Document Type : REVIEW PAPER


1 Clinical and Environmental Microbiology Group. University of Cartagena, Faculty of Natural and Exact Sciences, Cartagena, Colombia

2 GIA Environmental Research Group, Faculty of Engineering, Fundación Universitaria Tecnológico Comfenalco, Cartagena, Colombia


BACKGROUND AND OBJECTIVES:The objective of this study isto present a description of the main characteristics of azo dyes and the different treatment methods used to remove them from water. There is a special emphasis given to the benefits associated with biological treatment, predominantly those related to the use of bacteria, which has to do with its competitive advantages over other microorganisms in the dye degradation processes.
METHODS: The topic to be addressed was first defined through workshops with the research group. The literature review was carried out following several inclusion/exclusion criteria: the year of publication, as the selection was limited to studies published between 2010 and 2020, the focus of the investigation, which had to be related to the efficiency of different techniques for the remediation of ecosystems contaminated with azo dyes and, lastly, that the studies also discussed the use of environmental bacteria in dye degradation processes.
FINDING: The efficiency of bacteria to degrade azo dyes ranges from 63-100%, the most efficient being: Marinobacter sp, Sphingobacterium sp, Enterococcus faecalis, Enterococcus casseliflavus. The bacteria that, reportedly, have greater efficiency for simultaneously removing the dye-metal complex are Bacillus circulans and Acinetobacter junii.
CONCLUSION: Traditional strategies for the treatment of effluents contaminated with azo dyes are limited to physical and chemical processes that have a high energy and economic cost. For these reasons, current challenges are focused on the use of environmental bacteria capable of transforming dyes into less toxic compounds.

Graphical Abstract

Application of environmental bacteria as potential methods of azo dye degradation systems


➢   The competitive advantages of bacteria to degrade azo dyes are related to their short life cycle, their ability to adapt and their metabolic action;

➢   The bacterial communities present in marine ecosystems are capable of effectively and simultaneously remedying effluents contaminated with azo dyes and heavy metals through mechanisms that involve enzymatic action;

➢   The most efficient bacteria for simultaneously removing the dye-metal complex are Bacillus circulans and Acinetobacter junii.


Main Subjects


This article is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License, which permits use, sharing, adaptation, distribution and reproduction in any medium or format, as long as you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made. The images or other third party material in this article are included in the article’s Creative Commons license, unless indicated otherwise in a credit line to the material. If material is not included in the article’s Creative Commons license and your intended use is not permitted by statutory regulation or exceeds the permitted use, you will need to obtain permission directly from the copyright holder. To view a copy of this license, visit:

Citation Metrics & Captures

Google Scholar Scopus Web of Science PlumX Metrics Altmetrics Mendeley |

Letters to Editor

GJESM Journal welcomes letters to the editor for the post-publication discussions and corrections which allows debate post publication on its site, through the Letters to Editor. Letters pertaining to manuscript published in GJESM should be sent to the editorial office of GJESM within three months of either online publication or before printed publication, except for critiques of original research. Following points are to be considering before sending the letters (comments) to the editor.

[1] Letters that include statements of statistics, facts, research, or theories should include appropriate references, although more than three are discouraged.
[2] Letters that are personal attacks on an author rather than thoughtful criticism of the author’s ideas will not be considered for publication.
[3] Letters can be no more than 300 words in length.
[4] Letter writers should include a statement at the beginning of the letter stating that it is being submitted either for publication or not.
[5] Anonymous letters will not be considered.
[6] Letter writers must include their city and state of residence or work.
[7] Letters will be edited for clarity and length.