MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4414519976 · doi:10.2478/jofnem-2025-0041

MicroRNAs in plant-parasitic nematodes: what are they and why should we care?

2025· review· en· W4414519976 on OpenAlexafffund
Dave T. Ste‐Croix, Benjamin Mimee

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Nematology · 2025
Typereview
Languageen
FieldAgricultural and Biological Sciences
TopicNematode management and characterization studies
Canadian institutionsCégep Saint-Jean-sur-RichelieuAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
FundersAgriculture and Agri-Food Canada
KeywordsmicroRNAFunction (biology)GeneRegulation of gene expressionGene expressionDiversity (politics)

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Plant-parasitic nematodes (PPNs) establish intimate interactions with their host plants, leading to significant economic losses worldwide. The molecular mechanisms underlying parasitism are complex, requiring tight regulation of numerous genes. MicroRNAs (miRNAs), small non-coding RNAs, regulate gene expression at the post-transcriptional level by binding to target messenger RNAs. However, the diversity and functional roles of miRNAs in PPNs are only beginning to be uncovered. This review summarizes the current knowledge on the nature, biogenesis, functions, and trafficking of miRNAs in PPNs. Beyond advancing our understanding of gene regulation throughout the nematode life cycle and during parasitism, miRNA characterization holds significant promise for novel control strategies. Emerging evidence suggests that miRNAs may function across kingdoms, modulating gene expression in host plants during parasitic interactions. We highlight compelling examples from other pathosystems and discuss preliminary findings on miRNA-mediated communication between PPNs and their hosts. Finally, we provide an overview of the main computational tools and databases available for identifying and predicting miRNAs and their targets, aimed at supporting researchers interested in this emerging field.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.002
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Not applicable · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Review · Consensus signal: Review
Teacher disagreement score0.002
Threshold uncertainty score0.006

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.002
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0010.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.001
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0010.002
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0020.002
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0020.001

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.

Opus teacher head0.063
GPT teacher head0.314
Teacher spread0.251 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designNot applicable
Domainnot available
GenreReview

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".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2025
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of NematologySame topicNematode management and characterization studiesFrench-language works237,207