Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29379215›Full record

ReviewNature reviews. Microbiology2018

Rhizobia: from saprophytes to endosymbionts.

Philip Poole, Vinoy Ramachandran, Jason Terpolilli

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Nature reviews. Microbiology, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 254 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
254citing papers in PubMed, 1 pooled it
–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

254 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Characterization of chemotaxis in soybean symbiontApplied and environmental microbiology · 2026
    Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Selection of aMicroorganisms · 2026
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Microorganisms · 2026
    Article
  20. Article

194 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

3 authors.

Philip PooleDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3RB, UK.
Vinoy RamachandranDepartment of Plant Sciences, University of Oxford, South Parks Road, Oxford OX1 3RB, UK.
Jason TerpolilliCentre for Rhizobium Studies, School of Veterinary and Life Sciences, Murdoch University, South Street, Perth, WA 6150, Australia.

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F004753/1Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F013159/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Rhizobia are some of the best-studied plant microbiota. These oligotrophic Alphaproteobacteria or Betaproteobacteria form symbioses with their legume hosts. Rhizobia must exist in soil and compete with other members of the microbiota before infecting legumes and forming N

Indexed as

FabaceaeNitrogen FixationPlant RootsRhizobiumSymbiosis

Identifiers

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.