Submitted Successfully!
To reward your contribution, here is a gift for you: A free trial for our video production service.
Thank you for your contribution! You can also upload a video entry or images related to this topic.
Version Summary Created by Modification Content Size Created at Operation
1
Antoni Sánchez
 -- 2203 2023-08-07 12:21:33 |
2 layout & references
Sirius Huang
 -59 word(s) 2144 2023-08-08 02:46:35 |

Video Upload Options

Do you have a full video?
Send video materials Upload full video

Confirm

Are you sure to Delete?
Yes No
Cite
If you have any further questions, please contact Encyclopedia Editorial Office.
Solano Porras, R.C.; Artola, A.; Barrena, R.; Ghoreishi, G.; Ballardo Matos, C.; Sánchez, A. Natural Biostimulants From Organic Waste for Sustainable Agriculture. Encyclopedia. Available online: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47734 (accessed on 27 July 2024).
Solano Porras RC, Artola A, Barrena R, Ghoreishi G, Ballardo Matos C, Sánchez A. Natural Biostimulants From Organic Waste for Sustainable Agriculture. Encyclopedia. Available at: https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47734. Accessed July 27, 2024.
Solano Porras, Roberto Carlos, Adriana Artola, Raquel Barrena, Golafarin Ghoreishi, Cindy Ballardo Matos, Antoni Sánchez. "Natural Biostimulants From Organic Waste for Sustainable Agriculture" Encyclopedia, https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47734 (accessed July 27, 2024).
Solano Porras, R.C., Artola, A., Barrena, R., Ghoreishi, G., Ballardo Matos, C., & Sánchez, A. (2023, August 07). Natural Biostimulants From Organic Waste for Sustainable Agriculture. In Encyclopedia. https://encyclopedia.pub/entry/47734
Solano Porras, Roberto Carlos, et al. "Natural Biostimulants From Organic Waste for Sustainable Agriculture." Encyclopedia. Web. 07 August, 2023.
Natural Biostimulants From Organic Waste for Sustainable Agriculture
Edit
This entry is adapted from the peer-reviewed paper 10.3390/pr11082300

Agriculture has been experiencing a difficult situation because of limiting factors in its production processes. Natural biostimulants (NBs) have emerged as a novel alternative to sustainable agriculture. In this document, a review on the use of solid-state fermentation organic waste for the production of NBs is analysed in detail.

natural biostimulant solid-state fermentation organic waste sustainable agriculture crop improvement

1. Introduction

One of the main challenges in agriculture is achieving global zero hunger [1]. Therefore, sustainable agriculture is a viable method to ensure food security. In this regard, the Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations (FAO) envisions providing nutritious and accessible food for all while preserving natural resources to meet current and future needs. Sustainable agriculture also aims to benefit producers in terms of economic development [1]. In conventional agriculture, reducing the intensive use of agrochemicals is a significant challenge that negatively impacts soil health, water scarcity, and biodiversity [2]. In this context, natural biostimulants (NBs) have emerged as alternatives to sustainable agriculture. NBs are derived from products such as microorganisms, plant extracts, and seaweed extracts and can be classified into three main groups based on their source and content: humic substances (HS), hormone-containing products (HCP), and amino-acid-containing products (AACP). HCP, such as seaweed extracts, contain various active substances for plant growth, including auxins, cytokinins, and their derivatives [3]. These products contain biologically active compounds that stimulate plant physiological processes and promote growth, development, and resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses [4][5][6][7]. NBs offer significant advantages because they are derived from natural sources, such as waste materials, plant extracts, and microorganisms [8][9], making them more environmentally sustainable than chemical products based on synthetic compounds. Furthermore, NBs are generally safer for the environment and human health than chemical products, which can be harmful [10]. NBs also have the potential to promote beneficial interactions with soil microorganisms, unlike chemical products that lack this capacity [11]. Additionally, NBs can serve as an easier alternative to chemicals in order to comply with regulations and restrictions in many countries [6][12][13]. Given these issues, NBs present themselves as a promising alternative in agriculture.
Various production methods exist, including solid-state fermentation (SSF), a technology conducted in the absence or near absence of free water, allowing the use of solid materials as substrates for enhanced biotransformation. SSF has been reported as a promising eco-technology for the production of bio-based products, and studies have demonstrated the successful pilot-scale production of NBs using plant biomass as a support and carbon source for different microorganisms. These production processes are performed under controlled conditions, including temperature, humidity, and airflow, to optimize NB synthesis [14][15]. Furthermore, the utilization of organic waste as a substrate in the SSF process has gained attention, primarily involving various solid biodegradable materials derived from agricultural and forestry byproducts and waste [16]. NBs obtained through SSF have shown biostimulant effects on crop development, including physical parameters such as germination, growth, stem length, leaf count, root dry weight, leaf area, biomass production, macronutrients, and micronutrients [17]. They have also demonstrated positive effects on root development in forest species [18]. Therefore, NBs produced through SSF represent an emerging alternative to the limitations of conventional biostimulants, including their negative impact on agricultural sustainability, the need to reduce the impact of waste on the environment, and the desire to limit the use of synthetic compounds in agriculture [19].

