ArticleMicroorganisms2024
Systematic Evaluation of Biotic and Abiotic Factors in Antifungal Microorganism Screening.
Article in Microorganisms, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.
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.
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.
Who cites it
0 citing papers in PubMed.
No citing paper in PubMed yet.
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Microorganisms have significant potential to control fungal contamination in various foods. However, the identification of strains that exhibit robust antifungal activity poses challenges due to highly context-dependent responses. Therefore, to fully exploit the potential of isolates as antifungal agents, it is crucial to systematically evaluate them in a variety of biotic and abiotic contexts. Here, we present an adaptable and scalable method using a robotic platform to study the properties of 1022 isolates obtained from maple sap. We tested the antifungal activity of isolates alone or in pairs on M17 + lactose (LM17), plate count agar (PCA), and sucrose-allantoin (SALN) culture media against
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.