Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29173800›Full record

ReviewTrends in cell biology2018

Zebrafish Infection: From Pathogenesis to Cell Biology.

Vincenzo Torraca, Serge Mostowy

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Trends in cell biology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 99 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
99citing 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

99 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Cystic fibrosis: insights from zebrafish models.Disease models & mechanisms · 2026
    Review
  3. A programmableApplied and environmental microbiology · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Co-zorbs: Motile, multispecies biofilms aid transport of diverse bacterial species.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2025
    Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Zebrafish (International journal of molecular sciences · 2024
    Review
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

39 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

2 authors.

Vincenzo TorracaSection of Microbiology, MRC Centre for Molecular Bacteriology and Infection, Imperial College London, London, UK.
Serge MostowySection of Microbiology, MRC Centre for Molecular Bacteriology and Infection, Imperial College London, London, UK. Electronic address: s.mostowy@imperial.ac.uk.

Funding

Wellcome Trust 206444/Z/17/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The study of host-pathogen interactions has illuminated fundamental research avenues in both infection and cell biology. Zebrafish (Danio rerio) larvae are genetically tractable, optically accessible, and present a fully functional innate immune system with macrophages and neutrophils that mimic their mammalian counterparts. A wide variety of pathogenic bacteria have been investigated using zebrafish models, providing unprecedented resolution of the cellular response to infection in vivo. In this review, we illustrate how zebrafish models have contributed to our understanding of cellular microbiology by providing an in vivo platform to study host-pathogen interactions from the single cell to whole animal level. We also highlight discoveries made from zebrafish infection that hold great promise for translation into novel therapies for humans.

Indexed as

Disease Models, AnimalAnimalsAnimals, Genetically ModifiedCytological TechniquesHost-Pathogen InteractionsHumansImmunity, InnateLarvaNeutrophilsZebrafishautophagybacterial infectioncellular microbiologyinflammationinnate immunityzebrafish

Identifiers

PMID29173800
PMCPMC5777827

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.