2. Definition and Types of Biostimulants

NBs are derived from natural sources such as microorganisms, plant residues, and seaweed, among others [20]. These products contain biologically active compounds that stimulate plant physiological processes, promoting plant growth, development, and resistance to biotic and abiotic stresses [10]. However, biostimulants include a wide range of compounds, as highlighted by the European Biostimulants Industry Council (EBIC) and the Biological Products Industry Alliance (BPIA) [14]. The EBIC defines plant biostimulants as substances or microorganisms that stimulate natural processes to enhance nutrient uptake, efficiency, stress tolerance, and crop quality. They do not a have direct pesticidal action and are not regulated by pesticide laws. BPIA defines biostimulants as diverse materials that improve crop vigour, quality, yield, and tolerance to abiotic stresses by facilitating nutrient uptake, enhancing soil microorganism development, and stimulating root growth to increase water-use efficiency [12][13]. This growth is in line with an increase in scientific support for the use of biostimulants as agricultural inputs for various plant species [21].
Currently, there are various types of NBs, including those produced by SSF, which can serve as a starting point for future research (Table 1).
Table 1. Types of NBs, mode of action, and effects produced by SSF.
Natural Product Type of NB Molecules Present Action Mode Biostimulant Effect SSF-Relevant Origin Refs.
Hormone-Containing Products (HCP) Auxins 3-indoleacetic Acid (IAA) Promotes cell elongation Stimulates cell elongation and rooting Produced by SSF [22][23]
  Indole Propionic Acid (AIP) Promotes vegetative growth and cell division Stimulates growth, flowering, and rooting in plants Not produced by SSF [24][25]
Cytokinins Zeatin Stimulates cell division and vegetative growth Promotes growth and development of plants Not produced by SSF [26][27][28]
Kinetin Stimulates cell division and vegetative growth Improves the quality of the crops, increasing the size and weight of the fruits Produced by SSF and vermicompost [29][30][31]
Abscisic Acid (ABA) ABA Regulates stress responses and plant development Improves stress tolerance and fruit ripening Produced by SSF [32][33]
Gibberellins Gibberellin A3 (GA3) Stimulates growth and vigor in plants Inducts germination and flowering Produced by SSF [34][35][36]
Gibberellin A4 (GA4) Promotes plant growth and development Stimulates germination, development of lateral shoots, and flowering Produced by SSF [37][38]
Seaweed Extract (AM)   Alginic Acids Improves nutrient absorption and stimulates enzyme activity Increases growth and resistance to abiotic stress Produced by SSF [39][40][41]
AM Fucoidan Improves the defense mechanisms of plants Increases resistance to abiotic stress Produced by SSF [42][43][44][45]
  Oligosaccharides Stimulates physiological responses in plants Improves immune response and growth Produced by SSF [46][47][48][49]
Humic Substances Humic and Fulvic Acids (AHF) Humic Acids Improves soil structure and nutrient availability Stimulates root growth and nutrient absorption Produced by SSF [50][51][52][53]
Humic Acids Stimulates plant growth and development Improves nutrient uptake and stress resistance. Produced by SSF [54][55]
Amino-Acid-Containing Products (AACP) Amino Acids L-proline Regulates plant stress and development Enhances stress tolerance and resistance Produced by SSF [56][57][58]
Peptides Low Molecular Weight Peptides Stimulates plant growth and development Improves plant nutrition and growth Produced by SSF [59][60][61]
Other NBs Siderophores Siderophores Binds to Fe and is solubilized Improves absorption and mobilization of Fe Produced by SSF [62][63][64]
Chitosan Fungal Chitosan Fungal Promotes plant growth, cell division, increases enzyme activity, and improves nutrient transport Presents biostimulant activity in seed germination Produced by SSF [65][66]

3. Advantages of Natural Biostimulants over Conventional Ones

In this regard, NBs obtained through SSF have emerged as an alternative to conventional biostimulants, primarily because of their positive impact on agricultural sustainability, reduced environmental waste, and limited use of synthetic compounds in agriculture [46].
NBs obtained by SSF from organic waste are gaining interest because of their numerous advantages over conventionally synthesized biostimulants [47]. This section reviews and compares the advantages of NBs in terms of effectiveness, safety, sustainability, and environmental benefits. Among these advantages, the following can be highlighted.

3.1. Sustainability and Environmental Impact

The importance of NBs as a sustainable option in agriculture lies in their renewable origin and lower environmental impact than chemical biostimulants [21].
Generally, the use of NBs has a positive environmental impact [19][48][49]. They can help to reduce or rationalize the amount of synthetic fertilizers and pesticides needed to grow plants [67][68][69]. For example, some NBs can have a positive effect on microbial communities in the soil and can be beneficial for agricultural practices [11]. In terms of environmental impact, NBs extracted from microorganisms are non-toxic and do not pollute the environment [70][71]. In addition, because they are obtained from natural sources, their production is more sustainable than that of chemical biostimulants.

3.2. Security

In contrast to the risks associated with the chemicals used in chemical biostimulants, NBs tend to be safer for both the environment and human health [72].

3.3. Broad Spectrum of Activity

NBs have a wide spectrum of activities, which implies multiple benefits for plants in terms of growth, nutrient absorption, stress resistance, flowering, and fruiting quality [20][73].

3.4. Positive Interactions

NBs promote beneficial interactions with soil microorganisms, improving soil health and favoring more balanced and productive agricultural systems [49][74].

3.5. Regulatory Compliance

NBs offer an easier option for complying with government regulations and restrictions on the use of chemicals in agriculture, which has become more relevant in many countries [6].

4. Production Processes of NBs by SSF

Thus, SSF is a promising method for NBs production. SSF produces a variety of bioactive products that promote plant growth, development, and responses to abiotic and biotic stress conditions [75][76]. In this chapter, the processes used to obtain natural biostimulants through SSF were explored, highlighting their importance and efficacy in sustainable agriculture.

4.1. Substrate Selection in NB Production by SSF

The appropriate choice of substrates is a crucial step in the production of NBs by SSF [77]. Substrates provide a source of nutrients, energy, and bioactive compounds for microorganisms during fermentation. [78]. The most commonly used substrates in SSF include agricultural residues, agro-industrial waste, food industry by-products, and lignocellulosic materials [16]. These substrates are rich in nutrients and can be degraded by microorganisms, allowing the production of beneficial metabolites [79].

4.2. Substrate Pretreatment

Pretreatment of substrates is necessary to improve their composition and nutrient availability. Pretreatment may involve steps such as crushing, grinding, sieving, pH adjustment, sterilization, and addition of nutritional agents [75][80][81]. These steps aim to optimize the conditions for microbial growth and production of desired metabolites [82]. Pretreatment can also facilitate the degradation of substrates and increase fermentation efficiency [83].

