BEYOND SURFACE ACTIVITY: THE EXPANDING ROLE OF MICROBIAL BIOSURFACTANTS IN SUSTAINABLE AGRICULTURE

REGISTRO DOI: 10.70773/revistatopicos/786507210

ABSTRACT
The search for more sustainable agricultural alternatives has intensified in response to growing concerns about food security, climate change, and the environmental impacts associated with the intensive use of chemical inputs. In this context, biosurfactants have attracted increasing attention as microbial-derived compounds that combine biodegradability, low toxicity, and a wide range of properties relevant to agriculture. This review brings together recent advances in microbial biosurfactant production and discusses their potential applications in plant pathogen management, agricultural formulations, soil quality improvement, plant growth promotion, and the bioremediation of contaminated soils. It also examines the main barriers to large-scale adoption, including production costs, process optimization, formulation standardization, and the need for field validation under commercial farming conditions. Overall, the available evidence suggests that biosurfactants are a promising alternative for supporting more sustainable agricultural systems. However, their broader commercial use will depend on advances that integrate microbial biotechnology, formulation development, and consistent agronomic validation across different production systems.
Keywords: biosurfactants; sustainable agriculture; bioinputs; plant growth promotion; bioremediation.

RESUMO
O interesse por alternativas mais sustentáveis para a agricultura tem aumentado diante dos desafios relacionados à segurança alimentar, às mudanças climáticas e aos impactos causados pelo uso intensivo de insumos químicos. Nesse cenário, os biossurfactantes vêm se destacando por serem moléculas produzidas por microrganismos que combinam baixa toxicidade, biodegradabilidade e diferentes propriedades de interesse agrícola. Esta revisão reúne estudos recentes sobre a produção microbiana desses compostos e discute seu potencial em diferentes aplicações, incluindo o controle de fitopatógenos, o uso como adjuvantes em formulações agrícolas, a melhoria da qualidade do solo, a promoção do crescimento vegetal e a biorremediação de áreas contaminadas. Também são abordados os principais entraves para sua utilização em larga escala, como os elevados custos de produção, a necessidade de processos mais eficientes, a padronização das formulações e a validação em condições reais de campo. De modo geral, os estudos indicam que os biossurfactantes representam uma alternativa promissora para o desenvolvimento de sistemas agrícolas mais sustentáveis. Entretanto, sua adoção comercial ainda depende de avanços que permitam integrar a produção biotecnológica, o desenvolvimento de formulações e a comprovação de sua eficiência em diferentes condições de cultivo.
Palavras-chave: biossurfactantes; agricultura sustentável; bioinsumos; promoção do crescimento vegetal; biorremediação.

1. INTRODUCTION

Global food production is under increasing pressure to meet the demands of a growing population while responding to rapid urbanization and changing consumption patterns. At the same time, agricultural systems must cope with climate change, soil degradation, water scarcity, and the continuous loss of arable land, all of which threaten long-term productivity (Deng et al., 2025; Li et al., 2026). Addressing these interconnected challenges requires production systems capable of sustaining crop yields while conserving natural resources and improving the resilience of agroecosystems (Gawdiya et al., 2025; Menia et al., 2026; Panda, 2025).

Over the past decades, higher agricultural productivity has largely depended on mineral fertilizers, pesticides, and other synthetic inputs. Although these technologies have played a fundamental role in increasing crop yields, their intensive use has also been associated with soil and water contamination, biodiversity loss, the emergence of resistant pests and phytopathogens, and the progressive degradation of agricultural ecosystems (Alom et al., 2025; Nwankwo et al., 2025; Olamiti, 2026; Xiao et al., 2026). These concerns have encouraged the development of alternative production strategies that reduce dependence on conventional agrochemicals without compromising agricultural productivity. Within this context, bio-based agricultural inputs have gained increasing importance because of their potential to improve resource-use efficiency while reducing environmental impacts (Da Silva et al., 2025; Förster, 2025; Gomide et al., 2026).

Among these biological alternatives, biosurfactants have attracted considerable attention because their amphiphilic structure combines physicochemical and biological properties that are relevant to agriculture (Abdoli et al., 2025; Garg et al., 2025; Marks, Nogueira, & Hungria, 2025). Produced primarily by microorganisms and frequently obtained from renewable substrates, these molecules are biodegradable, generally exhibit low toxicity, and can perform multiple functions within agricultural systems. Rather than serving a single purpose, biosurfactants can act as complementary components in sustainable crop management by supporting different biological and physicochemical processes (Pandit & Meena, 2026; Sharma et al., 2025).

This review examines recent advances in microbial biosurfactant production and discusses how these compounds are being incorporated into different areas of agriculture. Particular attention is given to plant pathogen management, agricultural formulations, soil quality, plant growth promotion, and the bioremediation of contaminated soils. Instead of considering these applications in isolation, we discuss biosurfactants as multifunctional molecules whose combined properties enable diverse roles within agricultural production systems. The review also examines the technological and agronomic barriers that continue to limit large-scale adoption and discusses research directions that may facilitate their broader implementation.

2. BIOSURFACTANTS

Biosurfactants are microbial surface-active molecules characterized by remarkable structural diversity and a broad range of physicochemical and biological properties. Their composition varies according to the producing microorganism and cultivation conditions, resulting in compounds with distinct surface activities, biological functions, and application potential (Athira & Abdulla, 2026; Maji et al., 2026; Wahab & Al-Sahlany, 2025). These characteristics have supported the growing use of biosurfactants in several industrial sectors, particularly as sustainable alternatives to synthetic surfactants (Paul et al., 2025; Silva et al., 2026).

Recent research has expanded beyond the discovery of new biosurfactant-producing microorganisms to improving production efficiency, exploring renewable feedstocks, and developing processes suitable for large-scale applications (Dhiman et al., 2025; Kapoor et al., 2026; Singh & Kumar, 2025). As a result, current studies increasingly combine microbial prospecting, bioprocess optimization, and application-driven research to overcome technical and economic barriers that still limit commercial adoption. Understanding the characteristics, classification, and production strategies of biosurfactants is therefore essential for evaluating their potential in sustainable agricultural systems (Handa, Kaur, & Chatterjee, 2025).

2.1. Characteristics And Classification

Biosurfactants are classified according to their molecular weight, functional properties, or chemical composition, although classification based on chemical structure is the most widely used (Hsu et al., 2025; Luong, Moorthy, & Luong, 2026). This approach divides biosurfactants into glycolipids, lipopeptides and lipoproteins, phospholipids, fatty acids, polymeric biosurfactants, and particulate biosurfactants. Because these groups differ in molecular structure, they also differ in surface activity, emulsifying ability, and biological functions (Satpute et al., 2026; Uddin et al., 2025). Low-molecular-weight biosurfactants, especially glycolipids and lipopeptides, are generally more efficient at reducing surface and interfacial tension, whereas high-molecular-weight compounds are better emulsifiers and produce more stable emulsions (Lourenço, Duarte, & Ribeiro, 2024; Matosinhos et al., 2026; Sałek, Euston, & Janek, 2022). These differences largely explain why distinct biosurfactant classes are suited to different biotechnological applications.

Glycolipids and lipopeptides are the most extensively studied biosurfactants. Their prominence is associated with their high surface activity, diverse biological functions, and the availability of well-characterized microbial producers. As a result, rhamnolipids, sophorolipids, mannosylerythritol lipids (MELs), trehalolipids, surfactin, iturin, and fengycin have become the compounds most frequently investigated in studies of biosurfactant production and application (Chaudhary et al., 2026; Indoria et al., 2026). Other classes, including phospholipids, fatty acids, polymeric biosurfactants, and particulate biosurfactants, have received less attention but also exhibit properties of biotechnological interest (Meng et al., 2026). This uneven distribution of research appears to reflect the current stage of knowledge and technological development rather than intrinsic differences in application potential. The major biosurfactant classes, representative compounds, and their general characteristics are summarized in Table 1.

Table 1. Classification of the major biosurfactant classes based on their chemical structure and general characteristics

Source: Prepared by the authors.

2.2. Microbial Production

Biosurfactants are synthesized by a wide variety of microorganisms, reflecting their metabolic diversity and ability to produce compounds with distinct structural and functional properties (Chegini & Zare, 2025; Ullah, Selvarajan, & Lau Vetter, 2026). Their synthesis is frequently associated with the metabolism of hydrophobic substrates but also occurs in cultures grown on hydrophilic carbon sources. Product yield and composition are influenced by nutrient availability, culture medium composition, pH, temperature, aeration, and fermentation time (Bustos-Vázquez et al., 2025; Matosinhos et al., 2026). This variability highlights the importance of selecting appropriate microbial strains and cultivation conditions to obtain consistent production and product quality (Maji et al., 2026; Sharma & Lamsal, 2025).

