The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Comparison of five bacterial strains producing siderophores with ability to chelate iron under alkaline conditions
Open accessAbstract
Iron deficiency is one of the main causes of chlorosis in plants, which leads to losses in field crops quality and yield. The use of synthetic chelates to prevent or correct iron-deficiency is not satisfactory mainly due to their poor biodegradability. The present work aimed to search suitable microorganisms to produce alternative, environment-friendly iron-chelating agents (siderophores). For this purpose, the performance of five bacteria (Azotobacter vinelandii, Bacillus megaterium, Bacillus subtilis, Pantoea allii and Rhizobium radiobacter) was evaluated, regarding siderophore production kinetics, level of siderophore production (determined by chrome azurol S, CAS method), type of siderophore produced (using Arnow and Csaky’s tests) and iron-chelating capacity at pH 9.0. All bacteria were in stationary phase at 24 h, except A. vinelandii (at 72 h) and produced the maximum siderophore amount (80–140 µmol L−1) between 24 and 48 h, with the exception of A. vinelandii (at 72 h). The analysis of culture filtrates revealed the presence of catechol-type siderophores for B. subtilis and R. radiobacter and hydroxamate-type siderophores for B. megaterium and P. allii. In the case of A. vinelandii, both siderophore-types (catechol and hydroxamates) were detected. The highest iron-chelating capacity, at pH 9.0, was obtained by B. megaterium followed by B. subtilis and A. vinelandii. Therefore, these three bacteria strains are the most promising bacteria for siderophore production and chlorosis correction under alkaline conditions.
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
Chemistry and biology of siderophores
Hider, R. C., & Kong, X. (2010) · Natural Product Reports · doi:10.1039/b906679a · Cited by 1,722
Cited by
Khatoon, Z., Huang, S., Rafique, M., Fakhar, A., Kamran, M. A., & Santoyo, G. (2020) · Journal of Environmental Management · doi:10.1016/j.jenvman.2020.111118 · Cited by 319
Bacillus subtilis impact on plant growth, soil health and environment: Dr. Jekyll and Mr. Hyde
Mahapatra, S., Yadav, R., & Ramakrishna, W. (2022) · Journal of Applied Microbiology · doi:10.1111/jam.15480 · Cited by 285
Metadata
- Authors
- Ferreira, C. M. H., Vilas-Boas, Â., Sousa, C. A., Soares, H. M. V. M., & Soares, E. V.
- Venue
- AMB Express
- Published
- 2019-05-28
- Volume
- 9
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 78-78
- ISSN
- 2191-0855 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2947801593
- Cited by
- 176
- References
- 1
- FWCI
- 12.00
- 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: Comparison of five bacterial strains producing siderophores with ability to chelate iron under alkaline conditions. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s13568-019-0796-3
- The paper
- Ferreira, C. M. H., Vilas-Boas, Â., Sousa, C. A., Soares, H. M. V. M., & Soares, E. V. (2019). Comparison of five bacterial strains producing siderophores with ability to chelate iron under alkaline conditions. AMB Express. https://doi.org/10.1186/s13568-019-0796-3
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.