4.3. Microorganisms for NB Production by SSF and Inoculation

Microorganisms play a fundamental role in the production of NBs by SSF, as they are responsible for substrate degradation and synthesis of bioactive metabolites [84]. This section will focus on the different microorganisms used in this process and their relevance to NB production.
Examples of microorganisms used in SSF for NB production include bacteria, fungi, and yeasts. Each type of microorganism possesses specific characteristics that can influence biostimulant production.
The inoculation of microorganisms is a crucial step in the production of NBs by SSF [18]. Beneficial microorganism strains such as bacteria, fungi, and yeast are selected for their ability to degrade substrates and produce bioactive metabolites. These microorganisms were pre-cultivated under optimal conditions and then inoculated into substrates to initiate SSF [78][84]. The choice of suitable microorganisms and their interactions during SSF influence the composition and final quality of the biostimulant [18].

4.4. Control of SSF Conditions

Control of SSF conditions is essential for obtaining high-quality biostimulants through SSF. Parameters such as the temperature, humidity, pH, C/N ratio, moisture content, and process duration must be monitored and adjusted accordingly. These conditions affect the growth and metabolism of microorganisms [15][18]. The precise control of SSF conditions ensures the optimization and quality of the biostimulant.
The production of natural biostimulants through SSF involves the selection of suitable substrates, pretreatment of substrates, inoculation of microorganisms, and control of SSF conditions. These processes are crucial for obtaining high-quality NBs that can promote plant growth.

4.5. SSF Bioreactors in NB Production

The use of SSF bioreactors has proven to be a promising technique for improving NB production. These systems allow for better control of fermentation conditions and higher efficiency in obtaining high-quality biostimulants [15].
SSF bioreactors can be designed to maintain optimal cultivation conditions, including temperature, humidity, aeration, and water content [85]. The appropriate selection of the bioreactor depends on various factors, such as the type of microorganism, substrate used, and desired production scale [86]. Common types of SSF bioreactors include fixed-bed, fluidized-bed, and packed-bed bioreactors [79]. The implementation of SSF bioreactors in NB production represents a significant improvement in the efficiency and quality of biostimulants, contributing to a more sustainable and productive agriculture [87][88]. Table 2 presents examples of substrates commonly used in the production of NBs by SSF, together with their characteristics and advantages, microorganism selection, production mode, and bioreactor type.
Table 2. Comparison of substrates, microorganism selection, production mode, and ioreactor type in NB production by SSF.
Substrate Characteristics and Advantages of Substrate Microorganism Selection Production Mode Bioreactor Type Refs.
Crop Residues Abundant local availability, nutrient source, and microorganism support Bacteria, Fungi Batch, Continuous, Fed-Batch Fixed-Bed, Packed-Bed [89][90][91]
Agroindustrial Waste Waste valorization and reduced environmental impact Filamentous Fungi Batch, Continuous Fluidized-Bed, Packed-Bed [47][92]
Food Residues Rich in nutrients and organic matter, avoids food waste Bacteria, Filamentous Fungi Batch, Fed-Batch Fixed-Bed, Packed-Bed [37][93]
Plant Residues High content of bioactive compounds and phytohormones Bacteria, Filamentous Fungi Batch, Continuous Fluidized-Bed, Packed-Bed [94][95]
Algal Biomass Rich in bioactive compounds and auxins Microalgae Batch, Fed-Batch Bubble-Column [96][97]
Wood Residues Sustainable source with lignocellulosic content Filamentous Fungi Fed-Batch, Continuous Fluidized-Bed, Packed-Bed [98][99]
Residual Sludge Reduces waste volume and provides rich source of nutrients Bacteria, Filamentous Fungi Batch, Continuous Plug-
Flow, Packed-Bed		 [100][101]
Fishery Waste Utilization of waste from the fishing industry Filamentous Fungi Batch, Continuous Packed-Bed [102][103]
Brewery Waste Valorization of waste from brewing processes Filamentous Fungi Continuous Packed-Bed [104][105]
Citrus Waste Abundant source of bioactive compounds and antioxidants Filamentous Fungi Batch, Fed-Batch Fixed-Bed, Packed-Bed [33][106]
Coffee Residues Rich in bioactive compounds and promotes soil health Filamentous Fungi Batch, Continuous Packed-Bed [107]
Rice Husk Rich in organic matter and bioactive substances Filamentous Fungi Fed-Batch, Continuous Packed-Bed [108]

