ArticleBMC plant biology2026
Apple replant disease resistance in different apple rootstocks evaluated using microbiomic and metabolomic analyses.
Article in BMC plant 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.
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
9 authors.
Funding
Abstract
backgroundApple replant disease (ARD) is a critical obstacle to the sustainable development of apple (Malus domestica Borkh.) agriculture. The use of resistant rootstocks has been adopted as a method for the long-term, effective prevention and control of ARD.
resultsThis study evaluated the responses of seven apple rootstocks to ARD stress, including five that have shown ARD resistance (14-30, 14-54, Jizhen 1 [J1], Jizhen 2 [J2], and Jizhen 3 [J3]) and two that are strongly and weakly ARD-resistant (G935 and M26, respectively). We measured plant growth and physiological indices, and determined ARD tolerance using membership function and principal component analyses (PCA). J3 exhibited the best performance among all rootstocks, maintaining higher biomass, photosynthetic rates, chlorophyll content, and superoxide dismutase (SOD) and peroxidase (POD) activity under ARD stress. The rootstocks displayed decreasing ARD resistance in the order: J3 > 14-54 >14-30 > G935 > M26 > J1 > J2. High-throughput sequencing, liquid chromatography–mass spectroscopy, and metabolomics analyses revealed that the high-resistance J3 and low-resistance J2 rootstocks had distinct rhizosphere microbial and metabolic profiles. J3 was associated with greater abundance of beneficial microbes, such as those in the genera Bacillus, Pseudomonas, Pontibacter, and Glomus, which were in turn correlated with improved soil nutrient availability and ARD tolerance. Metabolomic analysis identified 108 differential metabolites including flavonoids and carboxylic acids; compounds such as 4',5,7-trihydroxy-3-methoxyflavanone and trans-3-feruloylcorosolic acid were positively associated with both beneficial microbes and ARD resistance. Thus, the J3 rootstock gained enhanced ARD tolerance through recruiting beneficial rhizosphere microbes and modulating soil metabolites.
conclusionsThese results provide a scientific basis for screening ARD-resistant apple rootstocks and improving apple tree breeding programs.
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.