Evidence map›Paper›PMID 12456784›Full record

ReviewMicrobiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR2002

Microbial biodiversity: approaches to experimental design and hypothesis testing in primary scientific literature from 1975 to 1999.

Cindy E Morris, Marc Bardin, Odile Berge, Pascale Frey-Klett, Nathalie Fromin, Hélène Girardin, Marie-Hélène Guinebretière, Philippe Lebaron, Jean M Thiéry, Marc Troussellier

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR, 2002. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Eukaryotic Cell Capture by Amplified MagneticFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Molecular approaches: advantages and artifacts in assessing bacterial diversity.Journal of industrial microbiology & biotechnology · 2007
    Review
  10. Sponge-associated microorganisms: evolution, ecology, and biotechnological potential.Microbiology and molecular biology reviews : MMBR · 2007
    Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Review
  15. Article
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

10 authors.

Cindy E MorrisStation de Pathologie Végétale, Station de Technologie de Produits Végétaux, France. morris@avignon.inra.fr
Marc Bardin
Odile Berge
Pascale Frey-Klett
Nathalie Fromin
Hélène Girardin
Marie-Hélène Guinebretière
Philippe Lebaron
Jean M Thiéry
Marc Troussellier

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Research interest in microbial biodiversity over the past 25 years has increased markedly as microbiologists have become interested in the significance of biodiversity for ecological processes and as the industrial, medical, and agricultural applications of this diversity have evolved. One major challenge for studies of microbial habitats is how to account for the diversity of extremely large and heterogeneous populations with samples that represent only a very small fraction of these populations. This review presents an analysis of the way in which the field of microbial biodiversity has exploited sampling, experimental design, and the process of hypothesis testing to meet this challenge. This review is based on a systematic analysis of 753 publications randomly sampled from the primary scientific literature from 1975 to 1999 concerning the microbial biodiversity of eight habitats related to water, soil, plants, and food. These publications illustrate a dominant and growing interest in questions concerning the effect of specific environmental factors on microbial biodiversity, the spatial and temporal heterogeneity of this biodiversity, and quantitative measures of population structure for most of the habitats covered here. Nevertheless, our analysis reveals that descriptions of sampling strategies or other information concerning the representativeness of the sample are often missing from publications, that there is very limited use of statistical tests of hypotheses, and that only a very few publications report the results of multiple independent tests of hypotheses. Examples are cited of different approaches and constraints to experimental design and hypothesis testing in studies of microbial biodiversity. To prompt a more rigorous approach to unambiguous evaluation of the impact of microbial biodiversity on ecological processes, we present guidelines for reporting information about experimental design, sampling strategies, and analyses of results in publications concerning microbial biodiversity.

Indexed as

BacteriaEcosystemResearch DesignDatabases as TopicEcologyPublications

Identifiers

PMID12456784
PMCPMC134657

What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.