https://www.ajol.info/index.php/br <p>The “Journal of Biological Research and Biotechnology (Bio-Research)” is a peer-reviewed, multidisciplinary, international, scientific Open Access Journal that provides publication of articles on biological sciences and biotechnology. The journal established in 2003, is published by the faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria. The Journal welcomes submission of manuscripts in the form of original and reviews articles, brief and case reports, special communications and editorials, that meet the general criteria of significance and scientific excellence. Papers will be published online approximately one-to-two weeks after acceptance.</p> <p>Publication of articles in the Journal of Biological Research and Biotechnology (Bio-Research) involves several parties, each of which performs an essential role in achieving the aims and objectives of the journal. Thus, all players (author, the journal editor, the peer-reviewer, and the publisher) are expected to meet and uphold standard norms of ethical behaviour from submission to the publication stage, depending on the area of involvement.</p> <p><strong>OPEN ACCESS STATEMENT</strong></p> <p>All articles published by <em>Bio-Research</em> journal are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. This means:</p> <ul> <li>Everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles published in Bio-Research journal;</li> <li>Everyone is free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose.</li> <li>Open access publication is supported by the authors' institutes or research funding agencies by payment of a comparatively low Article Processing Charge (APC) for accepted articles.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Permissions</strong></p> <p>No special permission is required to reuse all or part of article published by Bio-Research, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. Reuse of an article does not imply endorsement by the authors or Bio-Research.</p> Faculty of Biological Sciences, University of Nigeria, Nsukka, Nigeria en-US Bio-Research 1596-7409 <p><strong>OPEN ACCESS STATEMENT</strong></p> <p>All articles published by Bio-Research journal are made immediately available worldwide under an open access license. This means:</p> <ul> <li>Everyone has free and unlimited access to the full-text of all articles published in Bio-Research journal;</li> <li>Everyone is free to read, download, copy, distribute, print, search, or link to the full texts of articles, crawl them for indexing, pass them as data to software, or use them for any other lawful purpose.</li> <li>Open access publication is supported by the authors' institutes or research funding agencies by payment of a comparatively low Article Processing Charge (APC) for accepted articles.</li> </ul> <p><strong>Permissions</strong></p> <p>No special permission is required to reuse all or part of article published by Bio-Research, including figures and tables. For articles published under an open access Creative Common CC BY-NC-ND 4.0 license, any part of the article may be reused without permission provided that the original article is clearly cited. Reuse of an article does not imply endorsement by the authors or Bio-Research.</p> <p><br />Notices<br />You do not have to comply with the license for elements of the material in the public domain or where your use is permitted by an applicable exception or limitation.</p> <p> </p> <p><strong><em>JOURNAL OF BIOLOGICAL RESEARCH AND BIOTECHNOLOGY (BIO-RESEARCH)- </em></strong><strong>Publication Ethics and Publication Malpractice Statement </strong></p> <p>The Journal of Bio-Research and Biotechnology (Bio-Research) follows the COPE Code of Conduct and Best Practice Guidelines for Journal Editors. Authors, reviewers, and editors are expected to follow the best practice guidelines on ethical behavior. The following is a selection of the key points.</p> <p><strong>Duties of Editors </strong></p> <p><strong>Fair play and editorial independence </strong></p> <p>Editors and Editorial Board members evaluate submitted manuscripts exclusively on the basis of their academic merit (importance, originality, study’s validity, clarity) and their relevance to the journal’s scope, without regard to the authors’ race, gender, sexual orientation, ethnic origin, citizenship, religious belief, political philosophy, or institutional affiliation. Decisions to edit and publish are not determined by the policies of governments or any other agencies outside of the journal itself. The Editor-in-Chief and members of the Editorial Board have full authority over the entire editorial content of the journal and the timing of publication of that content if accepted.</p> <p><strong>Confidentiality </strong></p> <p>Editors and editorial staff will not disclose any information about a submitted manuscript to anyone other than the corresponding author, reviewers, potential reviewers, other editorial advisers, and the publisher, as appropriate.</p> <p><strong>Disclosure and conflicts of interest </strong></p> <p>Editors and Editorial Board members will not use unpublished information disclosed in a submitted manuscript for their own research purposes without the authors’ explicit written consent. Privileged information or ideas obtained by editors as a result of handling the manuscript must be kept confidential and not used for their personal advantage. Editors and peer reviewers will recuse themselves from considering manuscripts in which they have conflicts of interest resulting from collaborative, competitive or other formal or informal relationships with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the papers; instead, they will ask another member of the Editorial Review Board to handle the manuscript.