Bacteria dominate biosurfactant production because they combine rapid growth with high productivity and well-characterized metabolic pathways (Saranraj et al., 2022). Species of Pseudomonas and Bacillus remain the best-known producers of rhamnolipids and lipopeptides, respectively, and continue to underpin research on biosurfactant production and industrial applications (Kabeil et al., 2025; Satpute et al., 2026). Yeasts represent another important production platform, particularly for glycolipids such as sophorolipids and mannosylerythritol lipids (MELs). Their efficient use of renewable feedstocks and agro-industrial residues has strengthened interest in yeast-based production systems as a means of reducing manufacturing costs while improving process sustainability (Morita et al., 2009; Shokri et al., 2025).

Filamentous fungi have broadened the spectrum of microorganisms available for biosurfactant production. Their capacity to grow on lignocellulosic materials and other agro-industrial by-products, combined with extensive metabolic diversity, has encouraged the exploration of these organisms as alternative production platforms (Hilmy et al., 2026). Biosurfactant-producing species have been reported within the genera Absidia (Mendonça et al., 2026), Aspergillus (Rita et al., 2025), Penicillium (Costa et al., 2025), and Trichoderma (Valerio-Aguilar et al., 2026). The number of reports remains considerably lower than that for bacteria and yeasts, indicating that fungal biosurfactants remain comparatively underexplored despite their potential for expanding the diversity of available molecules.

Carbon source selection is equally important for the economic viability of biosurfactant production (Rasheed et al., 2025). Waste cooking oils, crude glycerol, molasses, whey, cereal brans, and lignocellulosic residues have been widely investigated because they lower raw material costs while promoting the recovery of agricultural and industrial wastes within circular economy strategies (Hilmy et al., 2026; Tornuk & Akman, 2026). Current research therefore seeks production systems that combine efficient microbial platforms with inexpensive renewable substrates, reducing production costs without compromising biosurfactant performance. The principal microbial producers, the biosurfactants they synthesize, and their main characteristics are summarized in Table 2.

Table 2. Major microbial platforms used for biosurfactant production.

Source: Prepared by the authors.

2.3. Challenges For Production And Application

The commercial adoption of biosurfactants remains constrained by technical and economic factors that limit their large-scale production (Jui et al., 2026). Laboratory studies have consistently demonstrated their potential, yet transferring these results to industrial production requires efficient fermentation processes, reproducible product quality, and competitive manufacturing costs (Raheja et al., 2025). These challenges are closely connected, since improvements in production efficiency directly affect downstream processing requirements and the overall cost of the final product. Consequently, biosurfactants often remain more expensive than conventional surfactants, particularly when high product purity is required (Kim et al., 2026).

Process performance is influenced by several variables, including the producing microorganism, culture medium composition, and carbon source (Laribi et al., 2025). Small changes in these parameters can affect both biosurfactant yield and composition, making process optimization essential for consistent production. For this reason, agro-industrial residues have become attractive alternatives to conventional substrates because they reduce raw material costs while adding value to agricultural by-products, supporting circular economy and bioeconomy initiatives (Gupta, Gaur, & Singh, 2026). Even so, variations in the chemical composition of these feedstocks may influence process reproducibility and require careful optimization before industrial implementation.

Downstream processing remains another major barrier to commercial production (Grewal & Gulati, 2026). Recovery, concentration, and purification generally involve multiple processing steps that increase manufacturing costs and may reduce overall product recovery, especially when highly purified biosurfactants are required (Corrales et al., 2026). Comparisons among studies are further complicated by differences in cultivation conditions, analytical methods, and purification procedures, which can produce biosurfactants with distinct compositions and functional properties even when the same microorganism is employed (Garg et al., 2025). This lack of methodological standardization also limits direct comparisons of production efficiency and makes it more difficult to identify robust processes for industrial application.

Advances in metabolic engineering, fermentation technology, renewable feedstocks, and downstream processing continue to improve the prospects for commercial biosurfactant production (Carmona Marques et al., 2025). The main obstacle, however, is no longer the identification of new biosurfactant-producing microorganisms but the development of production systems that combine technical reliability, economic competitiveness, and industrial scalability. For agricultural applications, these advances must also be accompanied by validation under practical field conditions before biosurfactants can be more widely incorporated into commercial products (Khoulati et al., 2025).

3. APPLICATIONS OF BIOSURFACTANTS IN AGRICULTURE

The properties of biosurfactants have enabled their use in several areas of agriculture, extending beyond their traditional role as surface-active molecules. Their reported applications include plant pathogen management, soil quality improvement, agricultural formulations, and the remediation of contaminated environments (Sheth et al., 2026). These functions are often interconnected, since the same biosurfactant may simultaneously influence microbial populations, improve the performance of agricultural inputs, and modify physicochemical processes in the soil. This functional diversity has supported the investigation of biosurfactants as components of integrated strategies for more sustainable agricultural production. The following sections examine these applications in relation to some of the main challenges facing modern agriculture.

3.1. Sustainable Management Of Plant Pathogens

Plant diseases caused by fungi, bacteria, viruses, and other phytopathogens remain a major constraint on agricultural productivity. Disease control still relies predominantly on chemical pesticides, which have contributed substantially to crop protection but have also favored the emergence of resistant pathogen populations and raised environmental concerns associated with their intensive use (Bakr et al., 2025; Cucu et al., 2025; Rather et al., 2025). These limitations have stimulated the search for complementary disease management strategies based on biological products, including biosurfactants (Bender et al., 2026).

Unlike conventional pesticides, biosurfactants may combine direct antimicrobial activity with the ability to stimulate plant defense responses. Depending on their chemical structure, they can disrupt microbial membranes, interfere with cell adhesion and biofilm formation, alter membrane permeability, or activate signaling pathways associated with systemic resistance, reducing pathogen establishment through multiple mechanisms rather than a single biological target (Khan et al., 2025; Sultana et al., 2025; Wahab & Al-Sahlany, 2025). This combination of direct and indirect effects has contributed to their growing use in integrated plant disease management.

Most studies have focused on lipopeptides and glycolipids because these classes include the biosurfactants with the most consistent evidence of antifungal and antibacterial activity (Awadelkareem et al., 2025). By contrast, considerably less information is available for other biosurfactant classes, indicating that their potential for plant pathogen management remains less thoroughly explored. The principal biosurfactants investigated for disease control, their reported mechanisms of action, and representative target phytopathogens are summarized in Table 3.

Table 3. Major biosurfactants investigated for plant pathogen management, their mechanisms of action, and representative target phytopathogens.

Source: Prepared by the authors.

3.2. Biosurfactants as Adjuvants For Improving Agrochemical Performance

Biosurfactants are increasingly incorporated into agricultural formulations as adjuvants because their amphiphilic structure modifies interfacial properties, improving the dispersion, emulsification, and stability of active ingredients (Sheth et al., 2026; Begum, Mondal, & Mandal, 2026). By reducing the surface tension of spray solutions, they promote greater droplet spreading, increase retention on leaf surfaces, and facilitate the penetration of active compounds into plant tissues (De Carvalho, Weitz, & Conte-Junior, 2026; Awasthi et al., 2026). These effects may improve the efficiency of agrochemical applications by increasing contact between the active ingredient and its biological target rather than simply increasing the amount of product applied.

Positive effects have been reported for formulations containing fertilizers, herbicides, fungicides, and insecticides (Pagano et al., 2025; Verma et al., 2025; Yasir, Hossain, & Pratap-Singh, 2025). Under appropriate conditions, improved spray coverage and retention may reduce application rates and minimize runoff losses, contributing to more efficient use of agricultural inputs. Most of the available evidence, however, has been generated under laboratory or greenhouse conditions. Field performance is often more variable because formulation efficiency depends on environmental conditions, crop architecture, application technology, and interactions with the active ingredient. These factors help explain why relatively few biosurfactant-based adjuvants have reached commercial use despite the promising experimental results. A schematic representation of these mechanisms is presented in Figure 1.

Figure 1. Mechanism of action of biosurfactants as adjuvants in agricultural formulations. (A) Conventional spraying, characterized by higher surface tension, limited leaf coverage, and increased runoff. (B) Spraying with biosurfactants, resulting in lower surface tension, greater droplet spreading, and enhanced penetration of active ingredients.

