ReviewMicrobial biotechnology2009
Interplay of metagenomics and in vitro compartmentalization.
Review in Microbial biotechnology, 2009. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.
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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- Starch and Cellulose Degradation in the Rumen and Applications of Metagenomics on Ruminal Microorganisms.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2022Review
- Recent Advances in Function-based Metagenomic Screening.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2018Review
- Concepts and Methods to Access Novel Antibiotics from Actinomycetes.Antibiotics (Basel, Switzerland) · 2018Review
- Ultrahigh-throughput discovery of promiscuous enzymes by picodroplet functional metagenomics.Nature communications · 2015Article
- A culture-independent approach to unravel uncultured bacteria and functional genes in a complex microbial community.PloS one · 2012Article
- Biotechnological uses of enzymes from psychrophiles.Microbial biotechnology · 2011Review
- Microbial Biotechnology from medicine to bacterial population dynamics.Microbial biotechnology · 2009Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
In recent years, the application of approaches for harvesting DNA from the environment, the so-called, 'metagenomic approaches' has proven to be highly successful for the identification, isolation and generation of novel enzymes. Functional screening for the desired catalytic activity is one of the key steps in mining metagenomic libraries, as it does not rely on sequence homology. In this mini-review, we survey high-throughput screening tools, originally developed for directed evolution experiments, which can be readily adapted for the screening of large libraries. In particular, we focus on the use of in vitro compartmentalization (IVC) approaches to address potential advantages and problems the merger of culture-independent and IVC techniques might bring on the mining of enzyme activities in microbial communities.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion 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 OpenQuestion graph.