</p> <p><strong>Publication decisions </strong></p> <p>The editors ensure that all submitted manuscripts being considered for publication undergo initial review by the Editorial Board and peer review by at least two reviewers who have expertise in the field. The Editor in Chief is responsible for deciding which of the manuscripts submitted to the journal will be published, based on the validation of the work in question, its importance to researchers and readers, the reviewers’ comments, and such legal requirements as are currently in force regarding libel, copyright infringement, and plagiarism. The Editor in Chief may confer with the Editorial Board, other editors, or reviewers in making this important decision.</p> <p><strong>Involvement and cooperation in investigations </strong></p> <p>Editors (in conjunction with the publisher) will take responsive measures when ethical concerns are raised with regard to a submitted manuscript or published paper. Every reported act of unethical publishing behavior will be looked into, even if it is discovered years after publication. If an ethical concern is well-founded, a correction, retraction, expression of concern, or other note as may be relevant will be published in the journal.</p> <p><strong>Duties of Reviewers </strong></p> <p><strong>Contribution to editorial decisions </strong></p> <p>Peer reviewers assist editors in making editorial decisions and, through editorial communications with authors, may assist authors in improving their manuscripts.</p> <p><strong>Promptness</strong></p> <p>Any invited reviewer who feels unqualified to review the research reported in a manuscript or knows that its prompt review will be impossible should immediately notify the editors and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted to review the manuscript<strong>. </strong></p> <p><strong>Confidentiality</strong></p> <p>Any manuscripts received for review are confidential documents and must be treated as such; they must not be shown to or discussed with others except if authorized by the Editor in Chief (who would only do so under exceptional and specific circumstances). This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation.</p> <p><strong>Standards of objectivity </strong></p> <p>Reviews should be conducted objectively and observations formulated clearly with supporting arguments so that authors can use them for improving the manuscript. Personal criticism of the authors is inappropriate and will not be tolerated by the editorial board.</p> <p><strong>Acknowledgment of sources</strong></p> <p>Reviewers should identify relevant published work that has not been cited by the authors. Any statement that is an observation, derivation, or argument that has been reported in previous publications should be accompanied by the relevant citation. A reviewer should also notify the editors of any substantial similarity or overlap between the manuscript under consideration and any other manuscript (published or unpublished) of which they have personal knowledge.</p> <p><strong>Disclosure and conflicts of interest</strong></p> <p>Any invited reviewer who has conflicts of interest resulting from competitive, collaborative, or other relationships or connections with any of the authors, companies, or institutions connected to the manuscript and the work described therein should immediately notify the editors to declare his or her conflicts of interest and decline the invitation to review so that alternative reviewers can be contacted. Unpublished material disclosed in a submitted manuscript must not be used in a reviewer’s own research without the express written consent of the authors. Privileged information or ideas obtained through peer review must be kept confidential and not used for the reviewer’s personal advantage. This applies also to invited reviewers who decline the review invitation<strong>. </strong></p> <p><strong>Duties of Authors</strong></p> <p><strong>Reporting standards </strong></p> <p>Authors of original research should present an accurate account of the work performed and the results, followed by an objective discussion of the significance of the work. The manuscript should contain sufficient detail and references to permit others to replicate the work. Review articles should be accurate, objective, and comprehensive, while editorial opinion or perspective pieces should be clearly identified as such. Fraudulent or knowingly inaccurate statements constitute unethical behavior and are unacceptable.</p> <p><strong>Data access and retention </strong></p> <p>Authors may be asked to provide the raw data of their study together with the manuscript for editorial review and should be prepared to make the data publicly available if practicable. In any event, authors should ensure accessibility of such data to other competent professionals for at least 10 years after publication (preferably via an institutional or subject-based data repository or other data center), provided that the confidentiality of the participants can be protected and legal rights concerning proprietary data do not preclude their release to third parties.