Beyond improving spray deposition, biosurfactants also function as emulsifiers, dispersants, wetting agents, and stabilizers in agricultural formulations (Abd-Elsalam et al., 2025; Ansari et al., 2025). These properties contribute to formulation stability and promote a more uniform distribution of active ingredients on the target surface. Their multifunctionality also creates opportunities to replace or reduce the use of conventional formulation additives, supporting the development of bio-based agricultural products with lower environmental impact (Da Silva et al., 2025; De Souza et al., 2026).

Commercial implementation still depends on overcoming several formulation challenges. Compatibility with different active ingredients, storage stability, process standardization, and consistent performance under field conditions remain important limitations (Macchia et al., 2025). The effectiveness of a biosurfactant as an adjuvant is therefore determined not only by its surface activity but also by its behavior within the complete formulation and under practical application conditions. Demonstrating consistent performance across different crops, environments, and production systems remains one of the main steps required for broader commercial adoption (Chauhan, Mohanty, & Meena, 2025; Rafiq et al., 2025).

3.3. Soil Quality And Nutrient Availability

Soil quality directly influences nutrient availability, microbial activity, water dynamics, and root development, making it a key determinant of agricultural productivity and the long-term sustainability of cropping systems (Țopa et al., 2025; Kumar et al., 2025). Intensive cultivation, repeated fertilizer application, and inadequate soil management can alter these processes, reducing nutrient use efficiency and accelerating soil degradation (Yimer & Tarnawa, 2025; Asante et al., 2025). Because biosurfactants modify interactions among soil particles, water, and mineral compounds, they have been investigated as biological tools for improving nutrient dynamics and soil functioning (Sethi et al., 2025).

Their effects are associated with changes in interfacial interactions within the soil matrix, influencing nutrient solubility, mobility, and availability (Gonzalo & González-Pérez, 2025; Hayes & Roulia, 2025). Biosurfactants may increase the availability of poorly soluble nutrients, promote the release of compounds retained on soil particles, and stimulate microbial processes involved in nutrient cycling (Shahabirokni et al., 2025). The magnitude of these responses, however, depends on several factors, including soil texture, mineral composition, organic matter content, and the physicochemical characteristics of the biosurfactant itself. As a result, responses reported under controlled conditions are not always directly transferable to different agricultural systems.

The rhizosphere represents another important target for biosurfactant activity. By influencing microbial interactions, biosurfactants may favor the establishment of plant growth-promoting microorganisms and stimulate processes related to organic matter mineralization and nutrient cycling (Marks, Nogueira, & Hungria, 2025). These responses may improve nutrient use efficiency and support soil fertility management, although the relative contribution of biosurfactants within the complex soil microbiome remains difficult to isolate under field conditions. The principal soil processes affected by biosurfactants, their mechanisms of action, and their potential agronomic implications are summarized in Table 4.

Table 4. Soil processes affected by biosurfactants and their potential agronomic implications.

Source: Prepared by the authors.

Most available evidence has been obtained from laboratory, greenhouse, or short-term experiments. Long-term field studies remain limited, particularly across contrasting soil types, cropping systems, and climatic conditions (Sheth et al., 2026; Khoulati et al., 2025; Jamilah et al., 2025; Marks, Nogueira, & Hungria, 2025). Establishing consistent application protocols and identifying the environmental conditions under which biosurfactants provide reproducible agronomic benefits remain important challenges for their incorporation into soil fertility management.

3.4. Plant Growth Promotion

Plant growth promotion is one of the most widely investigated agricultural applications of biosurfactants, particularly when these compounds are associated with plant growth-promoting microorganisms (PGPM) (Ríos-Ruiz et al., 2025; Gaurav et al., 2026). Rather than supplying nutrients directly, biosurfactants influence soil physicochemical properties and rhizosphere processes that regulate plant development. Changes in nutrient availability, microbial activity, and root–soil interactions may create conditions that favor plant establishment and growth (Mohanty, Manyapu, & Mandpe, 2025; Abdoli et al., 2025).

The reported responses arise from the interaction of multiple processes rather than from a single mechanism of action. Biosurfactants may increase nutrient availability, facilitate rhizosphere colonization by beneficial microorganisms, influence plant–microbe interactions, and contribute to organic matter mineralization and nutrient cycling (Panhwar et al., 2025; Sun et al., 2025). Some studies also describe improved tolerance to abiotic stresses such as drought and salinity, suggesting that biosurfactants can help maintain plant performance under environmental conditions that limit crop development (Rahim et al., 2025; Di Sario et al., 2025).

Interest has also grown in combining biosurfactants with microbial inoculants. In these systems, biosurfactants may improve the establishment of beneficial microorganisms in the rhizosphere, potentially increasing the effectiveness of microbial inoculants (Kampouris et al., 2025). Positive responses have been reported for seed germination, root development, plant biomass, leaf area, and crop yield (Jamilah et al., 2025; Mendonça et al., 2026; Shahabirokni et al., 2025; Abdoli et al., 2025; Paul et al., 2025). The magnitude of these responses, however, varies substantially among crop species, soil conditions, and management practices, indicating that plant growth promotion cannot be attributed solely to the presence of biosurfactants. The principal mechanisms involved in biosurfactant-mediated plant growth promotion are summarized in Table 5.

Table 5. Processes influenced by biosurfactants and their potential contributions to plant growth

Source: Prepared by the authors.

Most available evidence has been obtained under controlled experimental conditions, whereas long-term field studies remain comparatively scarce (Sharma et al., 2025; Albuquerque et al., 2025). Plant responses are influenced by the interaction between biosurfactants, soil properties, native microbial communities, environmental conditions, and application strategy, making it difficult to establish broadly applicable recommendations. Defining the production systems in which biosurfactants consistently improve plant performance remains one of the main challenges for their wider adoption in agriculture.

3.5. Bioremediation Of Contaminated Soils

Agricultural intensification has contributed to the accumulation of contaminants in soil, including pesticide residues, fuel-derived hydrocarbons, fertilizers, and potentially toxic metals, compromising soil quality, ecosystem functioning, and crop productivity (Malla et al., 2026; Kumar, Arora, & Shadangi, 2026). Bioremediation has become an important strategy for reducing contaminant levels through biological processes that promote their transformation, degradation, or immobilization (Vuković Domanovac et al., 2025; Qattan, 2025). Within this context, biosurfactants have been investigated primarily because they modify the availability of contaminants to microorganisms rather than acting directly on the contaminants themselves (Handa, Kaur, & Chatterjee, 2025).

Their amphiphilic structure reduces surface and interfacial tension, promotes micelle formation, and increases the apparent solubility of hydrophobic compounds (Samant & Kaliappan, 2025; Satpute, Sati, & Pratap, 2026). These changes facilitate the desorption of contaminants retained in the soil matrix, increasing their accessibility to microbial degradation. Biosurfactants may also interact with potentially toxic metals through complexation processes that influence metal mobility and contribute to either contaminant removal or stabilization, depending on remediation objectives (Raheja et al., 2025). The effectiveness of these mechanisms, however, depends on contaminant chemistry, soil properties, and environmental conditions, which may lead to substantial variation among remediation systems.

The combined use of biosurfactants with contaminant-degrading microorganisms has produced encouraging results for the remediation of hydrocarbons, pesticides, and other persistent contaminants (Elias et al., 2025). Nevertheless, the positive effects reported under experimental conditions cannot be generalized to all contaminated environments because contaminant concentration, soil composition, microbial communities, and environmental conditions strongly influence remediation efficiency. The principal agricultural contaminants targeted by biosurfactant-assisted bioremediation, together with their mechanisms of action and potential environmental outcomes, are summarized in Table 6.

Table 6. Agricultural contaminants targeted by biosurfactant-assisted bioremediation and their potential environmental benefits.

Source: Prepared by the authors.

Most available studies have been conducted under laboratory or pilot-scale conditions, whereas field-scale validation remains comparatively limited (Aprilya et al., 2026; De Oliveira et al., 2026). In addition, increasing contaminant mobility does not necessarily translate into improved remediation if microbial degradation is insufficient or environmental conditions are unfavorable. Defining application strategies that balance contaminant availability with effective biodegradation remains one of the main challenges for the broader use of biosurfactants in the remediation of agricultural soils.

