Evidence map›Paper›PMID 38867725›Full record

ReviewiMeta2022

Toward understanding the genetic bases underlying plant-mediated "cry for help" to the microbiota.

Zhenghong Wang, Yi Song

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in iMeta, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 68 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
68citing 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

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

  1. Root colonization by beneficial rhizobacteria.FEMS microbiology reviews · 2024
    Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Review

8 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

2 authors.

Zhenghong WangInstitute of Plant and Food Science, Department of Biology University of Science and Technology Shenzhen China.
Yi SongInstitute of Plant and Food Science, Department of Biology University of Science and Technology Shenzhen China.ORCID 0000-0002-7129-7900

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Canonical plant stress biology research has focused mainly on the dynamic regulation of internal genetic pathways in stress responses. Increasingly more studies suggest that plant-mediated timely reshaping of the microbiota could also confer benefits in responding to certain biotic and abiotic stresses. This has led to the "cry for help" hypothesis, which is supported by the identification of plant genetic regulators integrating biotic/abiotic stress signaling and microbiota sculpting. Although diverse genetic mutants have been reported to affect microbiota composition, it has been challenging to confirm the causal link between specific microbiota changes and plant phenotypic outputs (e.g., fitness benefits) due to the complexity of microbial community composition. This limits the understanding of the relevance of plant-mediated microbiota changes. We reviewed the genetic bases of host-mediated reshaping of beneficial microbiota in response to biotic and abiotic stresses, and summarized the practical approaches linking microbiota changes and "functional outputs" in plants. Further understanding of the key regulators and pathways governing the assembly of stress-alleviating microbiota would benefit the design of crops that could dynamically enlist beneficial microbiota under conditions of stress.

Indexed as

fitnessmicrobiotaplantregulationSynCom

Identifiers

PMID38867725
PMCPMC10989820

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.