Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 250

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 5 of the 5 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Maintenance and assessment of cell viability in formulation of non‐sporulating bacterial inoculants

Open access
Berninger, Teresa, González López, Óscar, Bejarano, Ana, Preininger, Claudia, Sessitsch, Angela·2018·Microbial Biotechnology

Abstract

Summary: The application of beneficial, plant‐associated microorganisms is a sustainable approach to improving crop performance in agriculture. However, microbial inoculants are often susceptible to prolonged periods of storage and deleterious environmental factors, which negatively impact their viability and ultimately limit efficacy in the field. This particularly concerns non‐sporulating bacteria. To overcome this challenge, the availability of protective formulations is crucial. Numerous parameters influence the viability of microbial cells, with drying procedures generally being among the most critical ones. Thus, technological advances to attenuate the desiccation stress imposed on living cells are key to successful formulation development. In this review, we discuss the core aspects important to consider when aiming at high cell viability of non‐sporulating bacteria to be applied as microbial inoculants in agriculture. We elaborate the suitability of commonly applied drying methods (freeze‐drying, vacuum‐drying, spray‐drying, fluidized bed‐drying, air‐drying) and potential measures to prevent cell damage from desiccation (externally applied protectants, stress pre‐conditioning, triggering of exopolysaccharide secretion, ‘helper’ strains). Furthermore, we point out methods for assessing bacterial viability, such as colony counting, spectrophotometry, microcalorimetry, flow cytometry and viability qPCR . Choosing appropriate technologies for maintenance of cell viability and evaluation thereof will render formulation development more efficient. This in turn will aid in utilizing the vast potential of promising, plant beneficial bacteria as sustainable alternatives to standard agrochemicals.

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 · 10.1111/1751-7915.12880

Cites

5 of 5 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

Show all 5 references

Cited by

See all 250

Metadata

Authors
Berninger, T., González López, Ó., Bejarano, A., Preininger, C., & Sessitsch, A.
Venue
Microbial Biotechnology
Publisher
Wiley
Published
2017-12-04
Volume
11
Issue
2
Pages
277-301
ISSN
1751-7915 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2775472968
Cited by
250
References
5
FWCI
10.36
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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: Maintenance and assessment of cell viability in formulation of non‐sporulating bacterial inoculants. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1111/1751-7915.12880
The paper
Berninger, T., González López, Ó., Bejarano, A., Preininger, C., & Sessitsch, A. (2018). Maintenance and assessment of cell viability in formulation of non‐sporulating bacterial inoculants. Microbial Biotechnology. https://doi.org/10.1111/1751-7915.12880

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.