Bacteria used in the biological control of plant-parasitic nematodes: populations, mechanisms of action, and future prospects
Bibliographic record
Abstract
As a group of important natural enemies of nematode pests, nematophagous bacteria exhibit diverse modes of action: these include parasitizing; producing toxins, antibiotics, or enzymes; competing for nutrients; inducing systemic resistance of plants; and promoting plant health. They act synergistically on nematodes through the direct suppression of nematodes, promoting plant growth, and facilitating the rhizosphere colonization and activity of microbial antagonists. This review details the nematophagous bacteria known to date, including parasitic bacteria, opportunistic parasitic bacteria, rhizobacteria, Cry protein-forming bacteria, endophytic bacteria and symbiotic bacteria. We focus on recent research developments concerning their pathogenic mechanisms at the biochemical and molecular levels. Increased understanding of the molecular basis of the various pathogenic mechanisms of the nematophagous bacteria could potentially enhance their value as effective biological control agents. We also review a number of molecular biological approaches currently used in the study of bacterial pathogenesis in nematodes. We discuss their merits, limitations and potential uses.
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.002 | 0.002 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.002 | 0.002 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".