ReviewInternational journal of molecular sciences2026
Comparative Wound Healing Processes in Plants and Animals: Bioinspired Strategies for Advancing Regenerative Medicine.
Review in International journal of molecular sciences, 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
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Wound healing is a fundamental biological process essential to maintaining structural integrity and survival across both plant and animal life. Despite the profound evolutionary distance separating these kingdoms, wound healing provides one of those momentous occasions when these biological universes collide, revealing significant evolutionary parallels in the core mechanisms of healing, despite clear molecular and physiological differences. However, two challenges have hindered systematic cross-kingdom comparisons. First, unlike animal wound healing, the major phases of plant wound healing have not been organized into a universally accepted classification. Second, no comparative framework exists for systematically comparing wound-healing processes across plant and animal kingdoms. To address these challenges, we developed a comparative classification framework that organizes wound healing into three functional phases: (1) bioelectrical signaling, (2) immune responses, and (3) tissue formation and remodeling. This classification defines the major phases of plant wound healing, while the comparative framework establishes a common basis for systematic cross-kingdom comparison. Through comparative analysis, multiple shared cellular and molecular mechanisms were identified. These findings led to a conceptual model termed the hybrid-wound healing system, integrating plant- and animal-derived regenerative responses and providing a theoretical basis for future bioinspired regenerative strategies. Within this system, living plant stem cells are proposed as central biological components that may potentially act as intelligent pharmaceutical microfactories, releasing bioactive molecules in suitable microenvironments. This approach represents a hypothetical future strategy requiring extensive preclinical validation to strategies based on extracts, conditioned media, extracellular vesicles, or isolated bioactive compounds. Collectively, this descriptive review establishes a conceptual foundation for future investigations in plant biology, wound healing, and regenerative medicine.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What Socratic 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 Socratic graph.