Hiring in life sciences? Share your open positions with our professional community. Read more Close

Advertisement

Effect of alginate encapsulation on growth and viability of polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbon-degrading bacteria varies by environment, species, and capsule design

Created on 28 Aug 2026

Authors

Foley, A. M., Gunsch, C. K.

Abstract

Polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons (PAHs) are hazardous organic contaminants for which microbial bioaugmentation is a promising remediation strategy, but poor persistence of introduced microorganisms can limit efficacy. Encapsulation may improve persistence, yet the influence of capsule design, microbial species, and environmental conditions on performance remains poorly understood. We evaluated alginate encapsulation of the PAH-degrading bacteria Pseudomonas putida and Novosphingobium aromaticivorans across nutrient conditions and capsule formulations. Encapsulation effects varied by species and medium, influencing growth rate, maximum cell density, overall growth, and lag time; notably, encapsulation shortened lag time of N. aromaticivorans in sRB15 medium (36.9 h to 3.9-5.3 h). Enumeration methods also affected apparent cell recovery. After 8 weeks, encapsulation had no significant effect on P. putida but resulted in increased concentrations of N. aromaticivorans relative to planktonic cultures (1.22 x 10; vs. 2.05 x 10; CFU/mL). Capsule composition further influenced cell retention: increasing alginate approximately doubled capsule-associated cell concentrations, while chitosan coatings reduced cell concentrations within capsules without affecting external concentrations. These findings demonstrate that the benefits of encapsulation are species- and environment-dependent and that capsule formulation can be tuned to influence bacterial persistence and release, informing the design of encapsulated inoculants for bioaugmentation applications.

Preprint server: bioRxiv
The authors list and abstract were imported from bioRxiv on 28 Aug 2026.

Advertisement

Stats

  • Community rating n/a 0 votes
  • Your rating

1-terrible, 9-excellent. How would you rate this preprint? Sign in in to submit your rating.

  • Recommendations n/a n/a positive of 0 vote(s)
  • Views 4
  • Comments 0

Recommended by

  • No recommendations yet.

Post a comment

You need to be signed in to post comments. You can sign in here.

Comments

There are no comments yet.

Advertisement