</p> <p><strong>Originality and plagiarism </strong></p> <p>Authors should ensure that they have written and submit only entirely original works and if they have used the work and/or words of others, that this has been appropriately cited. Publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the work reported in the manuscript should also be cited. Plagiarism takes many forms, from "passing off" another's paper as the author's own, to copying or paraphrasing substantial parts of another's paper (without attribution), to claiming results from research conducted by others. Plagiarism in all its forms constitutes unethical publishing behavior and is unacceptable by the Journal of Biological Research and Biotechnology.</p> <p><strong>Multiple, duplicate, redundant, or concurrent submission/publication </strong></p> <p>Papers that describe essentially the same research should not be published in more than one journal or primary publication. Therefore, authors should not submit for consideration a manuscript that has already been published in another journal. Submission of a manuscript concurrently to more than one journal is unethical publishing behavior and unacceptable. The publication of some kinds of articles in more than one journal is sometimes justifiable, provided that certain conditions are met and relevance to the subscribing community is apparent. The authors and editors of the journals concerned must agree to the secondary publication, which must reflect the same data and interpretation of the primary document. The primary reference must be cited in the secondary publication.</p> <p> <strong>Authorship of the manuscript </strong></p> <p>Only persons who meet the following authorship criteria should be listed as authors in the manuscript as they must be able to take public responsibility for the content: (1) made significant contributions to the conception, design, execution, data acquisition, or analysis/interpretation of the study; (2) drafted the manuscript or revised it critically for important intellectual content; and (3) have seen and approved the final version of the paper and agreed to its submission for publication. All persons who made substantial contributions to the work reported in the manuscript (such as technical help, writing and editing assistance, general support) but who do not meet the criteria for authorship must not be listed as an author, but should be acknowledged in the Acknowledgments section after their written permission to be named has been obtained. The corresponding author should ensure that all appropriate coauthors (according to the above definition) and no inappropriate coauthors are included in the author list and verify that all coauthors have seen and approved the final version of the manuscript and agreed to its submission for publication.</p> <p><strong>Disclosure and conflicts of interest</strong></p> <p>Authors should—at the earliest stage possible (generally by submitting a disclosure form at the time of submission and including a statement in the manuscript)—disclose any conflicts of interest that might be construed to influence the results or their interpretation in the manuscript. Examples of potential conflicts of interest that should be disclosed include financial ones such as honoraria, educational grants or other funding, participation in speakers’ bureaus, membership, employment, consultancies, or other equity interest, and paid expert testimony or patent-licensing arrangements, as well as nonfinancial ones such as personal or professional relationships, affiliations, knowledge, or beliefs in the subject matter or materials discussed in the manuscript. All sources of financial support for the work should be disclosed (including the grant number or other reference number if any). <strong>Acknowledgement of sources</strong></p> <p>Authors should ensure that they have properly acknowledged the work of others and should also cite publications that have been influential in determining the nature of the reported work. Information obtained privately (from conversation, correspondence, or discussion with third parties) must not be used or reported without explicit, written permission from the source. Authors should not use information obtained in the course of providing confidential services, such as refereeing manuscripts or grant applications, unless they have obtained the explicit written permission of the author(s) of the work involved in these services.</p> <p><strong>Peer review</strong></p> <p>Authors are obliged to participate in the peer review process and cooperate fully by responding promptly to editors’ requests for raw data, clarifications, proof of ethics approval, and copyright permissions. In the case of a first decision of "minor or major revisions required," authors should respond to the reviewers’ comments systematically, point by point, and in a timely manner, revising and resubmitting their manuscript to the journal by the deadline given.</p> <p><strong>Fundamental errors in published works</strong></p> <p>When authors discover significant errors or inaccuracies in their own published work, it is their obligation to promptly notify the journal’s editors or publisher and cooperate with them either to correct the paper in the form of an erratum or to retract the paper. If the editors or publisher learns from a third party that a published work contains a significant error or inaccuracy, then it is the authors’ obligation to promptly correct or retract the paper or provide evidence to the journal editors of the correctness of the paper.