4. LIMITATIONS, CHALLENGES, AND FUTURE PERSPECTIVES

Research on agricultural applications of biosurfactants has expanded considerably in recent years, providing evidence of their potential for plant disease management, agricultural formulations, soil quality improvement, plant growth promotion, and bioremediation (Abdoli et al., 2025; Ansari et al., 2025; Marks, Nogueira, & Hungria, 2025; Sheth et al., 2026; Satpute, Sati, & Pratap, 2026). Much of this progress has established the biological and physicochemical versatility of biosurfactants. Their broader adoption in agriculture, however, is no longer limited by the identification of new applications but by the ability to translate experimental evidence into commercially viable technologies. Technological, agronomic, economic, and regulatory barriers continue to limit large-scale implementation and remain the main focus of current research (Begum, Mondal, & Mandal, 2026; Lavanya & Agarwala, 2026; Abdoli et al., 2025; Handa, Kaur, & Chatterjee, 2025).

4.1. Technological Challenges

The commercial competitiveness of biosurfactants remains closely associated with the efficiency of their production systems. Although numerous producing microorganisms and renewable substrates have been identified, manufacturing costs continue to exceed those of conventional surfactants because of limitations related to fermentation efficiency, industrial scale-up, downstream processing, and product recovery (Ahluwalia et al., 2025; Ganger et al., 2025; Garg et al., 2025). These production stages are closely interconnected, meaning that improvements in one part of the process do not necessarily result in economically viable manufacturing if limitations persist elsewhere.

Technological development also extends beyond biosurfactant production itself. Product performance depends on the compatibility of biosurfactants with fertilizers, pesticides, microbial inoculants, and other formulation components rather than on the properties of the biosurfactant alone (Paul et al., 2025). Consequently, overcoming technological barriers requires integrated production and formulation strategies capable of generating stable, reproducible, and economically competitive products. Even when these requirements are met, however, successful agricultural implementation ultimately depends on consistent performance under practical field conditions.

4.2. Agronomic Challenges

Addressing technological constraints alone is insufficient to ensure the successful adoption of biosurfactants in agriculture. Once production and formulation challenges have been overcome, biosurfactant-based products must also demonstrate consistent agronomic performance under the diverse environmental conditions encountered in commercial farming. Consequently, the transition from experimental studies to agricultural production systems remains one of the principal challenges for biosurfactant application (Adhikary et al., 2026).

Although positive responses have frequently been reported under laboratory and greenhouse conditions, these results are not consistently reproduced in the field, where crop species, soil properties, climatic conditions, management practices, and native microbial communities interact simultaneously (Khoulati et al., 2025). This environmental complexity contributes to considerable variation in reported responses and limits the development of recommendations that can be broadly applied across agricultural production systems.

Another challenge is the integration of biosurfactants into existing crop management practices. Synergistic effects have been reported when biosurfactants are combined with fertilizers, pesticides, and plant growth-promoting microorganisms, but evidence regarding formulation stability, compatibility, and agronomic performance under commercial conditions remains limited (Abitabile et al., 2025; Shaikat, Rabbani, & Ahamad, 2026). Likewise, environmental persistence varies according to soil and climatic conditions, influencing application frequency, product performance, and management decisions (Beretta et al., 2026).

A further limitation is the absence of standardized field evaluation protocols. Current studies differ substantially in biosurfactant type, formulation, crop species, soil characteristics, application methods, and environmental conditions, making direct comparisons difficult and limiting the identification of the factors that consistently determine agronomic performance. As evidence supporting agricultural applications continues to accumulate, research is increasingly focused on establishing standardized field evaluations that allow meaningful comparisons across agricultural production systems. Coordinated multi-location field trials and standardized evaluation protocols will therefore be essential to identify robust application strategies, generate comparable evidence, and support the commercial implementation of biosurfactants in agriculture (Da Silva et al., 2026; Khoulati et al., 2025; Barbosa et al., 2025).

4.3. Future Perspectives

Current research increasingly emphasizes the translation of experimental findings into commercially viable agricultural technologies. As evidence supporting the principal applications of biosurfactants continues to accumulate, research has progressively shifted toward improving production efficiency, formulation performance, and field reproducibility (Lavanya & Agarwala, 2026; Zheng et al., 2026; Maji et al., 2026).

Meeting these objectives will require greater integration between microbial biotechnology, formulation science, and agronomic research. Advances in microbial engineering, fermentation strategies, and renewable feedstocks are expected to improve production efficiency, whereas innovations in formulation technologies may enhance product stability, compatibility with agricultural inputs, and application performance (Sharma et al., 2025; Abitabile et al., 2025). Rather than functioning as isolated biological products, biosurfactants are increasingly being incorporated into integrated agricultural technologies, including controlled-release systems, multifunctional bioformulations, and precision agriculture approaches that seek to optimize product delivery and input-use efficiency (Matos et al., 2026; Valente et al., 2025; Kruger et al., 2025). At the same time, advances in omics technologies and systems biology continue to improve the understanding of microbial metabolism and biosynthetic pathways, supporting the identification of strains and production strategies better suited to agricultural applications (Shaikat, Rabbani, & Ahamad, 2026; Zheng et al., 2026).

The successful incorporation of biosurfactants into agricultural production systems will ultimately depend on advances beyond product development. Standardized production methods, harmonized field evaluation protocols, and regulatory frameworks adapted to biological products remain essential for generating comparable evidence and reducing uncertainty regarding field performance (Adhikary et al., 2026; Garg et al., 2025; Ahluwalia et al., 2025). Strengthening collaboration among researchers, industry, and regulatory agencies will also be important for accelerating technology transfer and establishing practical recommendations for commercial agriculture (Shaikat, Rabbani, & Ahamad, 2026). Overall, the literature indicates that the next stage of development will depend on transforming the current body of experimental evidence into reproducible agricultural technologies capable of delivering consistent technical, economic, and agronomic performance under commercial farming conditions.

5. CONCLUSION

The literature reviewed demonstrates that biosurfactants constitute a diverse group of microbial molecules whose physicochemical and biological properties support multiple agricultural applications. Their multifunctional nature enables simultaneous contributions to plant disease management, agricultural formulations, soil functioning, plant growth promotion, and the remediation of contaminated environments, highlighting their potential to support more sustainable agricultural production systems.

The current literature also indicates that the principal limitation is no longer demonstrating the versatility of biosurfactants but translating this knowledge into technologies that perform consistently under commercial agricultural conditions. Progress in production efficiency, formulation development, and field validation has expanded the feasibility of agricultural applications, yet variability in production systems, environmental conditions, and evaluation protocols continues to limit reproducibility and large-scale implementation.

Future advances will depend on integrating microbial biotechnology, process engineering, formulation science, and agronomic validation into coordinated development strategies. Equally important is the adoption of standardized production and field evaluation protocols capable of generating comparable evidence across crops, soils, and production systems. The broader contribution of biosurfactants to sustainable agriculture will therefore depend not on identifying additional applications, but on translating the existing body of knowledge into technologies that combine reproducible production, robust formulations, and consistent field performance under commercial farming conditions.

REFERENCES

ABD-ELSALAM, Kamel A. et al. Carriers, adjuvants, and surfactants in the formulation and application of biofungicides. In: ABD-ELSALAM, Kamel A.; STEFANO, Mariateresa Di (ed.). A Practical Approach to Biofungicide Formulation. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2025. p. 118–148. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003571230-6

ABDELMOTELEB, Ali; MORENO-RAMÍREZ, Lizbeth; VALDEZ-SALAS, Benjamín; SELEIMAN, Mahmoud F.; EL-HENDAWY, Salah; ALDHUWAIB, Khalid J.; ALOTAIBI, Majed; GONZÁLEZ-MENDOZA, Daniel. New Bacillus subtilis strains isolated from Prosopis glandulosa rhizosphere for suppressing Fusarium spp. and enhancing growth of Gossypium hirsutum L. Biology, v. 12, n. 1, art. 73, 2023. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/biology12010073.

ABDOLI, Sima et al. Unlocking the potential of biosurfactants in agriculture: novel applications and future directions. Sustainability, v. 17, n. 5, art. 2110, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17052110.

ABITABILE, Carla et al. Building sustainable futures: the bio-based fertilizer case-study. Bio-based and Applied Economics, v. 14, n. 1, p. 3–17, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.36253/bae-15786.

AHAMMAD, Golam Sagir; KIM, In Ho. Micelle-based phytogenic compounds in nonruminant nutrition: a review. Journal of Animal Physiology and Animal Nutrition, v. 109, n. 6, p. 1368–1383, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/jpn.70009.

AHLUWALIA, Ojasvini et al. Prospects and challenges regarding biosurfactants in advancing the petroleum industry. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, v. 13, art. 1697361, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2025.1697361.

ALOM, Khairul et al. Assessing environment impacts of chemical fertilizers consumption in Australia: State-level evidence. Environmental and Sustainability Indicators, v. 28, p. 101053, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.indic.2025.101053.

