Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 258

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 30 of the 30 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Fabrication of MgO nanostructures and its efficient photocatalytic, antibacterial and anticancer performance

Karthik, K., Dhanuskodi, S., Gobinath, C., Prabukumar, S., Sivaramakrishnan, S.·2019·Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology

Abstract

Magnesium oxide (MgO) nanostructures were prepared using microwave-assisted (M 1) and hydrothermal (M 2) methods and characterized by XRD, SEM and FT-IR. It exhibits cubic structure with an average crystallite size of 20 nm (M 1) and 14 nm (M 2) and the lattice strain (WH plot) is 0.0017 (M 1), 0.0037 (M 2). It's spherical and rods like structures are confirmed through SEM and TEM. The vibrational stretching mode of MgO is 439 (M 1) and 449 cm-1 (M 2). The optical bandgap is estimated as 5.93 eV (M 1) and 5.85 eV (M 2) through UV-Vis spectra. The fluorescence spectrum shows emission peaks at 414 and 437 (M 1) and 367 and 385 nm (M 2). The photodegradation studies of MgO nanostructures were assessed by monitoring the decolorization of methylene blue and Congo red dyes in aqueous solution under sunlight irradiation. The antibacterial activities of M 1 and M 2 are investigated against the gram-negative (Escherichia coli, Shigella flexneri, Salmonella typhi, Proteus mirabilis, Aeromonas hydrophila and Vibrio cholera) and gram-positive (Bacillus subtilis and Rhodococcus rhodochrous) bacteria. The zone of inhibition of 24 (M 1) and 25 mm (M 2) indicates high antibacterial activity towards the gram negative bacterium A. hydrophila. Confocal laser scanning microscopic (CLSM) analysis was utilized for understanding the variation in antibacterial activity between different orientations of MgO nanostructures. The cytotoxicity assay confirmed that the prepared nanostructures are non - toxic to normal healthy RBC's. In-vitro anticancer efficiency (IC50) of MgO nanostructures against human lung cancer cell line (A549) was investigated.

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2018.11.001

Cites

30 of 30 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

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

1 retracted

Show all 30 references

Cited by

See all 258

Metadata

Authors
Karthik, K., Dhanuskodi, S., Gobinath, C., Prabukumar, S., & Sivaramakrishnan, S.
Venue
Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2019-01
Volume
190
Pages
8-20
ISSN
1011-1344 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2901627499
Cited by
258
References
30
FWCI
9.22
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Fabrication of MgO nanostructures and its efficient photocatalytic, antibacterial and anticancer performance. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2018.11.001
The paper
Karthik, K., Dhanuskodi, S., Gobinath, C., Prabukumar, S., & Sivaramakrishnan, S. (2019). Fabrication of MgO nanostructures and its efficient photocatalytic, antibacterial and anticancer performance. Journal of Photochemistry and Photobiology B: Biology. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jphotobiol.2018.11.001

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.