| Literature DB >> 34540180 |
Doaa Montaser Ahmed Khalil1,2, Mohamed Salah Massoud1,3, Soad A El-Zayat1,2, Magdi A El-Sayed1,2,4.
Abstract
BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES: The use of endophytic fungi for management of phenol residue in paper and pulp industries has been shown as cost-effective and eco-friendly approach. In this study, isolation of endophytic fungi from roots, stems, and leaves of Hibiscus sabdariffa was conducted. Additionally, the isolated fungi were examined for their ability to degrade phenol and its derivatives in paper and pulp industrial samples, using different growth conditions.Entities:
Keywords: Aspergillus; Biodegradation; Biodiversity; Endophytes; Hibiscus; Phenol
Year: 2021 PMID: 34540180 PMCID: PMC8416593 DOI: 10.18502/ijm.v13i3.6404
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Iran J Microbiol ISSN: 2008-3289
Fig. 1.Diversity profile of endophytic fungi associated with H. sabdariffa, A Total count of fungal species, B% Genera Dominance of fungal species. C Venn diagram of the total number and mutual occurrence of fungal species of the root, stem, and leaf, D heat map illustrate % Colonization frequency (CF) of fungal species
Potency of different fungal species on percentage degradation of Catechol at 0.4, 0.6, 0.8 % concentrations, incubated at 28ºC for 8 d
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 97.01 ± 0.08AB | 94.58 ± 0.89ABC | 59.68 ± 1.03EFGHI | |
|
| 85.95 ± 0.76GHI | 74.46 ± 0.73L | 49.68 ± 1.20IJKL |
| 92.41 ± 0.37D | 92.63 ± 0.72BCD | 55.08 ± 2.16GHIJK | |
| 84.23 ± 0.17IJ | 73.80 ± 0.32L | 44.48 ± 2.28KLM | |
| 86.10 ± 1.13GHI | 90.17 ± 0.50CDE | 10.34 ± 1.99S | |
| 94.06 ± 0.93CD | 92.24 ± 0.09BCD | 23.97 ± 0.23P | |
| 95.38 ± 0.07BC | 92.48 ± 0.23BCD | 28.48 ± 5.75OP | |
| 93.76 ± 0.08CD | 93.77 ± 0.50BC | 79.35 ± 2.28ABC | |
| 81.84 ± 0.51KL | 81.35 ± 2.23IJK | 20.67 ± 4.27QRS | |
| 81.84 ± 0.51KL | 66.02 ± 3.22M | 76.38 ± 0.07ABC | |
| 79.14 ± 0.83M | 77.60 ± 1.31KL | 59.26 ± 0.68FGHI | |
| 92.02 ± 0.81DE | 88.86 ± 0.63DEF | 45.59 ± 2.62JKLM | |
| 89.72 ± 0.54EF | 85.32 ± 0.96FGHI | 61.36 ± 1.25EFGH | |
| 92.45 ± 0.07D | 82.26 ± 0.51 | 70.05 ± 1.54CDEF | |
| 86.57 ± 0.88GH | 79.70 ± 0.24JK | 83.45 ± 0.97A | |
| 93.70 ± 1.37CD | 88.43 ± 0.03DEFG | 75.35 ± 1.77ABCD | |
| 97.82 ± 0.64A | 95.30 ± 0.36AB | 37.22 ± 2.28MNO | |
| 95.11 ± 0.29BC | 92.57 ± 0.40BCD | 70.89 ± 0.51BCDE | |
| 75.85 ± 0.03LM | 86.07 ± 0.10EFGH | 81.45 ± 2.62AB | |
| 80.40 ± 0.54N | 84.39 ± 0.46FGHI | 69.91 ± 0.86CDEF | |
| 97.85 ± 0.03A | 98.50 ± 0.64 | 40.89 ± 3.25LM | |
| 89.45 ± 0.30F | 88.72 ± 0.86DEF | 34.15 ± 0.22NOP | |
| 79.23 ± 0.24M | 85.79 ± 0.55EFGHI | 55.40 ± 2.00GHIJK | |
| 85.54 ± 0.64GHIJ | 83.99 ± 0.17GHIJ | 64.89 ± 0.40DEFG | |
| 83.38 ± 0.05JK | 85.58 ± 0.53FGHI | 46.52 ± 3.06JKLM | |
