Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42143197›Full record

ReviewHeredity2026

Worming out defence strategies: mechanisms of immunity through the lens of genetic screens in C. elegans.

Manish Grover, Domenica Ippolito, Michalis Barkoulas

Abstract readReview
PubMed Publisher
In one paragraph

Review in Heredity, 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

3 authors.

Manish GroverDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College, London, UK. manish.grover@ahduni.edu.in.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0002-1625-7930
Domenica IppolitoDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College, London, UK.
Michalis BarkoulasDepartment of Life Sciences, Imperial College, London, UK. m.barkoulas@imperial.ac.uk.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-1974-7668

Funding

RCUK | Biotechnology and Biological Sciences Research Council (BBSRC) BB/X001865/1Schweizerischer Nationalfonds zur Förderung der Wissenschaftlichen Forschung (Swiss National Science Foundation) P500PB_214381Wellcome Trust (Wellcome) 219448/Z/19/Z
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Since Sydney Brenner's foundational work in 1974, Caenorhabditis elegans has served as an impactful model for biological discovery primarily driven by genetic approaches, including mutagenesis-based screens and RNAi-based functional genomics. We discuss here how genetic screens in C. elegans have advanced our understanding of innate immunity mechanisms by comparing signalling pathways and responses to a wide range of bacteria, viruses, and eukaryotic pathogens including oomycetes, and microsporidia. Screens have uncovered both evolutionarily conserved pathways and species-specific mechanisms of nematode immunity across multiple functional categories. These include mediators of pathogen recognition that specifically detect microbial patterns or infection-associated damage, surveillance immunity systems that sense pathogen-induced cellular dysfunction, and regulatory mechanisms that control the activation of immune signalling or balance it with physiological costs. A major theme emerging from these studies is the importance of cross-tissue immune communication, as C. elegans coordinates responses between multiple tissues including neurons, intestine, and epidermis through complex signalling networks. Powerful genetic approaches, coupled with the continued development of new tools in the community, position C. elegans as an attractive whole-animal model for understanding fundamental principles of host-pathogen interactions and the evolutionary origins of innate immunity.

Identifiers

PMID42143197

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.