Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34436499›Full record

ReviewMetabolites2021

Unravelling Plant Responses to Stress-The Importance of Targeted and Untargeted Metabolomics.

James William Allwood, Alex Williams, Henriette Uthe, Nicole M van Dam, Luis A J Mur, Murray R Grant, Pierre Pétriacq

Open access · goldAbstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Metabolites, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 49 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
49citing papers in PubMed
10.4field-weighted citation impact, top 2% 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

49 citing papers in PubMed, 102 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Characterization ofJournal of fungi (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Beyond Resistance Genes: Silencing Susceptibility.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Harnessing endophytes and Multi-Omics for sustainable Colchicine biosynthesis.World journal of microbiology & biotechnology · 2026
    Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Metabolomic Analysis of Tomato Plants Treated With Garlic Extract,Plant-environment interactions (Hoboken, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

7 authors at 6 institutions in 3 countries.

James William AllwoodEnvironmental and Biochemical Sciences, James Hutton Institute, Errol Road, Invergowrie, Dundee DD2 5DA, UK.ORCID 0000-0001-6433-2694
Alex WilliamsSchool of Earth and Environmental Sciences, The University of Manchester, Oxford Road, Manchester M13 9PT, UK.ORCID 0000-0003-3894-304X
Henriette UtheGerman Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Molecular Interaction Ecology Group, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, Puschstr. 4, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.
Nicole M van DamGerman Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research (iDiv) Halle-Jena-Leipzig, Molecular Interaction Ecology Group, Friedrich-Schiller University Jena, Puschstr. 4, 04103 Leipzig, Germany.ORCID 0000-0003-2622-5446
Luis A J MurInstitute of Biological, Environmental and Rural Sciences (IBERS), Edward Llwyd Building, Aberystwyth University, Aberystwyth SY23 3DA, UK.ORCID 0000-0002-0961-9817
Murray R GrantGibbet Hill Campus, School of Life Sciences, The University of Warwick, Coventry CV4 7AL, UK.
Pierre PétriacqUMR 1332 Fruit Biology and Pathology, Centre INRAE de Nouvelle Aquitaine Bordeaux, University of Bordeaux, 33140 Villenave d'Ornon, France.ORCID 0000-0001-8151-7420
German Centre for Integrative Biodiversity Research · DEAberystwyth University · GBJames Hutton Institute · GBUniversité de Bordeaux · FRUniversity of Manchester · GBUniversity of Warwick · GB

Funding

Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council BB/F005903/1
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Climate change and an increasing population, present a massive global challenge with respect to environmentally sustainable nutritious food production. Crop yield enhancements, through breeding, are decreasing, whilst agricultural intensification is constrained by emerging, re-emerging, and endemic pests and pathogens, accounting for ~30% of global crop losses, as well as mounting abiotic stress pressures, due to climate change. Metabolomics approaches have previously contributed to our knowledge within the fields of molecular plant pathology and plant-insect interactions. However, these remain incredibly challenging targets, due to the vast diversity in metabolite volatility and polarity, heterogeneous mixtures of pathogen and plant cells, as well as rapid rates of metabolite turn-over. Unravelling the systematic biochemical responses of plants to various individual and combined stresses, involves monitoring signaling compounds, secondary messengers, phytohormones, and defensive and protective chemicals. This demands both targeted and untargeted metabolomics approaches, as well as a range of enzymatic assays, protein assays, and proteomic and transcriptomic technologies. In this review, we focus upon the technical and biological challenges of measuring the metabolome associated with plant stress. We illustrate the challenges, with relevant examples from bacterial and fungal molecular pathologies, plant-insect interactions, and abiotic and combined stress in the environment. We also discuss future prospects from both the perspective of key innovative metabolomic technologies and their deployment in breeding for stress resistance.

Indexed as

abiotic stressbiotic stressbreedingmetabolomicsplant–insect interactionsplant pathologystress resistancesystems biologytargeteduntargeted

Identifiers

PMID34436499
PMCPMC8398504
OpenAlexW3195956986

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.