Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41652090›Full record

ReviewFunctional & integrative genomics2026

Status and advancement of root-knot nematode management strategies and the emerging CRISPR/Cas biotechnology application.

Xiaoping Pan, Ugur Yildiz, Sarah K Armstrong, Kaitlyn Bissonnette

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Functional & integrative genomics, 2026. 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. Review
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

4 authors.

Xiaoping PanDepartment of Biology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, 27858, USA. panx@ecu.edu.
Ugur YildizDepartment of Biology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, 27858, USA.
Sarah K ArmstrongDepartment of Biology, East Carolina University, Greenville, NC, 27858, USA.
Kaitlyn BissonnetteCotton Incorporated, Cary, NC, 27513, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Root-knot nematodes (RKNs), Meloidogyne spp., exhibit a broad host range, threatening more than 3000 species of plants, including agriculturally important crops such as cotton (Gossypium hirsutum), tomato (Lycopersicon esculentum) and rice (Oryza sativa). Among the over 90 RKN species, the four most prevalent are M. incognita, M. arenaria, M. javanica, and M. hapla, with M. incognita being the most damaging. This paper reviewed the current RKN management strategies, including chemical nematicides, biological control, crop rotation, and resistant varieties, with a focus on the application of the revolutionary CRISPR/Cas genome editing tool in developing RKN resistance in plants. CRISPR/Cas has been widely utilized for improving crop traits due to its specificity, streamline, and inheritability. Recent progress has demonstrated the simplicity and robustness of CRISPR/Cas technology in improving plant traits. Among these, the development of nematode resistance by CRISPR/Cas knocking out of plant compatibility factors in model and commercial plants, has achieved significant progress. This review summarizes the RKN parasitism mechanisms and plant compatibility factors that would be promising CRISPR/Cas targets. The fundamentals and key aspects of CRISPR/Cas genome editing technology are addressed and discussed, and an example experimental pipeline for developing nematode resistance in cotton is described.

Indexed as

CRISPR-Cas SystemsCrops, AgriculturalGene EditingPlant DiseasesTylenchoideaAnimalsBiotechnologyDisease ResistanceGossypiumPlant RootsPlants, Genetically ModifiedCottonCRISPR/Cas9Crop improvementGenome editingNematode resistanceRoot-knot nematodes

Identifiers

PMID41652090
PMCPMC12881027

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.