| Title |
Mannan endo-1,4-β-mannosidase from Kitasatospora sp. isolated in Indonesia and its potential for production of mannooligosaccharides from mannan polymers
|
|---|---|
| Published in |
AMB Express, May 2017
|
| DOI | 10.1186/s13568-017-0401-6 |
| Pubmed ID | |
| Authors |
Nanik Rahmani, Norimasa Kashiwagi, JaeMin Lee, Satoko Niimi-Nakamura, Hana Matsumoto, Prihardi Kahar, Puspita Lisdiyanti, Yopi, Bambang Prasetya, Chiaki Ogino, Akihiko Kondo |
| Abstract |
Mannan endo-1,4-β-mannosidase (commonly known as β-mannanase) catalyzes a random cleavage of the β-D-1,4-mannopyranosyl linkage in mannan polymers. The enzyme has been utilized in biofuel production from lignocellulose biomass, as well as in production of mannooligosaccharides (MOS) for applications in feed and food industries. We aimed to obtain a β-mannanase, for such mannan polymer utilization, from actinomycetes strains isolated in Indonesia. Strains exhibiting high mannanase activity were screened, and one strain belonging to the genus Kitasatospora was selected. We obtained a β-mannanase from this strain, and an amino acid sequence of this Kitasatospora β-mannanase showed a 58-71% similarity with the amino acid sequences of Streptomyces β-mannanases. The Kitasatospora β-mannanase showed a significant level of activity (944 U/mg) against locust bean gum (0.5% w/v) and a potential for oligosaccharide production from various mannan polymers. The β-mannanase might be beneficial particularly in the enzymatic production of MOS for applications of mannan utilization. |
X Demographics
The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 2 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| United Kingdom | 1 | 50% |
| Unknown | 1 | 50% |
Demographic breakdown
| Type | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Members of the public | 2 | 100% |
Mendeley readers
The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 62 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.
Geographical breakdown
| Country | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Unknown | 62 | 100% |
Demographic breakdown
| Readers by professional status | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Student > Master | 10 | 16% |
| Student > Bachelor | 8 | 13% |
| Student > Ph. D. Student | 7 | 11% |
| Researcher | 5 | 8% |
| Student > Doctoral Student | 3 | 5% |
| Other | 11 | 18% |
| Unknown | 18 | 29% |
| Readers by discipline | Count | As % |
|---|---|---|
| Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology | 19 | 31% |
| Agricultural and Biological Sciences | 9 | 15% |
| Environmental Science | 3 | 5% |
| Nursing and Health Professions | 2 | 3% |
| Medicine and Dentistry | 2 | 3% |
| Other | 8 | 13% |
| Unknown | 19 | 31% |
Attention Score in Context
This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 2. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 24 May 2017.
All research outputs
#14,936,169
of 22,973,051 outputs
Outputs from AMB Express
#347
of 1,238 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#186,156
of 312,883 outputs
Outputs of similar age from AMB Express
#24
of 69 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,973,051 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 32nd percentile – i.e., 32% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,238 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 2.8. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 64% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 312,883 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 37th percentile – i.e., 37% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 69 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 46th percentile – i.e., 46% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.