Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34685928›Full record

ReviewPlants (Basel, Switzerland)2021

General Limitations to Endophytic Entomopathogenic Fungi Use as Plant Growth Promoters, Pests and Pathogens Biocontrol Agents.

Bamisope Steve Bamisile, Junaid Ali Siddiqui, Komivi Senyo Akutse, Luis Carlos Ramos Aguila, Yijuan Xu

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Plants (Basel, Switzerland), 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 22 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
22citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Beauvericin production by endophytic and epiphyticFrontiers in fungal biology · 2025
    Article
  12. Review
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Review
  17. Review
  18. Review
  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

5 authors.

Bamisope Steve BamisileDepartment of Entomology, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5163-3631
Junaid Ali SiddiquiDepartment of Entomology, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China.ORCID 0000-0001-6626-2626
Komivi Senyo AkutsePlant Health Theme, International Centre of Insect Physiology and Ecology, Nairobi 00100, Kenya.ORCID 0000-0002-2124-1626
Luis Carlos Ramos AguilaState Key Laboratory of Ecological Pest Control for Fujian and Taiwan Crops, College of Plant Protection, Fujian Agriculture and Forestry University, Fuzhou 350002, China.ORCID 0000-0001-5355-2368
Yijuan XuDepartment of Entomology, South China Agricultural University, Guangzhou 510642, China.

Funding

South China Agricultural University 272116
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The multiple roles of fungal entomopathogens in host plants' growth promotion, pest and pathogen management have drawn huge attention for investigation. Endophytic species are known to influence various activities of their associated host plants, and the endophyte-colonized plants have been demonstrated to gain huge benefits from these symbiotic associations. The potential application of fungal endophytes as alternative to inorganic fertilizers for crop improvement has often been proposed. Similarly, various strains of insect pathogenic fungi have been formulated for use as mycopesticides and have been suggested as long-term replacement for the synthetic pesticides that are commonly in use. The numerous concerns about the negative effects of synthetic chemical pesticides have also driven attention towards developing eco-friendly pest management techniques. However, several factors have been underlined to be militating the successful adoption of entomopathogenic fungi and fungal endophytes as plant promoting, pests and diseases control bio-agents. The difficulties in isolation and characterization of novel strains, negative effects of geographical location, vegetation type and human disturbance on fungal entomopathogens, are among the numerous setbacks that have been documented. Although, the latest advances in biotechnology and microbial studies have provided means of overcoming many of these problems. For instance, studies have suggested measures for mitigating the negative effects of biotic and abiotic stressors on entomopathogenic fungi in inundative application on the field, or when applied in the form of fungal endophytes. In spite of these efforts, more studies are needed to be done to achieve the goal of improving the overall effectiveness and increase in the level of acceptance of entomopathogenic fungi and their products as an integral part of the integrated pest management programs, as well as potential adoption as an alternative to inorganic fertilizers and pesticides.

Indexed as

biological controlbiotechnologymutualismorganic fertilizersplant-fungal interactionsplant nutrients

Identifiers

PMID34685928
PMCPMC8540635

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.