Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31772307›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2019

A new perspective on fungal metabolites: identification of bioactive compounds from fungi using zebrafish embryogenesis as read-out.

Jelmer Hoeksma, Tim Misset, Christie Wever, Johan Kemmink, John Kruijtzer, Kees Versluis, Rob M J Liskamp, Geert Jan Boons, Albert J R Heck, Teun Boekhout and 1 more

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2019. 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
3.9field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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, 45 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Anticancer Effect of Mycotoxins FromInternational journal of microbiology · 2024
    Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Journal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2022
    Review
  13. Review
  14. Monomethylsulochrin isolated from biomass extract ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2022
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

11 authors at 5 institutions in 3 countries.

Jelmer HoeksmaHubrecht Institute - KNAW and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Tim MissetHubrecht Institute - KNAW and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Christie WeverHubrecht Institute - KNAW and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Johan KemminkUtrecht University, Chemical Biology & Drug Discovery, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
John KruijtzerUtrecht University, Chemical Biology & Drug Discovery, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Kees VersluisUtrecht University, Biomolecular Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Rob M J LiskampUtrecht University, Chemical Biology & Drug Discovery, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0001-8897-8975
Geert Jan BoonsUtrecht University, Chemical Biology & Drug Discovery, Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Albert J R HeckUtrecht University, Biomolecular Mass Spectrometry and Proteomics, Bijvoet Center for Biomolecular Research and Utrecht Institute for Pharmaceutical Sciences, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Teun BoekhoutWesterdijk Institute for Fungal Biodiversity - KNAW, Utrecht, The Netherlands.
Jeroen den HertogHubrecht Institute - KNAW and University Medical Center Utrecht, Utrecht, The Netherlands. j.denhertog@hubrecht.eu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-8642-8088
Utrecht University · NLUniversity Medical Center Utrecht · NLInstitute for Biodiversity · DELeiden University · NLUniversity of Groningen · NL

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

There is a constant need for new therapeutic compounds. Fungi have proven to be an excellent, but underexplored source for biologically active compounds with therapeutic potential. Here, we combine mycology, embryology and chemistry by testing secondary metabolites from more than 10,000 species of fungi for biological activity using developing zebrafish (Danio rerio) embryos. Zebrafish development is an excellent model for high-throughput screening. Development is rapid, multiple cell types are assessed simultaneously and embryos are available in high numbers. We found that 1,526 fungal strains produced secondary metabolites with biological activity in the zebrafish bioassay. The active compounds from 39 selected fungi were purified by liquid-liquid extraction and preparative HPLC. 34 compounds were identified by a combination of chemical analyses, including LCMS, UV-Vis spectroscopy/ spectrophotometry, high resolution mass spectrometry and NMR. Our results demonstrate that fungi express a wide variety of biologically active compounds, consisting of both known therapeutic compounds as well as relatively unexplored compounds. Understanding their biological activity in zebrafish may provide insight into underlying biological processes as well as mode of action. Together, this information may provide the first step towards lead compound development for therapeutic drug development.

Indexed as

AnimalsChromatography, High Pressure LiquidDrug DiscoveryEmbryonic DevelopmentFungiHigh-Throughput Screening AssaysPhotoelectron SpectroscopyZebrafish

Identifiers

PMID31772307
PMCPMC6879544
OpenAlexW2990751541

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.