ANSARI, Nizamul Haque et al. Amino Acid-Based Biosurfactants: Promising and Ecofriendly Biomolecules for Attaining Sustainable Agriculture and Environmental Safety. Colloid Journal, v. 87, n. 1, p. 78-100, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1134/S1061933X24601021.

APRILYA, Siti Aldora Salsabila et al. Bioremediation of lead (Pb)-contaminated soil using Trichoderma: current insights and future perspectives. Environmental Pollutants and Bioavailability, v. 38, n. 1, art. 2670093, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/26395940.2026.2670093.

ASANTE, Kwaku Onwona-Hwesofour et al. Sustainable intensification: agroecosystem and plant nutrient management in a changing climate. In: Organic Fertilizers—Their Role in Sustainable Agriculture. London: IntechOpen, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5772/intechopen.100836.

ATHIRA, T. V.; ABDULLA, Mohamed Hatha. Beyond the freeze: unveiling the role of biosurfactant from polar regions in sustainable biotechnology applications—a review. Polar Biology, v. 49, n. 2, p. 41, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00300-026-03481-2.

AWADELKAREEM, Amir Mahgoub et al. Curtobacterium oceanosedimentum-derived biosurfactants as eco-friendly biocontrol agent with broad-spectrum antibacterial and antifungal properties for sustainable applications. World Journal of Microbiology and Biotechnology, v. 41, n. 5, art. 168, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11274-025-04351-7.

AWASTHI, Mehak et al. Biosurfactants in novel drug delivery: a natural approach to enhanced therapeutics. In: RUB, Malik Abdul; AZUM, Naved; KHAN, Anish; ALZAHRANI, Khalid A. (ed.). Industrial Applications of Individual and Mixed Surfactant Systems—Volume 2. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2026. p. 375–404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-9195-4_11.

BAHRINI, Insaf et al. Biosurfactants as next-generation antimicrobials: mechanistic insights and applications in antibiofilm strategies for combatting antimicrobial resistance. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's Archives of Pharmacology, v. 399, n. 2, p. 1769–1791, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00210-025-04276-6.

BAKR, Ramadan et al. The potential of beneficial microbes for sustainable alternative approaches to control phytopathogenic diseases. Microbiology Research, v. 16, n. 5, art. 105, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/microbiolres16050105.

BARBOSA, Mateus Florentino et al. Biological resources driving productivity: bioinputs for sustainable plant agriculture in Brazil. Sustainable Microbiology, v. 2, n. 3, qvaf011, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1093/sumbio/qvaf011.

BEGUM, Wasefa; MONDAL, Monohar Hossain; MANDAL, Ujjwal. Developing different industrial applications for microbial biosurfactants. In: RUB, Malik Abdul; AZUM, Naved; KHAN, Anish; ALZAHRANI, Khalid A. (ed.). Industrial Applications of Individual and Mixed Surfactant Systems—Volume 1. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2026. p. 41–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-4609-1_2.

BENDER, Leticia Eduarda; MULINARI, Jéssica; CHIOMENTO, José Luis Trevizan; COLLA, Luciane Maria. Employing Bacillus lipopeptides for sustainable management of phytopathogenic fungi in horticulture. Biocontrol Science and Technology, v. 36, n. 1, p. 1–26, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/09583157.2025.2574952

BERETTA, Gabriele et al. Biosurfactants and bioemulsifiers for soil remediation as a green solution from waste. Reviews in Environmental Science and Bio/Technology, v. 25, art. 16, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s11157-025-09761-3.

BUSTOS-VÁZQUEZ, Ma. Guadalupe et al. Recent advances in biosurfactant production in solid-state fermentation. Fermentation, v. 11, n. 10, p. 592, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation11100592.

CARMONA MARQUES, Pedro; FERNANDES, Pedro C. B.; SAMPAIO, Pedro; SILVA, Joaquim. Advances in biotechnology in the circular economy: a path to the sustainable use of resources. Sustainability, v. 17, n. 14, art. 6391, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17146391.

CHANG, Jing et al. Microbial Biosurfactants: A Bridge from Aquatic Environments to Subsurface Oil Recovery: Mechanisms, Challenges, Prospects. Life, v. 16, n. 3, p. 484, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/life16030484.

CHAUDHARY, Narendra Kumar et al. Biosurfactants’ importance in drug absorption enhancement. In: RUB, Malik Abdul et al. (ed.). Industrial Applications of Individual and Mixed Surfactant Systems—Volume 1. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2026. p. 133-152. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-4609-1_6.

CHAUHAN, Shivani; MOHANTY, Anee; MEENA, Sumer Singh. Unlocking the potential of rhamnolipids: production via agro-industrial waste valorization, market insights, recent advances, and applications. Biomass Conversion and Biorefinery, v. 15, n. 22, p. 28847–28876, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13399-025-06856-6.

CHEGINI, Mohadeseh; ZARE, Hossein. Advances in microbial biosurfactants: sustainable production, diverse microorganisms, and eco-friendly substrates. BiotechIntellect, v. 2, n. 1, p. e15 (1-19), 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.66224/BiotechIntellect.2.1.27.

CORRALES, Astrid et al. Purification and separation of bioproducts from yeast cells cultivated on lignocellulosic hydrolysates. In: VERDUYN, Chris; SATYANARAYANA, T.; DASGUPTA, Debojyoti (ed.). Yeast Biotechnology and Biorefinery. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2026. p. 375–404. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-22140-8.00016-9

COSTA, Everton Ricardo Carneiro et al. Tilapia viscera wastewater: an innovative substrate for sustainable biosurfactant production by Penicillium citrinum UCP 1183. Revista Brasileira de Ciências Ambientais, Rio de Janeiro, v. 60, e2524, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5327/Z2176-9478202502524

CUCU, Maria Alexandra et al. Utilizing environmentally friendly techniques for the sustainable control of plant pathogens: A review. Agronomy, v. 15, n. 7, art. 1551, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15071551.

DA SILVA, João Manoel et al. Bioinputs in sustainable agriculture: benefits, challenges, and pathways for resilient farming systems. Asian Journal of Research in Crop Science, v. 10, n. 2, p. 85-97, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9734/ajrcs/2025/v10i2354.

DE CARVALHO, Anna Paula Azevedo; WEITZ, David A.; CONTE-JUNIOR, Carlos Adam. Green oil-in-water nanoemulsions for delivery of phytochemicals with pesticidal activity for sustainable food production and safety. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, v. 25, n. 3, p. e70455, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.70455.

DE OLIVEIRA, Maria Auxiliadora et al. Biosurfactants used in the bioremediation of soils contaminated with hydrocarbons: overview of the state of the art and future perspectives. Recent Patents on Biotechnology, v. 20, n. 1, p. 3–24, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.2174/0118722083343490241130163344.

DENG, Ouping et al. Food-driven transformation of nitrogen fluxes with urbanization in China. Resources, Conservation and Recycling, v. 214, p. 108034, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.resconrec.2024.108034.

DHIMAN, Sunny et al. Nutritional enhancement of plant-based fermented foods: microbial innovations for a sustainable future. Fermentation, v. 11, n. 6, p. 346, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation11060346.

DI SARIO, Luciana et al. Plant biostimulants to enhance abiotic stress resilience in crops. International Journal of Molecular Sciences, v. 26, n. 3, art. 1129, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijms26031129.

ELIAS, Rodrigo Vital; INOUE, Miriam Hiroko; GUIMARÃES, Ana Carolina Dias; DE SOUZA, Mirella Franco. Abordagens biológicas para biorremediação de atrazine. ARACÊ, v. 7, n. 11, p. e9599, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.56238/arev7n11-025.

FÖRSTER, Carlos Rodríguez-Villa. Bio-Agricultural Inputs: The Coming Revolution. Agricultural Engineering Today, v. 49, n. 2, p. 13-14, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.52151/AET2025492.1826.

GARG, Rajni et al. Comprehensive review of the synthesis and sustainable applications of biosurfactants. Discover Applied Sciences, v. 7, n. 10, p. 1168, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-025-07603-z.

GAUR, Praveen Kumar et al. Functional roles of microbial biosurfactants in pharmaceutical formulation and targeted drug delivery. Journal of Surfactants and Detergents, v. 29, n. 3, p. 419-433, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jsde.70030.

GAURAV, Anand Kumar et al. Exploring the potential of actinomycetes for sustainable agriculture and industrial applications. 3 Biotech, v. 16, n. 2, art. 87, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s13205-026-04258-8.

