Isolation &amp; identification of bacteria for the treatment of brown crab (<i>Cancer pagurus</i>
) waste to produce chitinous material

Harkin, Carla; Brück, Wolfram M.; Lynch, Catherine

doi:10.1111/jam.12768

Cited by 20 publications

(17 citation statements)

References 31 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…Research into commercial chitin production in crustaceans, such as crab and shrimp, has mainly been conducted for use in the food industry. The chitin contents found were about 13% in brown crab, Cancer pagurus (Harkin et al 2015), about 14% in Atlantic blue crab, Callinectes sapidus (Muralidhara & Maggin 1985), about 21% in blue crab, Portunus trituberculatus (Lee et al 1984), about 27% in red crab, Chionoecetes opilio (No & Lee 1995), about 27% in shore crab, Carcinus mediterraneus (Hajji et al 2015) and about 35% in prawn, Litopenaeus vannamei (Mohammed et al 2013). Compared with those results, the chitin content obtained from pupa shells, averaging 8.02%, was much lower.…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

“…The chitin contents found were about 13% in brown crab, Cancer pagurus (Harkin et al . ), about 14% in Atlantic blue crab, Callinectes sapidus (Muralidhara & Maggin ), about 21% in blue crab, Portunus trituberculatus (Lee et al . ), about 27% in red crab, Chionoecetes opilio (No & Lee ), about 27% in shore crab, Carcinus mediterraneus (Hajji et al .…”

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

See 1 more Smart Citation

Extraction of chitin and chitosan from housefly, Musca domestica, pupa shells

Kim

Han

Choi³

et al. 2016

Entomological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chitins and chitosans are some of the most abundant natural polysaccharide materials, and are used to increase innate immune response and disease resistance in humans and animals. In this work, chitin and chitosan from housefly, Musca domestica, pupa shells were obtained by treatment with HCl and NaOH. For chitin extraction, 2 N HCl and 1.25 N NaOH solutions were used to achieve decalcification and deproteinization, respectively. For chitosan extraction, 50% NaOH solution was used to achieve deacetylation. The yields of chitin and chitosan from pupa shells of M. domestica were 8.02% and 5.87%, respectively. The deacetylations of chitosan (from chitin C1 and C2) were 89.76% and 92.39%, respectively, after the first alkali treatment with 50% NaOH (w/w) solution at 105 °C for 3 h and 5 h, respectively. The viscosities of the chitosans (from chitin C1 and C2) were 33.6 and 19.2 cP, respectively.

show abstract

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 94%

Section: Discussionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Extraction of chitin and chitosan from housefly, Musca domestica, pupa shells

Kim

Han

Choi³

et al. 2016

Entomological Research

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…Biotechnological methods to obtain chitin from crustacean shell wastes comprise demineralisation through lactic acid bacteria fermentation and deproteinisation by means of proteolytic bacteria or protease cocktails [10][11][12][13]. Alternatively, protease activity may simply be induced passively by pH reduction in lactic acid fermentation due to conversion of glucose, leading to accumulation of calcium lactate and removal of residual protein [14].…”

Section: Biotechnological Chitin Extractionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Enzymatic Modification of Native Chitin and Conversion to Specialty Chemical Products

Arnold

Brück²,

Garbe

et al. 2020

Marine Drugs

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Chitin is one of the most abundant biomolecules on earth, occurring in crustacean shells and cell walls of fungi. While the polysaccharide is threatening to pollute coastal ecosystems in the form of accumulating shell-waste, it has the potential to be converted into highly profitable derivatives with applications in medicine, biotechnology, and wastewater treatment, among others. Traditionally this is still mostly done by the employment of aggressive chemicals, yielding low quality while producing toxic by-products. In the last decades, the enzymatic conversion of chitin has been on the rise, albeit still not on the same level of cost-effectiveness compared to the traditional methods due to its multi-step character. Another severe drawback of the biotechnological approach is the highly ordered structure of chitin, which renders it nigh impossible for most glycosidic hydrolases to act upon. So far, only the Auxiliary Activity 10 family (AA10), including lytic polysaccharide monooxygenases (LPMOs), is known to hydrolyse native recalcitrant chitin, which spares the expensive first step of chemical or mechanical pre-treatment to enlarge the substrate surface. The main advantages of enzymatic conversion of chitin over conventional chemical methods are the biocompability and, more strikingly, the higher product specificity, product quality, and yield of the process. Products with a higher Mw due to no unspecific depolymerisation besides an exactly defined degree and pattern of acetylation can be yielded. This provides a new toolset of thousands of new chitin and chitosan derivatives, as the physio-chemical properties can be modified according to the desired application. This review aims to provide an overview of the biotechnological tools currently at hand, as well as challenges and crucial steps to achieve the long-term goal of enzymatic conversion of native chitin into specialty chemical products.

show abstract

“…isolated from crab shell, resulted in 98.8% demineralization with an overall yield of chitinous material of 15.4 (AE1.56)%. The degree of acetylation was 81.9 (AE1.0) % as calculated from FTIR analysis [101]. Experiments were performed using either 5 or 10 g of shell waste in 100 ml of a 10% (w/v) glucose solution.…”

Section: Pretreatmentmentioning

confidence: 99%