References

  1. 2.4.1 Agricultural Sustainability|Sustainable Development Goals|Food and Agriculture Organization of the United Nations. Available online: https://www.fao.org/sustainable-development-goals/indicators/241/en/ (accessed on 23 May 2023).
  2. Sumberg, J.; Giller, K.E. What Is ‘Conventional’ Agriculture? Glob. Food Secur. 2022, 32, 100617.
  3. Kauffman, G.L.; Kneivel, D.P.; Watschke, T.L. Effects of a Biostimulant on the Heat Tolerance Associated with Photosynthetic Capacity, Membrane Thermostability, and Polyphenol Production of Perennial Ryegrass. Crop Sci. 2007, 47, 261–267.
  4. Wong, W.S.; Tan, S.N.; Ge, L.; Chen, X.; Letham, D.S.; Yong, J.W.H. The Importance of Phytohormones and Microbes in Biostimulants: Mass Spectrometric Evidence and Their Positive Effects on Plant Growth. Acta Hortic. 2016, 1148, 49–60.
  5. Boivin, S.; Fonouni-Farde, C.; Frugier, F. How Auxin and Cytokinin Phytohormones Modulate Root Microbe Interactions. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 1240.
  6. du Jardin, P. Plant Biostimulants: Definition, Concept, Main Categories and Regulation. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 196, 3–14.
  7. Sauer, M.; Robert, S.; Kleine-Vehn, J. Auxin: Simply Complicated. J. Exp. Bot. 2013, 64, 2565–2577.
  8. Rady, M.M.; Desoky, E.-S.M.; Elrys, A.S.; Boghdady, M.S. Can Licorice Root Extract Be Used as an Effective Natural Biostimulant for Salt-Stressed Common Bean Plants? S. Afr. J. Bot. 2019, 121, 294–305.
  9. Kurepin, L.V.; Zaman, M.; Pharis, R.P. Phytohormonal Basis for the Plant Growth Promoting Action of Naturally Occurring Biostimulators. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2014, 94, 1715–1722.
  10. Posmyk, M.M.; Szafrańska, K. Biostimulators: A New Trend towards Solving an Old Problem. Front. Plant Sci. 2016, 7, 748.
  11. Hellequin, E.; Monard, C.; Chorin, M.; Le bris, N.; Daburon, V.; Klarzynski, O.; Binet, F. Responses of Active Soil Microorganisms Facing to a Soil Biostimulant Input Compared to Plant Legacy Effects. Sci. Rep. 2020, 10, 13727.
  12. EBIC—The European Biostimulants Industry Council. Available online: https://biostimulants.eu/ (accessed on 8 March 2022).
  13. Biological Products Industry Alliance|Advancing Knowledge About Biopesticides & Biostimulants. Available online: https://www.bpia.org/ (accessed on 23 April 2023).
  14. do Prado, D.Z.; Okino-Delgado, C.H.; Zanutto-Elgui, M.R.; da Silva, R.B.G.; Pereira, M.S.; Jahn, L.; Ludwig-Müller, J.; da Silva, M.R.; Velini, E.D.; Fleuri, L.F. Screening of Aspergillus, Bacillus and Trichoderma Strains and Influence of Substrates on Auxin and Phytases Production through Solid-State Fermentation. Biocatal. Agric. Biotechnol. 2019, 19, 101165.
  15. Ghoreishi, G.; Barrena, R.; Font, X. Using Green Waste as Substrate to Produce Biostimulant and Biopesticide Products through Solid-State Fermentation. Waste Manag. 2023, 159, 84–92.
  16. Chen, H. Biotechnology Principles of Solid State Fermentation. Mod. Solid State Ferment. 2013, 23–74.
  17. Sanchez-Montesinos, B.; Dianez, F.; Moreno-Gavira, A.; Gea, F.J.; Santos, M. Role of Trichoderma Aggressivum f. Europaeumas Plant-Growth Promoter in Horticulture. Agronomy 2020, 10, 1004.
  18. Do Prado, D.Z.; Oliveira, S.L.; Okino-Delgado, C.H.; Auer, S.; Ludwig-Müller, J.; da Silva, M.R.; da Costa Fernandes, C.J.; Carbonari, C.A.; Zambuzzi, W.F.; Fleuri, L.F. Aspergillus Flavipes as a Novel Biostimulant for Rooting-Enhancement of Eucalyptus. J. Clean. Prod. 2019, 234, 681–689.
  19. Puglia, D.; Pezzolla, D.; Gigliotti, G.; Torre, L.; Bartucca, M.L.; Del Buono, D. The Opportunity of Valorizing Agricultural Waste, Through Its Conversion into Biostimulants, Biofertilizers, and Biopolymers. Sustainability 2021, 13, 2710.
  20. Zulfiqar, F.; Casadesús, A.; Brockman, H.; Munné-Bosch, S. An Overview of Plant-Based Natural Biostimulants for Sustainable Horticulture with a Particular Focus on Moringa Leaf Extracts. Plant Sci. 2020, 295, 110194.
  21. Calvo, P.; Nelson, L.; Kloepper, J.W. Agricultural Uses of Plant Biostimulants. Plant Soil 2014, 383, 3–41.
  22. Yu, X.; Li, Y.; Cui, Y.; Liu, R.; Li, Y.; Chen, Q.; Gu, Y.; Zhao, K.; Xiang, Q.; Xu, K.; et al. An Indoleacetic Acid-Producing Ochrobactrum Sp. MGJ11 Counteracts Cadmium Effect on Soybean by Promoting Plant Growth. J. Appl. Microbiol. 2017, 122, 987–996.
  23. Karnwal, A.; Dohroo, A. Effect of Maize Root Exudates on Indole-3-Acetic Acid Production by Rice Endophytic Bacteria under Influence of L-Tryptophan. F1000Research 2018, 7, 112.
  24. Do, T.C.V.; Tran, D.T.; Le, T.G.; Nguyen, Q.T. Characterization of Endogenous Auxins and Gibberellins Produced by Chlorella sorokiniana TH01 under Phototrophic and Mixtrophic Cultivation Modes toward Applications in Microalgal Biorefinery and Crop Research. J. Chem. 2020, 2020, e4910621.