GAWDIYA, Sandeep et al. Crop diversification as a cornerstone for sustainable agroecosystems: tackling biodiversity loss and global food system challenges. Discover Applied Sciences, v. 7, n. 5, p. 373, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42452-025-06855-z.

GOMIDE, Caroline Siqueira et al. The Potential of Remineralizers and Bioinputs as a Strategy for Sovereignty in Tropical Agriculture. In: MARTINS, Éder de Souza; THEODORO, Suzi Huff (ed.). Soil Remineralizers and Silicate Fertilizers: Regional Solutions to a Healthy Agriculture. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2026. p. 235-257. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-032-14656-4_12.

GONZALO, Almendros; GONZÁLEZ-PÉREZ, José A. Soil organic carbon sequestration mechanisms and the chemical nature of soil organic matter—A review. Sustainability, v. 17, n. 15, art. 6689, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/su17156689

GREWAL, Jasneet; GULATI, Jaspreet Singh. Production of biosurfactants. In: Sustainable Technologies for Value Addition to Biomass Waste. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2026. p. 539–564. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-36318-4.00026-1

GUPTA, Pallavi; GAUR, Prachi; SINGH, Rachana. Biosurfactant production from agro-industrial and food waste: a sustainable approach to waste management. Biotechnology and Applied Biochemistry, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/bab.70058

HANDA, Shristi; KAUR, Navneet; CHATTERJEE, Mary. Contributory role of biosurfactant in creating a sustainable environment. In: SOBTI, Ranbir Chander (ed.). Role of Science and Technology for Sustainable Future: Volume 2 – Applied Sciences and Technologies. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2025. p. 299-315. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-97-5177-8_16.

HAYAT, Muhammad Khizar; MAHMUD, Md. Nahid; MUNIZA, Nuzhat Tabassum; BATOOL, Rida; ULLAH, Qudrat; AL KAFI, Abdullah; HAIDER, Waqas. Biochar-based strategies for improving soil fertility and mitigating environmental pollution. Discover Environment, v. 4, n. 1, art. 222, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44274-026-00730-3.

HAYES, Michael H. B.; ROULIA, Maria. Relevance of organic matter compositions, structures and associations to soil aggregates and to sustainable productivity. Agronomy, v. 15, n. 9, art. 2182, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15092182.

HILMY, Nursyafi Amila et al. Agroindustrial waste and biosurfactant. In: KUMAR, V.; VARJANI, S.; SARMA, H. (ed.). Agroindustrial Waste Management: Towards a Sustainable Future. Singapore: Springer Nature, 2026. p. 393–428. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-2556-5_14.

HOLGUÍN-SALAS, Alehlí; ENRÍQUEZ-NÚÑEZ, Carlos Andrés; SÁENZ-MARTA, Claudia Isabel; NEVÁREZ-MOORILLÓN, Guadalupe Virginia. Biosurfactants produced by yeasts: environmental roles and biotechnological applications. Encyclopedia, v. 5, n. 4, art. 172, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/encyclopedia5040172

HSU, Chou-Yi et al. Biosurfactants: Properties, applications and emerging trends. South African Journal of Chemical Engineering, v. 53, p. 21-39, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.sajce.2025.04.002.

INDORIA, Shikha et al. Advantages of biosurfactants over chemical surfactants. In: RUB, Malik Abdul et al. (ed.). Industrial Applications of Individual and Mixed Surfactant Systems—Volume 2. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2026. p. 479-509. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-9195-4_15.

JAIN, Ashish; BHAGAT, Shrikrishna; REDDY, Udaykumar. Lipopeptides in medicine. In: SAYYED, Riyazali Z.; MUJUMDAR, Shilpa (ed.). Microbial Surfactants in Pharmaceuticals and Cosmetics. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2025. p. 314-338. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003424864-16.

JAMILAH, Jamilah et al. Biosurfactant-enriched organic fertilizer as a sustainable strategy to reduce chemical inputs and improve maize performance on Ultisols. SAINS TANAH – Journal of Soil Science and Agroclimatology, v. 22, n. 2, p. 171–179, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.20961/stjssa.v22i2.106698.

JEMIL, Nawel; BESBES, Imen; GHARBI, Yaakoub; TRIKI, Mohamed Ali; CHEFFI, Manel; MANRESA, Angeles; NASRI, Moncef; HMIDET, Noomen. Bacillus methylotrophicus DCS1: production of different lipopeptide families, in vitro antifungal activity and suppression of Fusarium wilt in tomato plants. Current Microbiology, v. 81, n. 6, art. 142, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00284-024-03660-6

JUI, Afsana Habib et al. Microbial biosurfactants: prospect and challenges for application in food industry. Food Reviews International, v. 42, n. 1, p. 181–214, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/87559129.2025.2478199.

KABEIL, Sanaa S. A. et al. Rhamnolipids bio-production and miscellaneous applications towards green technologies: a literature review. PeerJ, v. 13, p. e18981, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.7717/peerj.18981.

KAMPOURIS, Ioannis D. et al. Selective recruitment of beneficial microbes in the rhizosphere of maize affected by microbial inoculants, farming practice, and seasonal variations. Environmental Microbiome, v. 20, n. 1, art. 69, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s40793-025-00666-4.

KAPOOR, Ashish et al. Sustainable production of biofuels from lignocellulosic biomass using microbial applications: status, challenges and prospects. Molecular Biotechnology, v. 68, n. 4, p. 1649-1666, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12033-025-01479-5.

KHAN, Ehtisham Hassan et al. Elicitors in plant biology: types and defense mechanisms. In: SAYYED, Riyazali Z.; ARORA, N. K.; RASTOGI, Gaurav (ed.). Elicitors for Sustainable Crop Production: Overcoming Biotic Stress Challenges in Plants. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2025. p. 41–61. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-4700-0_3.

KHOULATI, Amine et al. Harnessing biostimulants for sustainable agriculture: innovations, challenges, and future prospects. Discover Agriculture, v. 3, n. 1, art. 56, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44279-025-00177-9

KIM, Ji Yeon et al. Beyond petrochemicals: challenges and opportunities in industrial-scale biomanufacturing. Nature Communications, v. 17, n. 1, p. 4819, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s41467-026-58187-6.

KUMAR, Anil et al. A comprehensive review on plant-soil interactions: microbial dynamics, nutrient cycling and sustainable crop production. Asian Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, v. 11, n. 2, p. 44–62, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.9734/AJSSPN/2025/v11i2266

KUMAR, Sumit; ARORA, Naveen Kumar; SHADANGI, Krushna Prasad (ed.). Development of Agro-Industrial Wastes as Adsorbent Materials: Applications and Future Scope. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003538936.

LARIBI, Amina et al. Valorization of olive mill wastewater via Yarrowia lipolytica: sustainable production of high-value metabolites and biocompounds—A review. Fermentation, v. 11, n. 6, p. 326, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation11060326.

LAVANYA, M.; AGARWALA, Rishabh. Advancements and challenges in the production of biosurfactants: a path toward sustainable surfactant alternatives. ChemBioEng Reviews, v. 13, n. 1, e70041, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/cben.70041.

LI, Wei et al. Revealing the complex relationship between urbanization and soil erosion by water in China. Environmental Impact Assessment Review, v. 116, p. 108148, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.eiar.2025.108148.

LOURENÇO, Madalena; DUARTE, Noélia; RIBEIRO, Isabel A. C. Exploring biosurfactants as antimicrobial approaches. Pharmaceuticals, v. 17, n. 9, p. 1239, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ph17091239.

LUONG, Albert D.; MOORTHY, Maruthapandi; LUONG, John H. T. Microbial biosurfactants: antimicrobial agents against pathogens. Macromol, v. 6, n. 1, p. 6, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/macromol6010006.

MACCHIA, Andrea; ZARATTI, Camilla; COLASANTI, Irene Angela; PRESTILEO, Fernanda; DE CARO, Tilde; VALENTINI, Federica. Bio-based surfactants in heritage conservation: performance, challenges and future directions. Chemistry – An Asian Journal, v. 20, n. 22, p. e70355, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/asia.70355.

MAJI, Debraj et al. Fermentative routes of microbial biosurfactants production: emerging trends, innovations and multifaceted applications. Bioprocess and Biosystems Engineering, p. 1-20, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00449-026-03321-x.

MALLA, Fayaz A. et al. Soil pollution remediation strategies and their environmental impact. In: Nonpoint Source Nitrogen Pollution. Amsterdam: Elsevier, 2026. p. 341–357. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-28840-1.00015-5.

