Evidence map›Paper›PMID 41883747›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in fungal biology2026

CAZome comparison in relation to host plant for selected

Hazal Kandemir, Mao Peng, Max Koster, Johannes Z Groenewald, Pedro W Crous, Andrei S Steindorff, Ronald P de Vries

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in fungal biology, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

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

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

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

7 authors.

Hazal Kandemir *Evolutionary Phytopathology, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Mao Peng *Fungal Physiology, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Max KosterEvolutionary Phytopathology, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Johannes Z GroenewaldEvolutionary Phytopathology, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Pedro W CrousEvolutionary Phytopathology, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.
Andrei S SteindorffU. S. Department of Energy Joint Genome Institute, Lawrence Berkeley National Laboratory, Berkeley, CA, United States.
Ronald P de VriesFungal Physiology, Westerdijk Fungal Biodiversity Institute, Utrecht, Netherlands.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Introduction: While most studies focus on the effectors involved in plant infection, another important aspect is the degradation of the plant cell wall, as this is the main physical barrier protecting the plant from pathogens. The plant cell wall mainly consists of polysaccharides, proteins and the aromatic polymer lignin, but the type of polysaccharide differs significantly between plant types, species and tissues. It can therefore be expected that pathogens of specific plants have evolved to produce those plant polysaccharide degrading enzymes that match the polysaccharides in the cell wall of their host plant. Methods: In this study, we compared the plant polysaccharide degradation potential of 56 Results and discussion: Our results show that the CAZy content of these fungi does not correlate with their genome-based phylogeny, indicating that the CAZome has evolved separately from the overall genome, possibly under different selection pressures. In some cases, clear adaptation of the fungal genome to the host plant of the fungus can be observed, including an indication of parallel evolution among Sordariomycetes and

Indexed as

CAZydothidiomycetesplant pathogenic fungiplant polysaccharide degradationsordariomycetes

Identifiers

PMID41883747
PMCPMC13008963

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.