  25. Ma, D.; Liu, B.; Ge, L.; Weng, Y.; Cao, X.; Liu, F.; Mao, P.; Ma, X. Identification and Characterization of Regulatory Pathways Involved in Early Flowering in the New Leaves of Alfalfa (Medicago sativa L.) by Transcriptome Analysis. BMC Plant Biol. 2021, 21, 8.
  26. Rusmin, D.; Basmal, J.; Kusumawati, R.; Darwati, I. Improving the Growth of Clove Seedlings by the Application of Seaweed Waste as Organic Fertilizers. IOP Conf. Ser. Earth Environ. Sci. 2020, 418, 012029.
  27. Jain, P.; Farooq, B.; Lamba, S.; Koul, B. Foliar Spray of Moringa Oleifera Lam. Leaf Extracts (MLE) Enhances the Stevioside, Zeatin and Mineral Contents in Stevia Rebaudiana Betoni. S. Afr. J. Bot. 2020, 132, 249–257.
  28. Basra, S.M.A.; Lovatt, C.J. Exogenous Applications of Moringa Leaf Extract and Cytokinins Improve Plant Growth, Yield, and Fruit Quality of Cherry Tomato. HortTechnology 2016, 26, 327–337.
  29. Ravindran, B.; Wong, J.W.C.; Selvam, A.; Sekaran, G. Influence of Microbial Diversity and Plant Growth Hormones in Compost and Vermicompost from Fermented Tannery Waste. Bioresour. Technol. 2016, 217, 200–204.
  30. Ravindran, B.; Contreras-Ramos, S.M.; Sekaran, G. Changes in Earthworm Gut Associated Enzymes and Microbial Diversity on the Treatment of Fermented Tannery Waste Using Epigeic Earthworm Eudrilus Eugeniae. Ecol. Eng. 2015, 74, 394–401.
  31. Ali, H.M.; Khan, H.Z.; Afzal, I. Exogenous application of growth promoting substances improves growth, yield and quality of spring maize (Zea mays L.) hybrids under late sown conditions. Bull. Biol. Allied Sci. Res. 2017, 2017, 9.
  32. Qi, H. Method for Producing Abscisic Acid by Solid State Fermentation of Fungi 2013. Available online: https://patents.google.com/patent/CN103409474A/en (accessed on 6 June 2023).
  33. Vandenberghe, L.P.S.; Pandey, A.; Carvalho, J.C.; Letti, L.A.J.; Woiciechowski, A.L.; Karp, S.G.; Thomaz-Soccol, V.; Martínez-Burgos, W.J.; Penha, R.O.; Herrmann, L.W.; et al. Solid-State Fermentation Technology and Innovation for the Production of Agricultural and Animal Feed Bioproducts. Syst. Microbiol. Biomanuf. 2021, 1, 142–165.
  34. Rodrigues, C.; Vandenberghe, L.P.D.S.; De Oliveira, J.; Soccol, C.R. New Perspectives of Gibberellic Acid Production: A Review. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 2012, 32, 263–273.
  35. Yang, S.; Xie, J.; Hu, N.; Liu, Y.; Zhang, J.; Ye, X.; Liu, Z. Bioconversion of Gibberellin Fermentation Residue into Feed Supplement and Organic Fertilizer Employing Housefly (Musca domestica L.) Assisted by Corynebacterium variabile. PLoS ONE 2015, 10, e0110809.
  36. Camara, M.C.; Vandenberghe, L.P.S.; Rodrigues, C.; de Oliveira, J.; Faulds, C.; Bertrand, E.; Soccol, C.R. Current Advances in Gibberellic Acid (GA3) Production, Patented Technologies and Potential Applications. Planta 2018, 248, 1049–1062.
  37. Brückner, B.; Blechschmidt, D. The Gibberellin Fermentation. Crit. Rev. Biotechnol. 1991, 11, 163–192.
  38. Maria, C.; Machado, M.; Soccol, C.R. Gibberellic Acid Production. In Current Developments in Solid-State Fermentation; Pandey, A., Soccol, C.R., Larroche, C., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 2008; pp. 277–301. ISBN 978-0-387-75213-6.
  39. Saeed, S.; Mehmood, T.; Irfan, M. Statistical Optimization of Cultural Parameters for the Optimized Production of Alginic Acid Using Apple (Malus Domestica) Peels through Solid-State Fermentation. Biomass Conv. Bioref. 2023, 13, 1269–1277.
  40. Dos Santos Silva, M.C.; De Farias Silva, C.E.; dos Santos, L.M.; Medeiros, J.A.; Vieira, R.C.; de Souza Abud, A.K.; Almeida, R.M.R.G.; Tonholo, J. Alginate Lyase Produced by Filamentous Fungus Through Solid State Fermentation Using Sargassum from the Brazilian Coast. Waste Biomass Valor. 2022, 13, 2947–2962.
  41. Wozniak, E.; Blaszczak, A.; Wiatrak, P.; Canady, M. Biostimulant Mode of Action; Wiley Online Library: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2020.
  42. Rodríguez-Jasso, R.M.; Mussatto, S.I.; Sepúlveda, L.; Agrasar, A.T.; Pastrana, L.; Aguilar, C.N.; Teixeira, J.A. Fungal Fucoidanase Production by Solid-State Fermentation in a Rotating Drum Bioreactor Using Algal Biomass as Substrate. Food Bioprod. Process. 2013, 91, 587–594.
  43. Bergé, J.P. Marine Biotechnology: An Overview of Leading Field. In Proceedings of the IXth ESMB Meeting, Nantes, France, 12–14 May 2002.
  44. Patel, J.S.; Selvaraj, V.; More, P.; Bahmani, R.; Borza, T.; Prithiviraj, B. A Plant Biostimulant from Ascophyllum Nodosum Potentiates Plant Growth Promotion and Stress Protection Activity of Pseudomonas Protegens CHA0. Plants 2023, 12, 1208.
  45. Zou, P.; Yang, X.; Yuan, Y.; Jing, C.; Cao, J.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, L.; Zhang, C.; Li, Y. Purification and Characterization of a Fucoidan from the Brown Algae Macrocystis Pyrifera and the Activity of Enhancing Salt-Stress Tolerance of Wheat Seedlings. Int. J. Biol. Macromol. 2021, 180, 547–558.