MARKS, Bettina Berquó; NOGUEIRA, Marco Antonio; HUNGRIA, Mariangela. Microbial secondary metabolites and their use in achieving sustainable agriculture: present achievements and future challenges. Agronomy, v. 15, n. 6, p. 1350, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agronomy15061350.

MATOSINHOS, Renato Dias et al. Integrated enzymatic and fermentative pathways for next-generation biosurfactants: advances in process design, functionalization, and industrial scale-up. Fermentation, v. 12, n. 1, p. 31, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation12010031.

MENDONÇA, Rafael Mendonça et al. A promising lipopeptide production and application as biostimulant for seeds germinations. Projeção e Docência, v. 17, n. 1, e2544, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.54899/rpd.v17n1-2544

MENG, Yifei et al. Nanoparticle-assisted structural tailoring of trehalose lipid biosynthesis by Rhodococcus erythropolis WJ-2. RSC Advances, v. 16, n. 9, p. 8166-8177, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/D5RA09253A

MENIA, Monika et al. Agroecology: A pathway to sustainable agriculture and food system resilience. In: One Planet, One Health, One Future. Cambridge: Academic Press, 2026. p. 387-396. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/B978-0-443-38325-0.00001-0.

MHATRE, Ninad; SAIGER, Fatema; PRATAP, Amit P. Applications of Microbial Surfactants in Biotechnology. In: RUB, Malik Abdul et al. (ed.). Industrial Applications of Individual and Mixed Surfactant Systems—Volume 2. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2026. p. 121-153. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-9195-4_5.

MNIF, Inès; BOUASSIDA, Mouna; GHRIBI, Dhouha. Application of biosurfactants as remediation option in the bioremediation of synthetic dyes. Biodegradation, v. 37, n. 2, p. 64, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-026-10285-y

MOHANTY, Prajnasmita; MANYAPU, Vivek; MANDPE, Ashootosh. Improving soil health with plant-microbial interactions: prospects and developments. In: SINGH, Harikesh Bahadur; VAISHNAV, Anjali; SAYYED, Riyazali Z. (ed.). Soil Bioremediation. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025. p. 505–534. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-031-85678-5_20.

MORITA, Tomotake et al. A yeast glycolipid biosurfactant, mannosylerythritol lipid, shows potential moisturizing activity toward cultured human skin cells: the recovery effect of MEL-A on the SDS-damaged human skin cells. Journal of Oleo Science, v. 58, n. 12, p. 639–642, 2009. DOI: https://doi.org/10.5650/jos.58.639

MÜNßINGER, Sini; BECK, Alexander; ORABY, Amira; ZIBEK, Susanne. Past, present and future of glycolipids from Ustilaginaceae—A review on cellobiose lipids and mannosylerythritol lipids. Journal of Surfactants and Detergents, v. 27, n. 5, p. 647–689, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jsde.12764.

NWANKWO, Chidiebele Emmanuel Ikechukwu et al. Addressing emerging contaminants in agriculture affecting plant–soil interaction: a review on bio-based and nano-enhanced strategies for soil health and global food security (GFS). Discover Toxicology, v. 2, n. 1, p. 4, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s44339-025-00018-w.

OLAMITI, Gbeminiyi. Agrochemical implications for cereal production, processing, public health, and food security in sub-Saharan Africa. Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, v. 25, n. 2, p. 1-17, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46488/NEPT.2026.v25i02.D1835.

PAGANO, Mario et al. Advancements in agricultural nanotechnology: an updated review. Plants, v. 14, n. 18, art. 2939, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/plants14182939.

PAN, Yun et al. Bacillus‐Derived Lipopeptides as Green Biosurfactants: Structures, Functions, Production, and Safety for Sustainable Applications. Comprehensive Reviews in Food Science and Food Safety, v. 25, n. 3, p. e70508, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1111/1541-4337.70508.

PANDA, Subhabrata. Soil and Water Conservation for Sustainable Resources and Ecosystem Resilience. In: BREARS, Robert C. (ed.). The Palgrave Encyclopedia of Sustainable Resources and Ecosystem Resilience. Cham: Springer Nature Switzerland, 2025. p. 1-81. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-3-030-67776-3_30-1

PANDIT, Nisha Kumari; MEENA, Sumer Singh. Exploring sustainable biosurfactant production through waste valorization: emerging research trends and industrial applications. Waste and Biomass Valorization, v. 17, n. 2, p. 585-619, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12649-025-03169-4.

PANHWAR, Qurban Ali et al. Role of rhizospheric microbes in soil management. In: MEENA, Vijay Kumar; SHARMA, Sudhir Kumar; SHARMA, Rajesh Kumar (ed.). Rhizospheric Microbiomes. Boca Raton: Apple Academic Press, 2025. p. 41–88. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003516026-3.

PANICKER, Suneeta. Glycolipids from Pseudomonas and their applications in health and medicine. In: SAYYED, Riyazali Z.; MUJUMDAR, Shilpa (ed.). Microbial Surfactants in Pharmaceuticals and Cosmetics. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2025. p. 291-313. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003424864-15.

PAUL, Sourab et al. Technological advancement in sustainable production of biosurfactant using agro-industrial wastes: a review of enhanced bioprocessing and computational optimization techniques. Critical Reviews in Environmental Science and Technology, v. 55, n. 18, p. 1430-1454, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/10643389.2025.2543795.

QATTAN, Shaza Y. A. Harnessing bacterial consortia for effective bioremediation: targeted removal of heavy metals, hydrocarbons, and persistent pollutants. Environmental Sciences Europe, v. 37, n. 1, art. 85, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12302-025-01103-y.

RAFIQ, Muhammad Umair et al. Biofungicides: scale-up, production, and emerging innovations in sustainable disease management. In: ABD-ELSALAM, Kamel A.; DI STEFANO, Mariateresa (ed.). A Practical Approach to Biofungicide Formulation. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2025. p. 175–206. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003571230-8.

RAHEJA, Yashika et al. Advancing bioremediation: biosurfactants as catalysts for sustainable remediation. Biodegradation, v. 36, n. 3, art. 33, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-025-10128-2.

RAHIM, Hafeez Ur et al. Abiotic stresses in soils, their effects on plants, and mitigation strategies: a literature review. Chemistry and Ecology, v. 41, n. 4, p. 552–585, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02757540.2025.2481648.

RASHEED, Faiza et al. Unlocking the potential of biowaste: sustainable strategies to produce valuable industrial products. Journal of Environmental Quality, v. 54, n. 2, p. 319–334, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jeq2.20671

RATHER, Muzamil Ahmad et al. Biodegradation of crude oil by biosurfactant-producing microaerophilic bacterium Pseudomonas aeruginosa MAR1. Science of The Total Environment, v. 991, p. 179876, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1016/j.scitotenv.2025.179876

RÍOS-RUIZ, Winston Franz et al. Plant-growth-promoting microorganisms: their impact on crop quality and yield, with a focus on rice. International Journal of Plant Biology, v. 16, n. 1, art. 9, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/ijpb16010009.

RITA, Novia et al. Fungal analysis of Aspergillus niger as an alternative biosurfactant for microbial injection-enhanced oil recovery. Scientific Contributions Oil and Gas, v. 48, n. 1, p. 179–191, 2025.

ROMERO VEGA, Gloria; GALLO STAMPINO, Paola. Bio-based surfactants and biosurfactants: An overview and main characteristics. Molecules, v. 30, n. 4, p. 863, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/molecules30040863.

SAŁEK, Karina; EUSTON, Stephen R.; JANEK, Tomasz. Phase behaviour, functionality, and physicochemical characteristics of glycolipid surfactants of microbial origin. Frontiers in Bioengineering and Biotechnology, v. 10, p. 816613, 2022. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fbioe.2022.816613.

SAMANT, Bhupesh S.; KALIAPPAN, Raja. The use of surfactants in the extraction of active ingredients from natural resources: a comprehensive review. RSC Advances, v. 15, n. 29, p. 23569–23587, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1039/D5RA03441J.

SARANRAJ, P. et al. Microbial biosurfactants: sources, classification, properties and mechanism of interaction. In: SAYYED, R. Z.; EL-ENSHASY, H. A. (ed.). Microbial Surfactants. Boca Raton: CRC Press, 2022. p. 1–24. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1201/9781003247739-1

SATPUTE, Nikil; SATI, Abhinav; PRATAP, Amit P. Physicochemical behavior and applications of biosurfactants. In: RUB, Malik Abdul; AZUM, Naved; KHAN, Anish; ALZAHRANI, Khalid A. (ed.). Industrial Applications of Individual and Mixed Surfactant Systems—Volume 2. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2026. p. 265–307. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-9195-4_8.