</p> <p><strong>Duties of the Publisher</strong></p> <p><strong>Handling of unethical publishing behavior</strong></p> <p>In cases of alleged or proven fraudulent publication or plagiarism, the publisher, in close collaboration with the editors, will take all appropriate measures to clarify the situation and to amend the article in question. This includes the prompt publication of an erratum, clarification or, in the most severe case, the retraction of the affected work. The publisher, together with the editors, shall take reasonable steps to identify and prevent the publication of papers when misconduct has occurred and, under no circumstances, encourage such misconduct or knowingly allow such misconduct to take place.</p> <p><strong>Access to journal content</strong></p> <p>The publisher is committed to the permanent availability and preservation of scholarly research and ensures accessibility by partnering with other organizations. It may also maintain its own digital archive.</p> https://www.ajol.info/index.php/br/article/view/283644 <p>This study assessed the renal effects of <em>Dialium</em> <em>guineense</em> and <em>Annona</em> <em>muricata</em> extracts on female Wistar rats, exploring their potential roles in kidney health. Given limited research on these extracts’ impacts on kidney biomarkers and tissue structure, this study investigated water balance, renal biomarkers, and kidney histology after 30 days of treatment. Rats were divided into four groups: <em>Dialium</em> <em>guineense</em> (100 mg/kg), <em>Annona</em> <em>muricata</em> (100 mg/kg), a combination (50 mg/kg each), and a control. Following 30 days of exposure, water and urine output were measured, with urine samples analyzed both qualitatively and quantitatively for protein, creatinine, and protein/creatinine ratios. Blood samples were collected, and kidney tissue was obtained following standard methods for histological examination. Results showed an increased urinary protein across all treated groups, with <em>Dialium</em> <em>guineense</em> showing the highest levels. Urinary creatinine levels decreased, especially in the <em>Dialium guineense</em> group, leading to elevated protein-creatinine ratios in both <em>Dialium guineense</em> and <em>Annona muricata</em> groups. Blood analysis showed slight but non-significant increases in uric acid and magnesium, a slight calcium increases in the Annona muricata group, and a significant sodium decrease in the combination treatment group. Histological examination revealed intact kidney structure, indicating no nephrotoxicity from the treatments. These findings suggest that, while the extracts affect specific renal biomarkers, they do not compromise kidney structure, supporting their potential as safe options in traditional medicine. Further studies are recommended to explore their long-term safety and mechanisms of action.</p> Albert Chukwuemeka Ibezute Oghenegueke Daniel Igiegie Copyright (c) 2024 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 2024-12-03 2024-12-03 22 3 2420 2431 10.4314/br.v22i3.1 https://www.ajol.info/index.php/br/article/view/283705 <p>One-third of diabetics develop renal and liver disease, which costs global health systems money and resources. The study examines hepatic indices, duration, and glucose levels and assesses neutrophil gelatinase-associated lipocalin (NGAL) as a sensitive marker for acute kidney injury (AKI) in gestational diabetes. This study recruited 30 non-gestational pregnant hospital ante-natal clinic patients and 30 non-diabetic controls without pregnancy. Standard techniques were used to collect and analyze fasting blood sugar, renal, and hepatic biomarkers. Significant findings were determined by conducting statistical analysis with P &lt;0.05. Gestational diabetes (GDM) and pregnant women without gestational diabetes (PNGDM) showed significantly higher levels (p&lt;0.05) of NGAL, urea, and creatinine compared to non-pregnant women without diabetes (NPNDM). Compared to women without pregnancy or diabetes (NPNDM), there was a significant difference in mean values of fasting blood sugar (FBS), glycated hemoglobin (HbA1c), aspartate amino transferase (AST), alanine amino transferase (ALT), alkaline phosphatase (ALP), and gamma-glutaryl glutaminase transferase (GGT) among gestational diabetes mellitus (GDM) and PNGDM (p&lt;0.05). NGAL had a higher AUROC of 0.684 compared to urea and creatinine. This study shows the significance of plasma NGAL levels as a biomarker for AKI in gestational diabetes. Furthermore, the findings of this study reveal that derangements in hepatic parameters are extensively co-existent in GDM.</p> Adedeji David Atere Oluwaferanmi Elizabeth Komalafe Gregory Uchechukwu Joseph Yekeen Adebisi Kosamat Opemipo Oluwafisayomi Adetayo Copyright (c) 2024 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 2024-12-03 2024-12-03 22 3 2432 2440 10.4314/br.v22i3.2 https://www.ajol.info/index.php/br/article/view/283815 <p>Polyhydroxyalkanoates (PHAs) are versatile carbon-neutral, eco-friendly biopolymers that can replace highly polluting petroleum plastics. Microorganisms accumulate PHAs in response to stress. Unfortunately, PHA is more expensive than plastics due to high cost of feedstock. Palm Oil Mill Effluent (POME) an abundant waste from oil palm production can support sustainable production of PHA using appropriate microorganism. Fresh and naturally acidified POME were used as negative-cost feedstock to produce PHA using novel bacteria. Six of 247 isolates obtained from POME / dumpsite soil efficiently accumulated between 19 and 72% PHA. Two isolates that accumulated the most polymers were identified as <em>Providencia rettgeri </em>and <em>Sporosarcina koreensis.