Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22154471›Full record

ReviewCurrent opinion in biotechnology2012

Single cell genome sequencing.

Suzan Yilmaz, Anup K Singh

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Current opinion in biotechnology, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 40 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
40citing 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

40 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Review
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Efficient Recovery of Complete Gut Viral Genomes by Combined Short- and Long-Read Sequencing.Advanced science (Weinheim, Baden-Wurttemberg, Germany) · 2024
    Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Review
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Review
  19. Biosensors · 2018
    Article
  20. 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.

Suzan YilmazDepartment of Bioengineering and Biotechnology, Sandia National Laboratory, Livermore, CA 94551, United States.
Anup K Singh

Funding

UNM TRAININGP50GM085273 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF NEW MEXICO HEALTH SCIS CTR · PI WILSON, BRIDGET S · 2009 to 2018
$26.1M
FISH "N" Chips: A Microfluidic Processor for Isolating and Analyzing MicrobesR01DE020891 · NIDCR · SANDIA CORP-SANDIA NATIONAL LABORATORIES · PI SINGH, ANUP K. · 2009 to 2012
$1.8M
NIDCR NIH HHS R01 DE020891NIGMS NIH HHS P50 GM085273
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Whole genome amplification and next-generation sequencing of single cells have become a powerful approach for studying uncultivated microorganisms that represent 90-99% of all environmental microbes. Single cell sequencing enables not only the identification of microbes but also linking of functions to species, a feat not achievable by metagenomic techniques. Moreover, it allows the analysis of low abundance species that may be missed in community-based analyses. It has also proved very useful in complementing metagenomics in the assembly and binning of single genomes. With the advent of drastically cheaper and higher throughput sequencing technologies, it is expected that single cell sequencing will become a standard tool in studying the genome and transcriptome of microbial communities.

Indexed as

BacteriaEnvironmental MicrobiologyGenome-Wide Association StudyHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingHumansMetagenomeMetagenomicsSequence Analysis, DNASingle-Cell Analysis

Identifiers

PMID22154471
PMCPMC3318999

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceTDM
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.