The DOI matches its Crossref record; 260 of the 260 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
A critical review on exploiting the pharmaceutical potential of plant endophytic fungi
Abstract
The escalating demand for secondary metabolites in international markets poses a severe threat to many plant species. An unscrupulous collection is also the immediate challenge to the survival of many unthreatened as well as vulnerable plants. Fungal endophytes have emerged in recent years as a promising substitute for sources of plant secondary metabolites. Many appealing secondary metabolites with potent antibacterial, antifungal, insecticidal, antioxidant, cytotoxic and anticancer properties have been discovered from endophytic fungi. Concerning their distinctive genetic and metabolic diversity and promising activities, they hold the plausible application in medicine and industry. However, there is little success in utilizing the pharmaceutical potential of fungal endophytes. Cutting-edge research is desirable to establish and bolster in vitro biosynthetic proficiency of fungal endophytes. Modern biotechnological techniques (such as multilocus sequence typing (MLST), metabolomics, metagenomics and next-generation sequencing (NGS) technologies) and bioinformatics approaches can fill a gap in fungal endophyte research. The present review focuses on how advanced chemical, biotechnological and computational molecular biology methods can be used for robust exploitation of bioactive compounds from these microorganisms.
Overview
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
Statistics
Verification
Claims the paper makes
The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.
Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
Citations
Cites
Thompson, J. D., Higgins, D. G., & Gibson, T. J. (1994) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/22.22.4673 · Cited by 64,617
Mosmann, T. (1983) · Journal of Immunological Methods · doi:10.1016/0022-1759(83)90303-4 · Cited by 56,104
MEGA6: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 6.0
Tamura, K., Stecher, G., Peterson, D., Filipski, A., & Kumar, S. (2013) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/mst197 · Cited by 47,205
MEGA7: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis Version 7.0 for Bigger Datasets
Kumar, S., Stecher, G., & Tamura, K. (2016) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msw054 · Cited by 44,059
Thompson, J. (1997) · Nucleic Acids Research · doi:10.1093/nar/25.24.4876 · Cited by 38,993
MEGA X: Molecular Evolutionary Genetics Analysis across Computing Platforms
Kumar, S., Stecher, G., Li, M., Knyaz, C., & Tamura, K. (2018) · Molecular Biology and Evolution · doi:10.1093/molbev/msy096 · Cited by 37,529
Amplification and direct sequencing of fungal ribosomal RNA genes for phylogenetics
White, T. J., Bruns, T., Lee, S., & Taylor, J. (1990) · PCR Protocols · doi:10.1016/b978-0-12-372180-8.50042-1 · Cited by 36,648
QIIME allows analysis of high-throughput community sequencing data
Caporaso, J. G., Kuczynski, J., Stombaugh, J., Bittinger, K., Bushman, F. D., Costello, E. K., Fierer, N., Peña, A. G., Goodrich, J. K., Gordon, J. I., et al. (2010) · Nature Methods · doi:10.1038/nmeth.f.303 · Cited by 34,887
RAxML version 8: a tool for phylogenetic analysis and post-analysis of large phylogenies
Stamatakis, A. (2014) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btu033 · Cited by 32,291
MrBayes 3: Bayesian phylogenetic inference under mixed models
Ronquist, F., & Huelsenbeck, J. P. (2003) · Bioinformatics · doi:10.1093/bioinformatics/btg180 · Cited by 29,077
Metadata
- Authors
- Gupta, S., Chaturvedi, P., Kulkarni, M. G., & Van Staden, J.
- Venue
- Biotechnology Advances
- Publisher
- Elsevier BV
- Published
- 2020-03
- Volume
- 39
- Pages
- 107462
- ISSN
- 0734-9750 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2981489178
- Cited by
- 346
- References
- 260
- FWCI
- 20.10
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- closed
About these checks
Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.
Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.
Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.
What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›
Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A critical review on exploiting the pharmaceutical potential of plant endophytic fungi. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2019.107462
- The paper
- Gupta, S., Chaturvedi, P., Kulkarni, M. G., & Van Staden, J. (2020). A critical review on exploiting the pharmaceutical potential of plant endophytic fungi. Biotechnology Advances. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.biotechadv.2019.107462
Data sources
Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.
Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).
Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.