Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28934343›Full record

ArticlePloS one2017

Disparate gain and loss of parasitic abilities among nematode lineages.

Martijn Holterman, Akbar Karegar, Paul Mooijman, Hanny van Megen, Sven van den Elsen, Mariette T W Vervoort, Casper W Quist, Gerrit Karssen, Wilfrida Decraemer, Charles H Opperman and 5 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in PloS one, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Rapid Detection of the Strawberry Foliar NematodeInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Phylogenetic studies on threeJournal of nematology · 2019
    Article
  14. Article
  15. Shifts in the Active Rhizobiome Paralleling LowFrontiers in plant science · 2019
    Article
  16. Functional Variation of Two Novel Cellulases,International journal of molecular sciences · 2018
    Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
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

15 authors.

Martijn HoltermanLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Akbar KaregarDepartment of Plant Protection, School of Agriculture, Shiraz University, Shiraz, Iran.
Paul MooijmanLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Hanny van MegenLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Sven van den ElsenLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Mariette T W VervoortLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Casper W QuistLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Gerrit KarssenNational Plant Protection Organization, Wageningen Nematode Collection, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Wilfrida DecraemerNematology Research Unit, Department of Biology, Ghent University, Ghent, Belgium.
Charles H OppermanNorth Carolina State University, Department of Plant Pathology, Raleigh, United States of America.
David M BirdNorth Carolina State University, Department of Plant Pathology, Raleigh, United States of America.
Jan KammengaLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Aska GoverseLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Geert SmantLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.
Johannes HelderLaboratory of Nematology, Department of Plant Sciences, Wageningen University, Wageningen, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-0408-3985

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plant parasitism has arisen time and again in multiple phyla, including bacteria, fungi, insects and nematodes. In most of these organismal groups, the overwhelming diversity hampers a robust reconstruction of the origins and diversification patterns of this trophic lifestyle. Being a moderately diversified phylum with ≈ 4,100 plant parasites (15% of total biodiversity) subdivided over four independent lineages, nematodes constitute a major organismal group for which the genesis of plant parasitism could be mapped. Since substantial crop losses worldwide have been attributed to less than 1% of these plant parasites, research efforts are severely biased towards this minority. With the first molecular characterisation of numerous basal and supposedly harmless plant parasites as well as their non-parasitic relatives, we were able to generate a comprehensive molecular framework that allows for the reconstruction of trophic diversification for a complete phylum. In each lineage plant parasites reside in a single taxonomic grouping (family or order), and by taking the coverage of the next lower taxonomic level as a measure for representation, 50, 67, 100 and 85% of the known diversity was included. We revealed distinct gain and loss patterns with regard to plant parasitism per se as well as host exploitation strategies between these lineages. Our map of parasitic nematode biodiversity also revealed an unanticipated time reversal in which the two most ancient lineages showed the lowest level of ecological diversification and vice versa.

Indexed as

Host-Parasite InteractionsAnimalsEvolution, MolecularNematodaPhylogenyPlants

Identifiers

PMID28934343
PMCPMC5608397

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.