SATPUTE, Surekha K. et al. Biosurfactants and bioemulsifiers from marine bacteria: current advances and perspectives. Chemistry and Ecology, v. 42, n. 3, p. 327-362, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1080/02757540.2026.2620439.

SETHI, Gangadhar et al. Enhancing soil health and crop productivity: the role of zinc-solubilizing bacteria in sustainable agriculture. Plant Growth Regulation, v. 105, n. 3, p. 601–617, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10725-024-01251-4.

SHAHABIROKNI, Mahdi et al. Impact of Pseudomonas putida KT2440 biosurfactant on soil nutrient availability and maize growth in calcareous soil: a comparative study with chelating agents. Journal of Soil Science and Plant Nutrition, v. 25, n. 3, p. 7767–7781, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42729-025-02166-5.

SHAIKAT, Bulbul; RABBANI, Tahsin Bin; AHAMAD, Salaman. Harnessing plant microbiomes for sustainable agriculture: integrating ecological complexity, microbial function, and translational insights. Microbial Bioactives, v. 9, n. 1, p. 1–14, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.25163/microbbioacts.9110616.

SHARMA, Jyoti; SUNDAR, Durai; SRIVASTAVA, Preeti. Biosurfactants: Potential Agents for Controlling Cellular Communication, Motility, and Antagonism. Frontiers in Molecular Biosciences, v. 8, p. 727070, 2021. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmolb.2021.727070.

SHARMA, Nisha et al. A comprehensive review on microbial production and significant applications of multifunctional biomolecules: biosurfactants. Biodegradation, v. 36, n. 2, p. 26, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10532-025-10121-9.

SHARMA, Rajat; LAMSAL, Buddhi P. Understanding bio-based surfactants, their production strategies, techno-economic viability, and future prospects of producing them on sugar-rich renewable resources. Processes, v. 13, n. 9, p. 2811, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13092811.

SHETH, Urjita et al. Application of biosurfactants in the preparation of sustainable agrochemicals. In: RUB, Malik Abdul; AZUM, Naved; KHAN, Anish; ALZAHRANI, Khalid A. (ed.). Industrial Applications of Individual and Mixed Surfactant Systems—Volume 2. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2026. p. 41–89. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-95-9195-4_3.

SHOKRI, Sajad et al. A review of yeast-derived emulsifiers developed through microbial fermentation for the food sector. Frontiers in Microbiology, v. 16, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2025.1745931.

SILVA, Renata R. da et al. Biosurfactants in Food: Advances, Innovative Applications and Functional Perspectives. Foods, v. 15, n. 3, p. 508, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/foods15030508.

SINGH, Akanksha; KUMAR, Sanjay. Exploring the functionality of microbes in fermented foods: technological advancements and future directions. Fermentation, v. 11, n. 6, p. 300, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/fermentation11060300.

SOUZA, Tancredo Augusto Feitosa de; MARTINS, Lindete Míria Vieira; HUNGRIA, Mariangela; FERNANDES-JÚNIOR, Paulo Ivan. Survey of scientific production on bio-inputs in Northern and Northeastern Brazil (2010–2025): a focus on plant growth-promoting microorganisms in legumes and grasses. Brazilian Journal of Microbiology, v. 57, art. 117, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s42770-026-01949-1.

SUBRAMANIAN, Venkataramanan et al. From the bench to the reactor: engineered filamentous fungi for biochemical and biomaterial production. Biotechnology for Biofuels and Bioproducts, v. 18, art. 113, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s13068-025-02712-8.

SULTANA, Rafat et al. Signaling and defence mechanism of jasmonic and salicylic acid response in pulse crops: role of WRKY transcription factors in stress response. Journal of Plant Growth Regulation, v. 44, n. 1, p. 5–21, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s00344-024-11540-7

SUN, Lingyun et al. Molecular mechanisms of root exudate-mediated remediation in soils co-contaminated with heavy metals and polycyclic aromatic hydrocarbons. Toxics, v. 13, n. 12, art. 1044, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/toxics13121044.

ȚOPA, Denis-Constantin et al. Sustainable practices for enhancing soil health and crop quality in modern agriculture: a review. Agriculture, v. 15, n. 9, art. 998, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/agriculture15090998.

TORNUK, Fatih; AKMAN, Perihan Kubra. Recent developments in the valorization of agri-food waste and byproducts by fermentation. Journal of the Science of Food and Agriculture, v. 106, n. 5, p. 2567–2577, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1002/jsfa.70160

UDDIN, Nazim et al. A review on biosurfactants with their broad spectrum applications in various fields. Nature Environment and Pollution Technology, v. 24, n. 1, p. 1-16, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.46488/NEPT.2025.v24i01.B4217.

ULLAH, Habib; SELVARAJAN, Ramganesh; LAU VETTER, Maggie C. Y. Genome-mining revealed biosurfactant production capacity and gene co-occurrence patterns in diverse ecosystems. Microbial Cell Factories, v. 25, n. 1, p. 84, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1186/s12934-026-02932-z.

VALERIO-AGUILAR, Kenneth et al. Identification of biosurfactant-producing fungi isolated from the Costa Rican mangrove. Uniciencia, v. 40, n. 1, p. 70–86, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.15359/ru.40-1.4.

VERMA, Amit B. et al. Understanding the impacts of herbicides, insecticides, and fungicide stress for crop plant growth and production. In: PANDEY, Pawan Kumar; SHUKLA, Gopal; PRASAD, Rajendra (ed.). Enhanced Crop Production Setup Under Various Micro and Nano Contaminants: Sustainable Use, Production and Future Prospects. Singapore: Springer Nature Singapore, 2025. p. 263–278. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/978-981-96-2332-5_14.

VUKOVIĆ DOMANOVAC, Marija; VOLF, Mirela; ŠABIĆ RUNJAVEC, Monika; TERZIĆ, Ivana. Sustainable and advanced strategies for bioremediation of highly contaminated wastewater. Processes, v. 13, n. 7, art. 2250, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/pr13072250.

WAHAB, Zainab Hussain Abdul; AL-SAHLANY, Shayma Thyab Gddoa. Bacterial biosurfactants as bioactive ingredients: surfactin’s role in food preservation, functional foods, and human health. Bacteria, v. 4, n. 4, p. 49, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/bacteria4040049.

WANG, Shuang; JIN, Pinjiao; ZHENG, Yanyan; WANG, Kangkang; CHEN, Jiaxin; LIU, Jiansheng; LI, Yonggang. Bacillus velezensis B105-8, a potential and efficient biocontrol agent in control of maize stalk rot caused by Fusarium graminearum. Frontiers in Microbiology, v. 15, art. 1462992, 2024. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3389/fmicb.2024.1462992.

XIAO, Zhenggao et al. Nano-agrochemical use in sustainable agriculture and environmental protection. Nature Reviews Earth & Environment, v. 7, p. 447-468, 2026. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1038/s43017-026-00796-w

YASIR, Muhammad; HOSSAIN, Abul; PRATAP-SINGH, Anubhav. Pesticide degradation: impacts on soil fertility and nutrient cycling. Environments, v. 12, n. 8, art. 272, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.3390/environments12080272.

YIMER, Arebu Hussen; TARNAWA, Akos. Advancing nutrient management strategies for sustainable crop productivity in a changing climate: a systematic review. The Scientific World Journal, v. 2025, art. 7101060, 2025. DOI: https://doi.org/10.1155/tswj/7101060.

¹ Discente do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Biotecnologia da Rede Nordeste de Biotecnologia (RENORBIO), Universidade Federal Rural de Pernambuco (UFRPE), Campus Sede, Recife, Pernambuco, Brasil. E-mail: [clique para visualizar o e-mail]acesse o artigo original para visualizar o e-mail

² Discente do Programa de Pós-Graduação em Desenvolvimento de Processos Ambientais, Universidade Católica de Pernambuco (UNICAP), Recife, Pernambuco, Brasil. E-mail: [clique para visualizar o e-mail]acesse o artigo original para visualizar o e-mail

³ Pesquisador do Instituto Agronômico de Pernambuco (IPA), Recife, Pernambuco, Brasil. E-mail: [clique para visualizar o e-mail]acesse o artigo original para visualizar o e-mail

⁴ Professora Titular da Universidade Católica de Pernambuco (UNICAP), Coordenadora do Centro Multiusuário de Análise e Caracterização de Biomoléculas e Superfície de Materiais (CEMACBIOS), Recife, Pernambuco, Brasil. E-mail: [clique para visualizar o e-mail]acesse o artigo original para visualizar o e-mail