  46. Baltazar, M.; Correia, S.; Guinan, K.J.; Sujeeth, N.; Bragança, R.; Gonçalves, B. Recent Advances in the Molecular Effects of Biostimulants in Plants: An Overview. Biomolecules 2021, 11, 1096.
  47. Mattedi, A.; Sabbi, E.; Farda, B.; Djebaili, R.; Mitra, D.; Ercole, C.; Cacchio, P.; Del Gallo, M.; Pellegrini, M. Solid-State Fermentation: Applications and Future Perspectives for Biostimulant and Biopesticides Production. Microorganisms 2023, 11, 1408.
  48. Colla, G.; Rouphael, Y. Biostimulants in Horticulture. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 196, 1–2.
  49. Tarafdar, J.C. Chapter 15—Biostimulants for Sustainable Crop Production. In New and Future Developments in Microbial Biotechnology and Bioengineering; Singh, H.B., Vaishnav, A., Eds.; Elsevier: Amsterdam, The Netherlands, 2022; pp. 299–313. ISBN 978-0-323-85579-2.
  50. Solid-State Fermentation for Humic Acids Production by a Trichoderma Reesei Strain Using an Oil Palm Empty Fruit Bunch as the Substrate|SpringerLink. Available online: https://link.springer.com/article/10.1007/s12010-013-0668-2 (accessed on 27 May 2023).
  51. Zhang, Y.; Dou, S.; Hamza, B.; Ye, S.; Zhang, D. Mechanisms of Three Fungal Types on Humic-Like Substances Formation during Solid-State Fermentation of Corn Straw. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2020, 23, 970–976.
  52. Yang, Y.; Wang, L.; Zhang, Y.; Li, L.; Shi, X.; Liu, X.; Ren, X.; Dou, S. Transformation of Corn Stalk Residue to Humus-like Substances during Solid-State Fermentation. Sustainability 2019, 11, 6771.
  53. Bettoni, M.M.; Mogor, Á.F.; Pauletti, V.; Goicoechea, N. Growth and Metabolism of Onion Seedlings as Affected by the Application of Humic Substances, Mycorrhizal Inoculation and Elevated CO2. Sci. Hortic. 2014, 180, 227–235.
  54. Hölker, U.; Höfer, M. Solid Substrate Fermentation of Lignite by the Coal-Solubilizing Mould, Trichoderma Atroviride, in a New Type of Bioreactor. Biotechnol. Lett. 2002, 24, 1643–1645.
  55. Canellas, L.P.; Olivares, F.L.; Aguiar, N.O.; Jones, D.L.; Nebbioso, A.; Mazzei, P.; Piccolo, A. Humic and Fulvic Acids as Biostimulants in Horticulture. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 196, 15–27.
  56. Deswal, D.; Khasa, Y.P.; Kuhad, R.C. Optimization of Cellulase Production by a Brown Rot Fungus Fomitopsis Sp. RCK2010 under Solid State Fermentation. Bioresour. Technol. 2011, 102, 6065–6072.
  57. Sodhi, H.K.; Sharma, K.; Gupta, J.K.; Soni, S.K. Production of a Thermostable α-Amylase from Bacillus Sp. PS-7 by Solid State Fermentation and Its Synergistic Use in the Hydrolysis of Malt Starch for Alcohol Production. Process Biochem. 2005, 40, 525–534.
  58. Lucini, L.; Rouphael, Y.; Cardarelli, M.; Canaguier, R.; Kumar, P.; Colla, G. The Effect of a Plant-Derived Biostimulant on Metabolic Profiling and Crop Performance of Lettuce Grown under Saline Conditions. Sci. Hortic. 2015, 182, 124–133.
  59. Asri, N.M.; Muhialdin, B.J.; Zarei, M.; Saari, N. Low Molecular Weight Peptides Generated from Palm Kernel Cake via Solid State Lacto-Fermentation Extend the Shelf Life of Bread. LWT 2020, 134, 110206.
  60. Li, W.; Wang, T. Effect of Solid-State Fermentation with Bacillus Subtilis Lwo on the Proteolysis and the Antioxidative Properties of Chickpeas. Int. J. Food Microbiol. 2021, 338, 108988.
  61. Cai, C.; Hua, Y.; Liu, H.; Dai, X. A New Approach to Recycling Cephalosporin Fermentation Residue into Plant Biostimulants. J. Hazard. Mater. 2021, 413, 125393.
  62. Prabhu, G.N.; Bindu, P. Optimization of Process Parameters for Siderophore Production Under Solid State Fermentation Using Polystyrene Beads as Inert Support. JSIR 2016, 75, 621–625.
  63. Le, H.; ZongHao, Y.; Can, C.; ChunYan, L.; Juan, L.; ZhongKe, S. Enhancing Iron Uptake and Alleviating Iron Toxicity in Wheat by Plant Growth-Promoting Bacteria: Theories and Practices. Int. J. Agric. Biol. 2020, 23, 190–196.
  64. Marschner, H.; Römheld, V.; Kissel, M. Different Strategies in Higher Plants in Mobilization and Uptake of Iron. J. Plant Nutr. 1986, 9, 695–713.
  65. Stanley-Raja, V.; Senthil-Nathan, S.; Chanthini, K.M.P.; Sivanesh, H.; Ramasubramanian, R.; Karthi, S.; Shyam-Sundar, N.; Vasantha-Srinivasan, P.; Kalaivani, K. Biological Activity of Chitosan Inducing Resistance Efficiency of Rice (Oryza sativa L.) after Treatment with Fungal Based Chitosan. Sci. Rep. 2021, 11, 20488.
  66. Nwe, N.; Chandrkrachang, S.; Stevens, W.F.; Maw, T.; Tan, T.K.; Khor, E.; Wong, S.M. Production of Fungal Chitosan by Solid State and Submerged Fermentation. Carbohydr. Polym. 2002, 49, 235–237.
  67. Rouphael, Y.; Colla, G. Editorial: Biostimulants in Agriculture. Front. Plant Sci. 2020, 11, 40.
  68. Lau, S.-E.; Teo, W.F.A.; Teoh, E.Y.; Tan, B.C. Microbiome Engineering and Plant Biostimulants for Sustainable Crop Improvement and Mitigation of Biotic and Abiotic Stresses. Discov. Food 2022, 2, 9.