| 86.03 ± 0.90GHI | 76.97 ± 0.84KL | 38.48 ± 0.57LM | |
|
| 97.12 ± 0.45AB | 94.17 ± 0.28ABC | 52.99 ± 4.78HIJK |
|
| 96.52 ± 0.35AB | 95.50 ± 0.74AB | 82.05 ± 0.07AB |
|
| 89.58 ± 0.26F | 57.63 ± 3.95N | 45.03 ± 10.16JKLMN |
|
| 84.39 ± 0.43HIJ | 96.58 ± 0.13AB | 14.34 ± 0.91RS |
|
| 86.70 ± 0.33G | 86.60 ± 0.13EFGH | 55.96 ± 1.42GHIJ |
Potency of different fungal species on percentage degradation of Resorcinol at 0.4, 0.6, 0.8% concentrations, incubated at 28ºC for 8 d
|
|
|
|
|
|---|---|---|---|
| 94.54 ± 0.70JK | 97.06 ± 0.06BCDE | 90.32 ± 1.68GHIJ | |
|
| 99.66 ± 0.14AB | 92.31 ± 0.97KLMN | 90.77 ± 0.08FGHI |
| 95.37 ± 0.63IJK | 93.82 ± 0.37HHIGKLM | 92.92 ± 0.59DEF | |
| 99.85 ± 0.00A | 94.73 ± 0.68EFGHIJ | 91.07 ± 0.10FGHI | |
| 96.39 ± 0.30GHI | 89.81 ± 1.00OP | 89.68 ± 0.45HIJ | |
| 97.32 ± 0.61EFGH | 79.93 ± 0.41R | 85.55 ± 0.20KL | |
| 97.52 ± 0.90CDEFGH | 97.41 ± 0.30ABCD | 80.55 ± 1.27M | |
| 98.45 ± 0.69ABCDEF | 91.56 ± 0.63MNO | 96.38 ± 0.14B | |
| 98.72 ± 0.22ABCDEF | 94.19 ± 0.80GHIJKL | 84.25 ± 0.06L | |
|
| 94.35 ± 0.73K | 95.20 ± 0.14DEFGHI | 94.00 ± 1.35BCDE |
| 98.49 ± 0.59ABCDEF | 92.12 ± 0.94LMNO | 89.16 ± 0.60IJ | |
| 99.22 ± 0.17ABCD | 97.46 ± 0.80ABCD | 84.12 ± 0.66L | |
| Chaetomium elatum 6s6 | 99.02 ± 0.19ABCDE | 96.78 ± 0.11BCDEF | 95.61 ± 0.14BC |
| 98.83 ± 0.40ABCDEF | 96.60 ± 1.00BCDEF | 92.31 ± 0.14EFG | |
| 98.73 ± 0.40ABCDEF | 98.97 ± 0.91AB | 95.07 ± 0.24BCD | |
| 97.87 ± 0.03BCDEFG | 87.50 ± 0.43P | 99.20 ± 0.14A | |
| 97.87 ± 0.03BCDEFG | 98.32 ± 0.40ABC | 91.55 ± 0.45EFGHI | |
| 97.89 ± 0.04BCDEFG | 96.32 ± 0.12CDEFG | 99.04 ± 0.48A | |
| 98.24 ± 0.88ABCDEF | 95.69 ± 0.53DEFGH | 95.02 ± 1.21BCD | |
| 97.03 ± 0.03FGHI | 94.57 ± 0.37FGHIJK | 93.64 ± 0.90CDE | |
| 95.79 ± 0.62HIJK | 89.74 ± 0.57OP | 83.72 ± 0.49L | |
| 97.36 ± 0.30EFGH | 94.13 ± 0.86GHIJKL | 87.82 ± 0.14JK | |
| 99.50 ± 0.07AB | 98.48 ± 0.14ABC | 94.02 ± 0.27BCDE | |
| 98.95 ± 0.25ABCDEF | 92.87 ± 0.34IJKLM | 98.92 ± 0.49A | |
| 98.56 ± 0.52ABCDEF | 89.93 ± 0.97NO | 85.33 ± 0.02KL | |
| 99.31 ± 0.08ABC | 96.71 ± 0.74BCDEF | 91.12 ± 0.22FGHI | |
|
| 99.25 ± 0.03ABC | 96.22 ± 0.06CDEFG | 85.43 ± 0.41KL |
|
| 99.12 ± 0.30ABCDE | 99.67 ± 0.09A | 98.95 ± 0.12A |
|
| 99.00 ± 0.72ABCDE | 98.18 ± 0.63ABC | 92.15 ± 0.16EFGH |
|
| 96.32 ± 0.14GHIJ | 86.64 ± 0.23Q | 83.30 ± 0.20L |
|
| 97.43 ± 0.55DEFGH | 92.75 ± 0.37JKLM | 93.65 ± 1.13CDE |
All values are mean ± SD, Values in the same column with different superscript letters are significantly different, P < 0.05 (ANOVA after Tukey’s test analysis).
Fig. 2.Batch biodegradation of phenol in Paper and Pulp Effluent samples by some species of endophytic fungi during 5 d.
Fig. 3.Effect of different factors on the degradation rate of phenol in paper and pulp effluent samples by using Fusarium poae