Evidence map›Paper›PMID 42809337›Full record

ReviewMicrobiology (Reading, England)2026

Sampling and analysis methods for detecting and monitoring airborne plant pathogens and fungal diversity.

Jonathan S West, Gail G M Canning, Rohan B E Kimber

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microbiology (Reading, England), 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Not yet cited in PubMed.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
0citing papers in PubMed
–field-weighted citation impact
1 · What the graph read from it

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.

2 · The registry

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.

3 · Its place in the literature

Who cites it

0 citing papers in PubMed.

No citing paper in PubMed yet.

4 · The record

Corrections and comments

PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.

5 · Who and what money

Authors and funding

3 authors.

Jonathan S WestRothamsted Research, Harpenden, AL5 2JQ, UK.
Gail G M CanningRothamsted Research, Harpenden, AL5 2JQ, UK.
Rohan B E KimberSouth Australian Research and Development Institute (SARDI), Adelaide, South Australia, Australia.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Many important plant diseases are caused by airborne spores. This review explains the aerobiology of plant pathogens, sampling methods for collection of airborne spores, merits of different post-capture diagnostic methods (microscopy, immunology and DNA-based diagnostics) and non-capture (optical or imaging) methods to classify airborne particles. Different sampling, downstream processing and diagnostic methods can affect the efficiency of detection of certain species due to differences in traits such as spore size, adhesive surfaces, electrostatic charge, hydrophobicity, physical toughness and copy number of target DNA sequences. These considerations and an understanding of dispersal must be understood by all engaged in practical or academic measurement of bioaerosols, whether for plant pathology, fungal ecology or to measure biodiversity. In addition to surveillance of changes in pathogen populations, for example, for antimicrobial resistance or pathotype, the review describes how air sampling can provide accurate and cost-effective forecasting of imminent plant disease. The scale of spore dispersal processes and impacts on sampling strategies (e.g. spatial density of spore traps and sampling height above ground) for broad-acre or small-scale but high-value crops is also discussed. The fundamental concept behind these processes is the aerobiology pathway, which describes the production, release, dispersal, deposition and resulting effect, which, for air-dispersed plant pathogens, is plant disease. In addition to the seasonality to spore production for many fungi, each component of the aerobiology pathway is affected by the weather, which causes different types of spores to be released under different meteorological conditions or at different times of day and to disperse in different ways. Dispersal processes of fungal spores in air have been modelled and apply irrespective of pathogens or non-pathogenic fungi, or to spores of individuals that are insensitive to fungicides or not. Often, we do not know the location of spore sources or their relative source strength, which makes sampling strategies difficult to optimize initially, and the best strategy will vary from pathogen to pathogen and according to the rationale for monitoring and consequences of 'missing' a spore event.

Indexed as

Air MicrobiologyBiodiversityEnvironmental MonitoringFungiPlant DiseasesPlantsSpores, FungalAerobiologybioaerosolbiodiversityeDNAplant diseasespore dispersalspore traps

Identifiers

PMID42809337
PMCPMC13625851

What Socratic holds

Textmetadata
Read underepoch 390

Registered trials

None linked

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.