered. An oxidation decrease (almost twice) on samples without ethanol with respect to the control was observed, while in those with ethanol it was increased (up to 2.5 times). Double bond index increased more than twice from 21 to 31 months. The higher TO‐LDPE changes and fungi‐LDPE interaction was observed in samples with ethanol, suggesting that ethanol favors the TO‐LDPE biodegradation, at least in case of P. pinophilum, probably by means of a cometabolic process. Mineralization of 0.50 % and 0.57 % for A. niger, and of 0.64 % and 0.37 % for P. pinophilum were obtained, for samples with and without ethanol, respectively. A model to explain morphological and structural changes on biologically treated TO‐LDPE is also proposed. © 2002 Wiley Periodicals, Inc. J Appl Polym Sci 83: 305–314, 2002
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
The three stages in degradation of polymers—polyethylene as a model substance
Albertsson, A., & Karlsson, S. (1988) · Journal of Applied Polymer Science · doi:10.1002/app.1988.070350515 · Cited by 194
Cited by
Microbial degradation and other environmental aspects of microplastics/plastics
Yuan, J., Ma, J., Sun, Y., Zhou, T., Zhao, Y., & Yu, F. (2020) · Science of The Total Environment · doi:10.1016/j.scitotenv.2020.136968 · Cited by 872
Microbial degradation and deterioration of polyethylene - a review
Restrepo-Flórez, J.-M., Bassi, A., & Thompson, M. R. (2014) · International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation · doi:10.1016/j.ibiod.2013.12.014 · Cited by 778
Biodegradation of polyethylene by the thermophilic bacterium Brevibacillus borstelensis
Hadad, D., Geresh, S., & Sivan, A. (2005) · Journal of Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1111/j.1365-2672.2005.02553.x · Cited by 653
Biodegradation of polyethylene: a brief review
Ghatge, S., Yang, Y., Ahn, J.-H., & Hur, H.-G. (2020) · Applied Biological Chemistry · doi:10.1186/s13765-020-00511-3 · Cited by 583
Colonization, biofilm formation and biodegradation of polyethylene by a strain of Rhodococcus ruber
(Orr), I. G., Hadar, Y., & Sivan, A. (2004) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-004-1584-8 · Cited by 539
Metadata
- Authors
- Volke‐Sepúlveda, T., Saucedo‐Castañeda, G., Gutiérrez‐Rojas, M., Manzur, A., & Favela‐Torres, E.
- Venue
- Journal of Applied Polymer Science
- Publisher
- Wiley
- Published
- 2001-11-06
- Volume
- 83
- Issue
- 2
- Pages
- 305-314
- ISSN
- 0021-8995 (ISSN-L)
- 1097-4628
- OpenAlex
- W2064019845
- Cited by
- 227
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 1.23
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.