The DOI matches its Crossref record.
Physicochemical Properties and Bioactivity of Fungal Chitin and Chitosan
Abstract
Chitinous material was extracted from mycelia of Aspergillus niger and Mucor rouxii grown in yeast peptone dextrose broth for 15 and 21 days, respectively. The extracted material was characterized for purity, degree of acetylation, and crystallinity and tested for antibacterial and eliciting properties. The maximum glucosamine level determined in the mycelium of A. niger was 11.10% dw and in the mycelium of M. rouxii was 20.13% dw. On the basis of the stepwise extraction of freeze-dried mycelia, it appeared that M. rouxii mycelia contained both chitin and chitosan, whereas A. niger contained only chitin. The yields of crude chitin from A. niger and M. rouxii were 24.01 and 13.25%, respectively, and the yield of chitosan from M. rouxii was 12.49%. Significant amounts (7.42-39.81%) of glucan were associated with chitinous compounds from both species and could not be eliminated by the extraction method used. The degrees of acetylation were determined to be 76.53 and 50.07% for chitin from A. niger and M. rouxii, respectively, and 19.5% for M. rouxii chitosan. The crystallinity of fungal chitin and chitosan was estimated to be less intense than in corresponding materials from shrimp shells. The extracted chitin and chitosan in a concentration of 0.1% reduced Salmonella Typhimurium DT104 2576 counts by 0.5-1.5 logs during a 4 day incubation in tryptic soy broth at 25 degrees C. Furthermore, all tested chitinous materials from fungal sources significantly reduced lesions caused by Botrytis cinerea and Penicillium expansum in harvested apples.
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
Cited by
Rizwan, M., Yahya, R., Hassan, A., Yar, M., Azzahari, A., Selvanathan, V., Sonsudin, F., & Abouloula, C. (2017) · Polymers · doi:10.3390/polym9040137 · Cited by 844
Muzzarelli, R. A. A., Boudrant, J., Meyer, D., Manno, N., DeMarchis, M., & Paoletti, M. G. (2012) · Carbohydrate Polymers · doi:10.1016/j.carbpol.2011.09.063 · Cited by 694
Shelf life extension of fresh fruit and vegetables by chitosan treatment
Romanazzi, G., Feliziani, E., Baños, S. B., & Sivakumar, D. (2017) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408398.2014.900474 · Cited by 367
Valencia-Chamorro, S. A., Palou, L., del Río, M. A., & Pérez-Gago, M. B. (2011) · Critical Reviews in Food Science and Nutrition · doi:10.1080/10408398.2010.485705 · Cited by 339
Alternatives to conventional fungicides for the control of citrus postharvest green and blue moulds
(2008) · Stewart Postharvest Review · doi:10.2212/spr.2008.2.2 · Cited by 205
Chemical Characteristics and Functional Properties of Chitosan
Lizardi-Mendoza, J., Argüelles Monal, W. M., & Goycoolea Valencia, F. M. (2016) · Chitosan in the Preservation of Agricultural Commodities · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-802735-6.00001-x · Cited by 167
Romanazzi, G., Gabler, F. M., Margosan, D., Mackey, B. E., & Smilanick, J. L. (2009) · Phytopathology® · doi:10.1094/phyto-99-9-1028 · Cited by 166
Metadata
- Authors
- Wu, T., Zivanovic, S., Draughon, F. A., Conway, W. S., & Sams, C. E.
- Venue
- Journal of Agricultural and Food Chemistry
- Publisher
- American Chemical Society (ACS)
- Published
- 2005-04-15
- Volume
- 53
- Issue
- 10
- Pages
- 3888-3894
- ISSN
- 0021-8561 (ISSN-L)
- 1520-5118
- OpenAlex
- W1991649466
- Cited by
- 260
- References
- 0
- FWCI
- 3.91
- 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.