Cited by 71Enzyme-mediated dye degradationMicrobial bioremediation and biosurfactantsAdsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal

Decolourization and biodegradation of azo dye methyl red by Rhodococcus strain UCC 0016

Abstract

In the present study, locally isolated Rhodococcus strains were attempted as biological tools for methyl red removal, a mutagenic azo dye posing threat to the environment if left untreated. Rhodococcus strain UCC 0016 demonstrated superior methyl red-decolourizing activity of 100% after 24 h at static condition in comparison to Rhodococcus strain UCC 0008 which recorded 65% decolourization after 72 h. Optimization of physicochemical parameters at 30°C, pH 7 and supplementing glucose as the carbon source resulted in improved methyl red-decolourizing activity at static condition and reduced the time taken to achieve complete decolourization by 80%. Higher concentration of methyl red (5 g/L) was able to be decolourized completely within 10 h by adopting the technology of immobilization. The encapsulated cells of Rhodococcus strain UCC 0016 demonstrated higher substrate affinity (K m = 0.6995 g/L) and an accelerated rate of disappearance of methyl red ( V max = 0.3203 g/L/h) compared to the free cells. Furthermore, the gellan gum beads could be reused up to nine batches without substantial loss in the catalytic activity indicating the economic importance of this protocol. Analysis of methyl red degradation products revealed no germination inhibition on Triticum aestivum and Vigna radiata demonstrating complete toxicity removal of the parent dye after biological treatment. The occurrence of new and altered peaks (UV-Vis and FTIR) further supported the notion that the removal of me…

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1080/09593330.2018.1491634

Cites

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

This paper’s full text isn’t openly available, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

Authors
Maniyam, M. N., Ibrahim, A. L., & Cass, A. E. G.
Affiliations
  • University of Selangor (MY)
  • Imperial College London (GB)
Corresponding author
Maniyam, Maegala Nallapan
Venue
Environmental Technology
Published
2018-06-28
Volume
41
Issue
1
Pages
71-85
ISSN
  • 0959-3330 (ISSN-L)
  • 1479-487X
OpenAlex
W2808936714
Cited by
71
References
0
Citations by year
2025: 11 · 2024: 14 · 2023: 7 · 2022: 22 · 2021: 9 · 2020: 6 · 2019: 1 · 2018: 1
FWCI
3.59
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Environmental Technology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
Ministry of Science, Technology and Innovation (MOSTI) (Kementerian Sains, Teknologi dan Inovasi) (3090104000 (G))
Topics
  • Life Sciences › Agricultural and Biological Sciences › Plant Science › Enzyme-mediated dye degradation
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Pollution › Microbial bioremediation and biosurfactants
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Water Science and Technology › Adsorption and biosorption for pollutant removal
Keywords
methyl red, azo dye decolorization, biodegradation, cell immobilization, bioremediation, wastewater treatment, dye toxicity, germination inhibition, substrate affinity, glucose supplementation
MeSH terms
Azo Compounds, Biodegradation, Environmental, Coloring Agents, Humans, Rhodococcus, Sprains and Strains

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