Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41098532›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2025

Endophytic

Claire Reichardt, David Estes, Caitlin M Carlson, Cameron R Currie, Daniel S May

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2025. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 1 paper.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
1citing 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

1 citing paper in PubMed.

  1. 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

5 authors.

Claire ReichardtDepartment of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States.
David EstesDepartment of Chemistry, Washington College, Chestertown, MD, United States.
Caitlin M CarlsonDepartment of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States.
Cameron R CurrieDepartment of Bacteriology, University of Wisconsin-Madison, Madison, WI, United States.
Daniel S MayDepartment of Chemistry, Washington College, Chestertown, MD, United States.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Honey bees are the most common pollinator of crops worldwide. However, our reliance on honey bees to pollinate pesticide-treated monoculture crops, combined with their pest and disease susceptibility, have led honey bee populations to fluctuate in recent years. Current treatments for honey bee bacterial and fungal diseases are inadequate due to poor safety profiles and increased pathogen resistance to these treatments. There has been renewed interest in discovering natural products from actinobacteria associated with bees to use as new hive treatments; however, few studies have determined whether these microbes are truly unique to bees or part of their broader environment. We isolated actinobacteria from plant pollen and hive pollen stores and found that the isolated

Indexed as

actinobacteriaApis melliferaendophytenatural productsPaenibacillus larvaesecondary metabolitesStreptomyces

Identifiers

PMID41098532
PMCPMC12518290

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.