Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42644768›Full record

ReviewFEMS microbiology reviews2026

From holobionts to habitats: opportunities and limitations of microbiome-assisted restoration strategies of marine ecosystem engineers.

Sofie Peeters, Chloé Stévenne, H Julia van Duijnhoven, Marcellina Rola, Manuela Quiroga-Pérez, Aschwin H Engelen, Gerard Muyzer, Pedro R Frade, Olivier De Clerck

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in FEMS microbiology reviews, 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

9 authors.

Sofie PeetersPhycology Research Group, Department of Biology, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0009-0007-4032-6194
Chloé StévenneZoological Department III, Natural History Museum Vienna, 1010 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0001-6877-3796
H Julia van DuijnhovenCentro de Ciências do Mar do Algarve (CCMAR/CIMAR LA), Universidade do Algarve, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0003-1519-6889
Marcellina RolaZoological Department III, Natural History Museum Vienna, 1010 Vienna, Austria.
Manuela Quiroga-PérezZoological Department III, Natural History Museum Vienna, 1010 Vienna, Austria.
Aschwin H EngelenCentro de Ciências do Mar do Algarve (CCMAR/CIMAR LA), Universidade do Algarve, 8005-139 Faro, Portugal.ORCID 0000-0002-9579-9606
Gerard MuyzerMicrobial Systems Ecology, Department of Freshwater and Marine Ecology, Institute for Biodiversity and Ecosystem Dynamics, University of Amsterdam, 1098 XH Amsterdam, Netherlands.ORCID 0000-0002-2422-0732
Pedro R FradeZoological Department III, Natural History Museum Vienna, 1010 Vienna, Austria.ORCID 0000-0002-4010-255X
Olivier De ClerckPhycology Research Group, Department of Biology, Ghent University, 9000 Ghent, Belgium.ORCID 0000-0002-3699-8402

Funding

EMBRC-Belgium I001621NEuropean UnionFoundation for Science and Technology LA/P/0101/2020Foundation for Science and Technology UID/04326/2025Foundation for Science and Technology UID/PRR/04326/2025FWF I 5838-BResearch Foundation-Flanders G0G3921N
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Marine ecosystem engineers such as corals, seaweeds, and seagrasses are foundational to coastal ecosystems, yet are declining at unprecedented rates due to accelerating climate and anthropogenic pressures. Microbiome-based approaches have attracted attention as a promising avenue to enhance the resilience and recovery of these organisms. Over the past decade, diverse marine probiotic microbes have been isolated and shown to positively influence key host life functions, including growth, development, reproduction, responses to environmental stressors, and pathogen defence. However, current research remains confined to laboratory settings, with few practical field applications tested or utilised, likely driven by practical and technological challenges and lacking communication between science and policy. To help close this gap, we propose a set of risk and success assessment criteria for microbiome-assisted restoration. This framework is built around four pillars: (1) ensuring environmental compatibility of candidate probiotics, (2) establishing scientific validation for their mechanisms of action, (3) securing legal clarity before application, and (4) implementing mandatory in situ monitoring to evaluate ecological outcomes. By integrating these pillars into a cycle of risk assessment, monitoring, and adaptive management, microbiome-assisted restoration could progress from an experimental concept to a practical application complementing existing conservation tools, strengthening the resilience of these ecosystems.

Indexed as

Aquatic OrganismsEcosystemEnvironmental Restoration and RemediationMicrobiotaAnimalsConservation of Natural ResourcesProbioticsclimate changeconservationholobiontpolicyprobioticsrestoration

Identifiers

PMID42644768
PMCPMC13679408

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.