Evidence map›Paper›PMID 40350752›Full record

ReviewThe New phytologist2025

Advancing forest pathology: the need for community-driven molecular experimental model systems.

Anne G Oostlander, André Fleißner, Bernard Slippers

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in The New phytologist, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
2citing papers in PubMed
–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

2 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. 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

3 authors.

Anne G OostlanderInstitute of Genetics, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, 38106, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1545-7727
André FleißnerInstitute of Genetics, Technische Universität Braunschweig, Braunschweig, 38106, Germany.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0001-5841-3199
Bernard SlippersDepartment of Biochemistry, Genetics and Microbiology, Forestry and Agricultural Biotechnology Institute, University of Pretoria, Pretoria, 0002, South Africa.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1491-3858

Funding

European Union's Horizon 2020 research and innovation programme (RISE) through the Marie Skłodowska-Curie grant, with the project acronym "Mycobiomics" 101008129
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Forests world-wide are under escalating threat from emerging and invasive fungal and oomycete pathogens, driven by globalization and shifting climate dynamics. Effective strategies to manage the current scale and rate of changes in forest health remain hindered by our limited ability to study the underlying mechanisms of pathogen-host and pathogen-microbiome interactions, especially at a molecular and cellular level, compared to general plant pathology, where experimental and model systems exist. Such models facilitate the integration of diverse methodologies from a broader base of the research community, allowing for a more holistic and deeper examination of complex research questions. Here, we propose a framework for the development of such model systems also for forest pathology. This goal is more feasible than ever, thanks to rapid technological advancements, increasing open data availability and a globally interconnected research community. These factors create a unique opportunity to integrate ecosystem-focused research in forest pathology with a unified model organism strategy. Achieving this goal will require a dedicated community effort in the coming years, as such model systems are not discovered but built.

Indexed as

ForestsModels, BiologicalPlant DiseasesPlant PathologyHost-Pathogen Interactionsforest healthmolecular plant pathologypathobiomepathosystemtree–microbe interactions

Identifiers

PMID40350752
PMCPMC12267908

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-ND
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.