  69. Ben Mrid, R.; Benmrid, B.; Hafsa, J.; Boukcim, H.; Sobeh, M.; Yasri, A. Secondary Metabolites as Biostimulant and Bioprotectant Agents: A Review. Sci. Total Environ. 2021, 777, 146204.
  70. Caccavo, V.; Forlano, P.; Mang, S.M.; Fanti, P.; Nuzzaci, M.; Battaglia, D.; Trotta, V. Effects of Trichoderma Harzianum Strain T22 on the Arthropod Community Associated with Tomato Plants and on the Crop Performance in an Experimental Field. Insects 2022, 13, 418.
  71. Ferrigo, D.; Raiola, A.; Rasera, R.; Causin, R. Trichoderma Harzianum Seed Treatment Controls Fusarium Verticillioides Colonization and Fumonisin Contamination in Maize under Field Conditions. Crop Prot. 2014, 65, 51–56.
  72. Xu, L.; Geelen, D. Developing Biostimulants from Agro-Food and Industrial By-Products. Front. Plant Sci. 2018, 9, 1567.
  73. Francesca, S.; Arena, C.; Mele, B.H.; Schettini, C.; Ambrosino, P.; Barone, A.; Rigano, M.M. The Use of a Plant-Based Biostimulant Improves Plant Performances and Fruit Quality in Tomato Plants Grown at Elevated Temperatures. Agronomy 2020, 10, 363.
  74. Nanda, S.; Kumar, G.; Hussain, S. Utilization of Seaweed-Based Biostimulants in Improving Plant and Soil Health: Current Updates and Future Prospective. Int. J. Environ. Sci. Technol. 2022, 19, 12839–12852.
  75. da Silva, L.C.A.; Honorato, T.L.; Cavalcante, R.S.; Franco, T.T.; Rodrigues, S. Effect of PH and Temperature on Enzyme Activity of Chitosanase Produced Under Solid Stated Fermentation by Trichoderma spp. Indian J. Microbiol. 2012, 52, 60–65.
  76. Akram, N.A.; Saleem, M.H.; Shafiq, S.; Naz, H.; Farid-ul-Haq, M.; Ali, B.; Shafiq, F.; Iqbal, M.; Jaremko, M.; Qureshi, K.A. Phytoextracts as Crop Biostimulants and Natural Protective Agents—A Critical Review. Sustainability 2022, 14, 14498.
  77. Vassilev, N.; Vassileva, M.; Lopez, A.; Martos, V.; Reyes, A.; Maksimovic, I.; Eichler-Löbermann, B.; Malusà, E. Unexploited Potential of Some Biotechnological Techniques for Biofertilizer Production and Formulation. Appl. Microbiol. Biotechnol. 2015, 99, 4983–4996.
  78. Chen, H. Modern Solid State Fermentation; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 2013.
  79. Singhania, R.R.; Patel, A.K.; Soccol, C.R.; Pandey, A. Recent Advances in Solid-State Fermentation. Biochem. Eng. J. 2009, 44, 13–18.
  80. Szabo, O.E.; Csiszar, E.; Koczka, B.; Kiss, K. Ultrasonically Assisted Single Stage and Multiple Extraction of Enzymes Produced by Aspergillus Oryzae on a Lignocellulosic Substrate with Solid-State Fermentation. Biomass Bioenergy 2015, 75, 161–169.
  81. Yadav, J.S.; Tripathi, J.P. Optimization of Cultivation and Nutrition Conditions and Substrate Pretreatment for Solid-Substrate Fermentation of Wheat Straw ByCoriolus Versicolor. Folia Microbiol. 1991, 36, 294–301.
  82. Kunamneni, A.; Permaul, K.; Singh, S. Amylase Production in Solid State Fermentation by the Thermophilic Fungus Thermomyces Lanuginosus. J. Biosci. Bioeng. 2005, 100, 168–171.
  83. Elibol, M.; Moreira, A.R. Optimizing Some Factors Affecting Alkaline Protease Production by a Marine Bacterium Teredinobacter Turnirae under Solid Substrate Fermentation. Process Biochem. 2005, 40, 1951–1956.
  84. Alias, C.; Bulgari, D.; Gobbi, E. It Works! Organic-Waste-Assisted Trichoderma Spp. Solid-State Fermentation on Agricultural Digestate. Microorganisms 2022, 10, 164.
  85. Raghavarao, K.S.M.S.; Ranganathan, T.V.; Karanth, N.G. Some Engineering Aspects of Solid-State Fermentation. Biochem. Eng. J. 2003, 13, 127–135.
  86. General Considerations about Solid-State Fermentation Processes|SpringerLink. Available online: https://link.springer.com/chapter/10.1007/978-0-387-75213-6_2 (accessed on 23 July 2023).
  87. Kamilova, F.; Okon, Y.; de Weert, S.; Hora, K. Commercialization of Microbes: Manufacturing, Inoculation, Best Practice for Objective Field Testing, and Registration. In Principles of Plant-Microbe Interactions: Microbes for Sustainable Agriculture; Lugtenberg, B., Ed.; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2015; pp. 319–327. ISBN 978-3-319-08575-3.
  88. Kiruba, N.J.M.; Saeid, A. An Insight into Microbial Inoculants for Bioconversion of Waste Biomass into Sustainable “Bio-Organic” Fertilizers: A Bibliometric Analysis and Systematic Literature Review. Int. J. Mol. Sci. 2022, 23, 13049.
  89. Chilakamarry, C.R.; Sakinah, A.M.M.; Zularisam, A.W.; Sirohi, R.; Khilji, I.A.; Ahmad, N.; Pandey, A. Advances in Solid-State Fermentation for Bioconversion of Agricultural Wastes to Value-Added Products: Opportunities and Challenges. Bioresour. Technol. 2022, 343, 126065.
  90. Weber, F.J.; Tramper, J.; Rinzema, A. A Simplified Material and Energy Balance Approach for Process Development and Scale-up of Coniothyrium Minitans Conidia Production by Solid-State Cultivation in a Packed-Bed Reactor. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 1999, 65, 447–458.
