Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28199101›Full record

ReviewJournal of natural products2017

Fungal Identification Using Molecular Tools: A Primer for the Natural Products Research Community.

Huzefa A Raja, Andrew N Miller, Cedric J Pearce, Nicholas H Oberlies

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Journal of natural products, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 337 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
337citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

What it found

Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.

The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.

2 · The registry

The trial behind it

Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.

Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

337 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. The role ofmBio · 2026
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. The Medicinal MushroomJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Review
  14. Detoxification of conifer antimicrobial defenses promotes entomopathogenic fungus infection of bark beetles.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2026
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Discovery of a novelMycoKeys · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

277 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

4 authors.

Huzefa A RajaDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of North Carolina at Greensboro , Greensboro, North Carolina 27402, United States.
Andrew N MillerIllinois Natural History Survey, University of Illinois , Champaign, Illinois 61820, United States.
Cedric J PearceMycosynthetix, Inc. , 505 Meadowland Drive, Suite 103, Hillsborough, North Carolina 27278, United States.
Nicholas H OberliesDepartment of Chemistry and Biochemistry, University of North Carolina at Greensboro , Greensboro, North Carolina 27402, United States.ORCID 0000-0002-0354-8464

Funding

Project 3:Isolation Chemistry of Filamentous Fungi and Biological EvaluationP01CA125066 · NCI · OHIO STATE UNIVERSITY · PI JIMMY ORJALA · 2007 to 2026
$27.2M
NCI NIH HHS P01 CA125066
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Fungi are morphologically, ecologically, metabolically, and phylogenetically diverse. They are known to produce numerous bioactive molecules, which makes them very useful for natural products researchers in their pursuit of discovering new chemical diversity with agricultural, industrial, and pharmaceutical applications. Despite their importance in natural products chemistry, identification of fungi remains a daunting task for chemists, especially those who do not work with a trained mycologist. The purpose of this review is to update natural products researchers about the tools available for molecular identification of fungi. In particular, we discuss (1) problems of using morphology alone in the identification of fungi to the species level; (2) the three nuclear ribosomal genes most commonly used in fungal identification and the potential advantages and limitations of the ITS region, which is the official DNA barcoding marker for species-level identification of fungi; (3) how to use NCBI-BLAST search for DNA barcoding, with a cautionary note regarding its limitations; (4) the numerous curated molecular databases containing fungal sequences; (5) the various protein-coding genes used to augment or supplant ITS in species-level identification of certain fungal groups; and (6) methods used in the construction of phylogenetic trees from DNA sequences to facilitate fungal species identification. We recommend that, whenever possible, both morphology and molecular data be used for fungal identification. Our goal is that this review will provide a set of standardized procedures for the molecular identification of fungi that can be utilized by the natural products research community.

Indexed as

PhylogenyBiological ProductsDNAFungiMolecular StructureResearchBiological ProductsDNA

Identifiers

PMID28199101
PMCPMC5368684

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.