Evidence map›Paper›PMID 19760178›Full record

ReviewApplied microbiology and biotechnology2009

Achievements and new knowledge unraveled by metagenomic approaches.

Carola Simon, Rolf Daniel

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Applied microbiology and biotechnology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 52 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
52citing 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

52 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Construction of Small-Insert and Large-Insert Metagenomic Libraries.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2023
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Recent Advances in Function-based Metagenomic Screening.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2018
    Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Marine Metagenome as A Resource for Novel Enzymes.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2015
    Review
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

2 authors.

Carola SimonDepartment of Genomic and Applied Microbiology, Institute of Microbiology and Genetics, Georg-August University Göttingen, Grisebachstr 8, 37077 Göttingen, Germany.
Rolf Daniel

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metagenomics has paved the way for cultivation-independent assessment and exploitation of microbial communities present in complex ecosystems. In recent years, significant progress has been made in this research area. A major breakthrough was the improvement and development of high-throughput next-generation sequencing technologies. The application of these technologies resulted in the generation of large datasets derived from various environments such as soil and ocean water. The analyses of these datasets opened a window into the enormous phylogenetic and metabolic diversity of microbial communities living in a variety of ecosystems. In this way, structure, functions, and interactions of microbial communities were elucidated. Metagenomics has proven to be a powerful tool for the recovery of novel biomolecules. In most cases, functional metagenomics comprising construction and screening of complex metagenomic DNA libraries has been applied to isolate new enzymes and drugs of industrial importance. For this purpose, several novel and improved screening strategies that allow efficient screening of large collections of clones harboring metagenomes have been introduced.

Indexed as

AlgorithmsBase SequenceDatabases, FactualEcosystemEnzymesGene LibraryGenesGenetic TestingGenetic VariationGenomeMetagenomicsPhenotypePhylogenySequence AlignmentEnzymes

Identifiers

PMID19760178
PMCPMC2773367

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.