The DOI matches its Crossref record; 17 of the 17 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
Review on the current status of polymer degradation: a microbial approach
Open accessAbstract
Inertness and the indiscriminate use of synthetic polymers leading to increased land and water pollution are of great concern. Plastic is the most useful synthetic polymer, employed in wide range of applications viz. the packaging industries, agriculture, household practices, etc. Unpredicted use of synthetic polymers is leading towards the accumulation of increased solid waste in the natural environment. This affects the natural system and creates various environmental hazards. Plastics are seen as an environmental threat because they are difficult to degrade. This review describes the occurrence and distribution of microbes that are involved in the degradation of both natural and synthetic polymers. Much interest is generated by the degradation of existing plastics using microorganisms. It seems that biological agents and their metabolic enzymes can be exploited as a potent tool for polymer degradation. Bacterial and fungal species are the most abundant biological agents found in nature and have distinct degradation abilities for natural and synthetic polymers. Among the huge microbial population associated with polymer degradation, Pseudomonas aeruginosa , Pseudomonas stutzeri , Streptomyces badius , Streptomyces setonii , Rhodococcus ruber , Comamonas acidovorans , Clostridium thermocellum and Butyrivibrio fibrisolvens are the dominant bacterial species. Similarly, Aspergillus niger, Aspergillus flavus, Fusarium lini , Pycnoporus cinnabarinus and Mucor rouxii are prevalent fungal species.
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
The return of a forgotten polymer—Polycaprolactone in the 21st century
Woodruff, M. A., & Hutmacher, D. W. (2010) · Progress in Polymer Science · doi:10.1016/j.progpolymsci.2010.04.002 · Cited by 4,033
A Literature Review of Poly(Lactic Acid)
Garlotta, D. (2001) · Journal of Polymers and the Environment · doi:10.1023/a:1020200822435 · Cited by 3,707
Jönsson, L. J., & Martín, C. (2016) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2015.10.009 · Cited by 2,147
Tokiwa, Y., Calabia, B. P., Ugwu, C. U., & Aiba, S. (2009) · International Journal of Molecular Sciences · doi:10.3390/ijms10093722 · Cited by 1,782
Mechanistic implications of plastic degradation
Singh, B., & Sharma, N. (2008) · Polymer Degradation and Stability · doi:10.1016/j.polymdegradstab.2007.11.008 · Cited by 1,569
Biodegradable and compostable alternatives to conventional plastics
Song, J. H., Murphy, R. J., Narayan, R., & Davies, G. B. H. (2009) · Philosophical Transactions of the Royal Society B: Biological Sciences · doi:10.1098/rstb.2008.0289 · Cited by 971
Biopolymers: overview of several properties and consequences on their applications
Van de Velde, K., & Kiekens, P. (2002) · Polymer Testing · doi:10.1016/s0142-9418(01)00107-6 · Cited by 887
Santo, M., Weitsman, R., & Sivan, A. (2013) · International Biodeterioration & Biodegradation · doi:10.1016/j.ibiod.2012.03.001 · Cited by 521
Biofilm development of the polyethylene-degrading bacterium rhodococcus ruber
Sivan, A., Szanto, M., & Pavlov, V. (2006) · Applied Microbiology and Biotechnology · doi:10.1007/s00253-005-0259-4 · Cited by 415
Biodegradation of Polyethylene by a Soil Bacterium and AlkB Cloned Recombinant Cell
Gyung Yoon, M., Jeong Jeon, H., & Nam Kim, M. (2012) · Journal of Bioremediation & Biodegradation · doi:10.4172/2155-6199.1000145 · Cited by 304
Cited by
Degradation rates of plastics in the environment
Chamas, A., Moon, H., Zheng, J., Qiu, Y., Tabassum, T., Jang, J. H., Abu-Omar, M., Scott, S. L., & Suh, S. (2020) · ACS Sustainable Chemistry & Engineering · doi:10.1021/acssuschemeng.9b06635 · Cited by 3,463
Understanding plastic degradation and microplastic formation in the environment: A review
Zhang, K., Hamidian, A. H., Tubić, A., Zhang, Y., Fang, J. K. H., Wu, C., & Lam, P. K. S. (2021) · Environmental Pollution · doi:10.1016/j.envpol.2021.116554 · Cited by 1,539
Kumar, R., Verma, A., Shome, A., Sinha, R., Sinha, S., Jha, P. K., Kumar, R., Kumar, P., Shubham, Das, S., et al. (2021) · Sustainability · doi:10.3390/su13179963 · Cited by 1,111
Plastics: Environmental and Biotechnological Perspectives on Microbial Degradation
Danso, D., Chow, J., & Streit, W. R. (2019) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.01095-19 · Cited by 918
Removal of microplastics from the environment. A review
Padervand, M., Lichtfouse, E., Robert, D., & Wang, C. (2020) · Environmental Chemistry Letters · doi:10.1007/s10311-020-00983-1 · Cited by 759
Metadata
- Authors
- Pathak, V. M., & Navneet
- Venue
- Bioresources and Bioprocessing
- Published
- 2017-03-23
- Volume
- 4
- Issue
- 1
- ISSN
- 2197-4365 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2599977611
- Cited by
- 817
- References
- 17
- FWCI
- 15.82
- 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: Review on the current status of polymer degradation: a microbial approach. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/s40643-017-0145-9
- The paper
- Pathak, V. M., & Navneet. (2017). Review on the current status of polymer degradation: a microbial approach. Bioresources and Bioprocessing. https://doi.org/10.1186/s40643-017-0145-9
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.
