Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19698104›Full record

ArticleGenome biology2009

Community-wide analysis of microbial genome sequence signatures.

Gregory J Dick, Anders F Andersson, Brett J Baker, Sheri L Simmons, Brian C Thomas, A Pepper Yelton, Jillian F Banfield

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Genome biology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 321 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
321citing 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

321 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2026
    Article
  6. Article
  7. Computational Microbial and Viral Ecology Analysis.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2026
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

261 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

7 authors.

Gregory J DickDepartment of Earth and Planetary Science, University of California, Berkeley, CA 94720, USA. gdick@umich.edu
Anders F Andersson
Brett J Baker
Sheri L Simmons
Brian C Thomas
A Pepper Yelton
Jillian F Banfield

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundAnalyses of DNA sequences from cultivated microorganisms have revealed genome-wide, taxa-specific nucleotide compositional characteristics, referred to as genome signatures. These signatures have far-reaching implications for understanding genome evolution and potential application in classification of metagenomic sequence fragments. However, little is known regarding the distribution of genome signatures in natural microbial communities or the extent to which environmental factors shape them.

resultsWe analyzed metagenomic sequence data from two acidophilic biofilm communities, including composite genomes reconstructed for nine archaea, three bacteria, and numerous associated viruses, as well as thousands of unassigned fragments from strain variants and low-abundance organisms. Genome signatures, in the form of tetranucleotide frequencies analyzed by emergent self-organizing maps, segregated sequences from all known populations sharing < 50 to 60% average amino acid identity and revealed previously unknown genomic clusters corresponding to low-abundance organisms and a putative plasmid. Signatures were pervasive genome-wide. Clusters were resolved because intra-genome differences resulting from translational selection or protein adaptation to the intracellular (pH approximately 5) versus extracellular (pH approximately 1) environment were small relative to inter-genome differences. We found that these genome signatures stem from multiple influences but are primarily manifested through codon composition, which we propose is the result of genome-specific mutational biases.

conclusionsAn important conclusion is that shared environmental pressures and interactions among coevolving organisms do not obscure genome signatures in acid mine drainage communities. Thus, genome signatures can be used to assign sequence fragments to populations, an essential prerequisite if metagenomics is to provide ecological and biochemical insights into the functioning of microbial communities.

Indexed as

GenomicsSoil MicrobiologyBacteriaIronMiningIron

Identifiers

PMID19698104
PMCPMC2745766

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY
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.