ReviewFEMS microbiology reviews2026
From holobionts to habitats: opportunities and limitations of microbiome-assisted restoration strategies of marine ecosystem engineers.
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.
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
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
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.