Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28993761›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2017

PCR and Omics Based Techniques to Study the Diversity, Ecology and Biology of Anaerobic Fungi: Insights, Challenges and Opportunities.

Joan E Edwards, Robert J Forster, Tony M Callaghan, Veronika Dollhofer, Sumit S Dagar, Yanfen Cheng, Jongsoo Chang, Sandra Kittelmann, Katerina Fliegerova, Anil K Puniya and 5 more

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 62 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
62citing 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

62 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Classification of Mycena andSensors (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. OMICS and Other Advanced Technologies in Mycological Applications.Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023
    Review

2 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

15 authors.

Joan E EdwardsLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University & ResearchWageningen, Netherlands.
Robert J ForsterLethbridge Research and Development Centre, Agriculture and Agri-Food CanadaLethbridge, AB, Canada.
Tony M CallaghanDepartment for Quality Assurance and Analytics, Bavarian State Research Center for AgricultureFreising, Germany.
Veronika DollhoferDepartment for Quality Assurance and Analytics, Bavarian State Research Center for AgricultureFreising, Germany.
Sumit S DagarBioenergy Group, Agharkar Research InstitutePune, India.
Yanfen ChengLaboratory of Gastrointestinal Microbiology, Nanjing Agricultural UniversityNanjing, China.
Jongsoo ChangDepartment of Agricultural Science, Korea National Open UniversitySeoul, South Korea.
Sandra KittelmannGrasslands Research Centre, AgResearch Ltd.Palmerston North, New Zealand.
Katerina FliegerovaInstitute of Animal Physiology and Genetics, Czech Academy of SciencesPrague, Czechia.
Anil K PuniyaCollege of Dairy Science and Technology, Guru Angad Dev Veterinary and Animal Sciences UniversityLudhiana, India.
John K HenskeDepartment of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Santa BarbaraSanta Barbara, CA, United States.
Sean P GilmoreDepartment of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Santa BarbaraSanta Barbara, CA, United States.
Michelle A O'MalleyDepartment of Chemical Engineering, University of California, Santa BarbaraSanta Barbara, CA, United States.
Gareth W GriffithInstitute of Biological Environmental and Rural Sciences, Aberystwyth UniversityAberystwyth, United Kingdom.
Hauke SmidtLaboratory of Microbiology, Wageningen University & ResearchWageningen, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Anaerobic fungi (phylum Neocallimastigomycota) are common inhabitants of the digestive tract of mammalian herbivores, and in the rumen, can account for up to 20% of the microbial biomass. Anaerobic fungi play a primary role in the degradation of lignocellulosic plant material. They also have a syntrophic interaction with methanogenic archaea, which increases their fiber degradation activity. To date, nine anaerobic fungal genera have been described, with further novel taxonomic groupings known to exist based on culture-independent molecular surveys. However, the true extent of their diversity may be even more extensively underestimated as anaerobic fungi continue being discovered in yet unexplored gut and non-gut environments. Additionally many studies are now known to have used primers that provide incomplete coverage of the Neocallimastigomycota. For ecological studies the internal transcribed spacer 1 region (ITS1) has been the taxonomic marker of choice, but due to various limitations the large subunit rRNA (LSU) is now being increasingly used. How the continued expansion of our knowledge regarding anaerobic fungal diversity will impact on our understanding of their biology and ecological role remains unclear; particularly as it is becoming apparent that anaerobic fungi display niche differentiation. As a consequence, there is a need to move beyond the broad generalization of anaerobic fungi as fiber-degraders, and explore the fundamental differences that underpin their ability to exist in distinct ecological niches. Application of genomics, transcriptomics, proteomics and metabolomics to their study in pure/mixed cultures and environmental samples will be invaluable in this process. To date the genomes and transcriptomes of several characterized anaerobic fungal isolates have been successfully generated. In contrast, the application of proteomics and metabolomics to anaerobic fungal analysis is still in its infancy. A central problem for all analyses, however, is the limited functional annotation of anaerobic fungal sequence data. There is therefore an urgent need to expand information held within publicly available reference databases. Once this challenge is overcome, along with improved sample collection and extraction, the application of these techniques will be key in furthering our understanding of the ecological role and impact of anaerobic fungi in the wide range of environments they inhabit.

Indexed as

anaerobic fungigenomicsmetabolomics(meta) transcriptomicsNeocallimastigomycotaphylogenyproteomicsrumen

Identifiers

PMID28993761
PMCPMC5622200

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.