Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36287902›Full record

ReviewToxics2022

Plant Resistance to Fungal Pathogens: Bibliometric Analysis and Visualization.

Yueyue Tang, Guandi He, Yeqing He, Tengbing He

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Toxics, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing 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

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

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. 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

4 authors.

Yueyue TangCollege of Agriculture, Guizhou University, Guiyang 550025, China.
Guandi HeCollege of Agriculture, Guizhou University, Guiyang 550025, China.
Yeqing HeCollege of Agriculture, Guizhou University, Guiyang 550025, China.
Tengbing HeCollege of Agriculture, Guizhou University, Guiyang 550025, China.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Plants are susceptible to fungal pathogen infection, threatening plant growth and development. Researchers worldwide have conducted extensive studies to address this issue and have published numerous articles on the subject, but they lack a scientometric evaluation. This study analyzed international research on the topic "Plant resistance to fungal pathogens" between 2008 and 2021, using the core database of the Web of Science (WoS). By searching the subject words "Plants", "Disease Resistance", and "Fungal Pathogens", we received 6687 articles. Bibliometric visualization software analyzes the most published countries, institutions, journals, authors, the most cited articles, and the most common keywords. The results show that the number of articles in the database has increased year by year, with the United States and China occupying the core positions, accounting for 46.16% of the total published articles worldwide. The United States Department of Agriculture (USDA) is the main publishing organization. Wang Guoliang is the author with the most published articles, and the Frontiers in Plant Science ranks first in published articles. The research on plant anti-fungal pathogens is booming, and international exchanges and cooperation need to be further strengthened. This paper summarizes five possible research ideas, from fungal pathogens, gene editing technology, extraction of secondary metabolites from plants as anti-fungal agents, identification of related signal pathways, fungal molecular databases, and development of nanomaterials, to provide data for related research.

Indexed as

diseasesfungal pathogensplant resistanceWeb of Science

Identifiers

PMID36287902
PMCPMC9609943

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.