Review3 Biotech2025
Exploring the modern approaches to enhance fungal endophyte-derived bioactive secondary metabolites.
Review in 3 Biotech, 2025. 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
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Over the past few decades, microbial-derived bioactive compounds have been tested for antiviral, antimicrobial, and anticancer properties. In addition, fungal-derived bioactive secondary metabolites (SMs) are increasingly being suggested as suitable alternative sources of potent bioactive compounds. The development of suitable, precise in vitro and in vivo screening techniques may contribute to identifying the biochemical and physiological effects of compounds. This advancement in bioassay evaluation techniques helps identify potential bioactive microbes rapidly. The main obstacles, however, have been the production of insufficient amounts of chemicals, endophytes' attenuation or loss of ability to produce the molecule of interest when grown in cultures, and fungal endophytes' failure to exhibit their full biosynthetic potential in lab conditions. These have led to the use of small chemical elicitors that activate the silent biosynthetic gene clusters (BGCs) in fungi, causing epigenetic alterations that increase the amount of desired metabolites or trigger the synthesis of hitherto unknown compounds. The silent BGCs were activated to maximize production of bioactive secondary metabolites, thereby increasing the yield of desired compounds or triggering the synthesis of novel metabolites. Other strategies include gene knocking, inducing mutations, heterologous expression, one strain-many compounds (OSMAC), epigenetic modifications, etc. This review is focused on the mechanism of plant-microbe interaction in enhancing the biosynthesis of fungal metabolites along with the BGCs for the biosynthesis of the bioactive fungal metabolites. Furthermore, we also discuss the genomic mining approaches for BGCs, the role of ribosomal engineering, precursor feeding, and various elicitors to explore the structural diversity of novel bioactive compounds.
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.