</em> At optimum yield they accumulated respectively 4.2g/L (72% of 5.8g/L biomass) and 3.4g/L (66% of 5.15g/L biomass) in POME at 72hours. Optimization studies show that pH 6, C:N ratio, 25:1, titratable acidity, 0.39% for both isolates, and inoculum size, 10% v/v for <em>Providencia rettgeri </em>and 5% v/v for <em>Sporosarcina koreensis </em>gave maximum concentration of PHA at 72hours. Fourier transform infrared spectroscopy (FT-IR) and GC-MS analysis of the polymer accumulated by both isolates identified the products as a poly-hydroxyl-butyrate (PHB). This work is reporting for the first time the use of <em>P. rettgeri</em> and <em>S. koreensis</em> in sustainable processes to valorize major agricultural pollutant to value-added high-cost biochemical. The yield of PHA by these isolates on POME feedstock is promising enough to serve as basis for sustainable industrial process. The waste effluent is reduced for COD and pollution potential and may safely be discharged to environment.</p> Precious Somtochukwu Ezechukwu Jerry Obeta Ugwuanyi Copyright (c) 2024 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 2024-12-03 2024-12-03 22 3 2441 2454 10.4314/br.v22i3.3 https://www.ajol.info/index.php/br/article/view/284104 <p>There is a correlation between obesity and oxidative stress, which is characterized by an imbalance between reactive oxygen species (ROS) and the free radical scavengers in the body. This imbalance arises as a result of fat accumulation. The purpose of this study was to investigate the bioactive components, free radical scavenging activity in vitro, and anti-lipase activity of aqueous and ethanolic leaf extracts of <em>Centrosema pubescens </em>Benth. Both the aqueous and ethanolic leaf extracts produced a yield of 15.79% and 8.03% respectively, after being air-dried, blended to powder, extracted with solvent and dried to paste using a water bath. Both extracts contained bioactive substances such as proteins, flavonoids, tannins, phenols, and alkaloids. The ethanol extract had higher amounts of these compounds than the water extract did. The extract samples displayed modest in-vitro scavenging capabilities for 2,2-diphenyl-1-picrylhydrazyl (DPPH) and nitric oxide (NO) radicals, as well as ferric reducing antioxidant power (FRAP) and total antioxidant capacity compared to the standard compound, ascorbic acid. Furthermore, the ethanol extract displayed a more pronounced inhibitory influence on pancreatic lipase, a key enzyme in lipid digestion, suggesting its potential in obesity control through the lowering of fat absorption. The research underlines the importance of solvent selection in maximizing the extraction of bioactive components and boosting the therapeutic effectiveness of herbal remedies.</p> Akpovwehwee Akporhuarho Anigboro Chioma Miracle Otabor Copyright (c) 2024 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 2024-12-07 2024-12-07 22 3 2455 2465 10.4314/br.v22i3.4 https://www.ajol.info/index.php/br/article/view/284604 <p>The African yam bean <em>Sphenostylis stenocarpa</em> is a nutritious under-exploited legume from Africa, with a potential to contribute greatly towards food security. The seed of this crop is attacked by the bean weevil <em>Callosobruchus maculatus</em> during storage, which can render them unfit for consumption or replanting. Insect-resistant varieties would be ideal and desired as these will require little or no additional costs for insecticides from farmers and will offer immense and long-term health, economic and environmental benefits to the farmers and consumers. In this study, standard procedures were followed to ascertain the resistance of 10 elite <em>S. stenocarpa</em> cultivars to stored product insect pests, <em>C. maculatus</em> and the maize weevil <em>Sitophilus zeamais</em>. Under conditions of natural infestation, seven (7) tropical <em>S. stenocarpa</em> accessions (TSs 9, 10, 33, 60, 93, 126 &amp; 349) were resistant to <em>C. maculatus</em> and had no infestation at all while 3 accessions (TSs 23, 111 &amp; 116) were susceptible.&nbsp; When the accessions were subjected to intentional infestation with <em>C. maculatus</em>, they showed varying levels of resistance, with TSs 93 as the most resistant accessions and TSs 23 as the least resistant accession. The maize weevil, <em>S. zeamais</em> however failed to establish on <em>S. stenocarpa</em> seeds. While lectin has been implicated in insect resistance by <em>S. stenocarpa</em>, this study found no significant correlation between lectin and the resistance of different accessions. Elite cultivars of the African yam bean <em>S. stenocarpa</em> that are resistant to its major insect pest <em>C. maculatus</em> have been identified in this study. These resistant cultivars will be of significance to future breeding programmes and food security in developing tropical countries and beyond.</p> Samuel Baiyeri Christian Ogaugwu Copyright (c) 2024 https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-nc-nd/4.0 2024-12-16 2024-12-16 22 3 2466 2474