  91. de Oliveira, J.; Rodrigues, C.; Vandenberghe, L.P.S.; Câmara, M.C.; Libardi, N.; Soccol, C.R. Gibberellic Acid Production by Different Fermentation Systems Using Citric Pulp as Substrate/Support. BioMed Res. Int. 2017, 2017, e5191046.
  92. Bulgari, D.; Alias, C.; Peron, G.; Ribaudo, G.; Gianoncelli, A.; Savino, S.; Boureghda, H.; Bouznad, Z.; Monti, E.; Gobbi, E. Solid-State Fermentation of Trichoderma Spp.: A New Way to Valorize the Agricultural Digestate and Produce Value-Added Bioproducts. J. Agric. Food Chem. 2023, 71, 3994–4004.
  93. Oh, Y.-K.; Hwang, K.-R.; Kim, C.; Kim, J.R.; Lee, J.-S. Recent Developments and Key Barriers to Advanced Biofuels: A Short Review. Bioresour. Technol. 2018, 257, 320–333.
  94. Nitayapat, N.; Prakarnsombut, N.; Lee, S.J.; Boonsupthip, W. Bioconversion of Tangerine Residues by Solid-State Fermentation with Lentinus Polychrous and Drying the Final Products. LWT Food Sci. Technol. 2015, 63, 773–779.
  95. Vassileva, M.; Malusá, E.; Eichler-Löbermann, B.; Vassilev, N. Aspegillus Terreus: From Soil to Industry and Back. Microorganisms 2020, 8, 1655.
  96. Dos Santos, V.Z.; Vieira, K.R.; Nass, P.P.; Zepka, L.Q.; Jacob-Lopes, E. Application of Microalgae Consortia/Cocultures in Wastewater Treatment. In Recent Advances in Microbial Degradation; Ahamed, M.I., Prasad, R., Eds.; Environmental and Microbial Biotechnology; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 131–154. ISBN 9789811605185.
  97. Tong, C.Y.; Honda, K.; Derek, C.J.C. A Review on Microalgal-Bacterial Co-Culture: The Multifaceted Role of Beneficial Bacteria towards Enhancement of Microalgal Metabolite Production. Environ. Res. 2023, 228, 115872.
  98. Berninger, T.; González López, Ó.; Bejarano, A.; Preininger, C.; Sessitsch, A. Maintenance and Assessment of Cell Viability in Formulation of Non-Sporulating Bacterial Inoculants. Microb. Biotechnol. 2018, 11, 277–301.
  99. Malusá, E.; Sas-Paszt, L.; Ciesielska, J. Technologies for Beneficial Microorganisms Inocula Used as Biofertilizers. Sci. World J. 2012, 2012, e491206.
  100. Fuess, L.T.; Lens, P.N.L.; Garcia, M.L.; Zaiat, M. Exploring Potentials for Bioresource and Bioenergy Recovery from Vinasse, the “New” Protagonist in Brazilian Sugarcane Biorefineries. Biomass 2022, 2, 374–411.
  101. Vassileva, M.; Malusà, E.; Sas-Paszt, L.; Trzcinski, P.; Galvez, A.; Flor-Peregrin, E.; Shilev, S.; Canfora, L.; Mocali, S.; Vassilev, N. Fermentation Strategies to Improve Soil Bio-Inoculant Production and Quality. Microorganisms 2021, 9, 1254.
  102. Zheng, Z.; Shetty, K. Cranberry Processing Waste for Solid State Fungal Inoculant Production. Process Biochem. 1998, 33, 323–329.
  103. Pandey, A.; Soccol, C.R.; Mitchell, D. New Developments in Solid State Fermentation: I-Bioprocesses and Products. Process Biochem. 2000, 35, 1153–1169.
  104. Malik, T.; Rawat, S. Biotechnological Interventions for Production of Flavour and Fragrance Compounds. In Sustainable Bioeconomy: Pathways to Sustainable Development Goals; Venkatramanan, V., Shah, S., Prasad, R., Eds.; Springer: Singapore, 2021; pp. 131–170. ISBN 9789811573217.
  105. Hassan, G.; Shabbir, M.A.; Ahmad, F.; Pasha, I.; Aslam, N.; Ahmad, T.; Rehman, A.; Manzoor, M.F.; Inam-Ur-Raheem, M.; Aadil, R.M. Cereal Processing Waste, an Environmental Impact and Value Addition Perspectives: A Comprehensive Treatise. Food Chem. 2021, 363, 130352.
  106. Finkler, A.T.J.; Biz, A.; Pitol, L.O.; Medina, B.S.; Luithardt, H.; Luz, L.F.d.L.; Krieger, N.; Mitchell, D.A. Intermittent Agitation Contributes to Uniformity across the Bed during Pectinase Production by Aspergillus Niger Grown in Solid-State Fermentation in a Pilot-Scale Packed-Bed Bioreactor. Biochem. Eng. J. 2017, 121, 1–12.
  107. Berovic, M. Cultivation of Medicinal Mushroom Biomass by Solid-State Bioprocessing in Bioreactors. In Solid State Fermentation: Research and Industrial Applications; Steudler, S., Werner, A., Cheng, J.J., Eds.; Advances in Biochemical Engineering/Biotechnology; Springer International Publishing: Cham, Switzerland, 2019; pp. 3–25. ISBN 978-3-030-23675-5.
  108. Khairy, M.F.A.; Mohamed, A.A.I.; Khlil, M.M.N. Development of bioreactor to enrich the protein of agricultural residues. Misr J. Agric. Eng. 2015, 32, 1625–1640.
More
© Text is available under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license; additional terms may apply. By using this site, you agree to the Terms and Conditions and Privacy Policy.
Upload a video for this entry
Information
Subjects: Agronomy
Contributors MDPI registered users' name will be linked to their SciProfiles pages. To register with us, please refer to https://encyclopedia.pub/register :
Roberto Carlos Solano Porras
,
Adriana Artola
,
Raquel Barrena
,
Golafarin Ghoreishi
,
Cindy Ballardo Matos
,
Antoni Sánchez
View Times: 315
Revisions: 2 times (View History)
Update Date: 08 Aug 2023
Table of Contents
    1000/1000
    Hot Most Recent
    Video Production Service
    Feedback