ArticlePloS one2012
Comparison of DNA extraction methods for microbial community profiling with an application to pediatric bronchoalveolar lavage samples.
Article in PloS one, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 69 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
69 citing papers in PubMed.
- The bacterial microbiota in first-void urine from men with and without idiopathic urethritis.PloS one · 2018Trial
- A Different Microbiome Gene Repertoire in the Airways of Cystic Fibrosis Patients with Severe Lung Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2017Trial
- Setting higher standards for reports of microbial species in human cancers.Nature cancer · 2026Review
- Complete genome sequences of colistin-resistantMicrobiology resource announcements · 2025Article
- Expression and Immobilization of Tannase for Tannery Effluent Treatment from Lactobacillus plantarum and Staphylococcus lugdunensis: A Comparative Study.Applied biochemistry and biotechnology · 2024Article
- Metrological evaluation of DNA extraction method effects on the bacterial microbiome and resistome in sputum.mSystems · 2024Article
- Methanogenic symbionts of anaerobic ciliates are host and habitat specific.The ISME journal · 2024Article
- Carbapenem Resistance inBioMed research international · 2024Article
- Comparison of culture and PCR-DGGE methods to evaluate the airways of cystic fibrosis patients and determination of their antibiotic resistance profile.Iranian journal of microbiology · 2023Article
- Sample Collection Methods in Upper Gastrointestinal Research.Journal of Korean medical science · 2023Review
- Review
- Microvolume DNA extraction methods for microscale amplicon and metagenomic studies.ISME communications · 2021Article
- Article
- Patterns of Microbiome Variation Among Infrapopulations of Permanent Bloodsucking Parasites.Frontiers in microbiology · 2021Article
- Impact of Bead-Beating Intensity on the Genus- and Species-Level Characterization of the Gut Microbiome Using Amplicon and Complete 16S rRNA Gene Sequencing.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2021Article
- Helminth Microbiota Profiling Using Bacterial 16S rRNA Gene Amplicon Sequencing: From Sampling to Sequence Data Mining.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2021Article
- Untargeted Metagenomic Investigation of the Airway Microbiome of Cystic Fibrosis Patients with Moderate-Severe Lung Disease.Microorganisms · 2020Article
- Viral Ecogenomics of Arctic Cryopeg Brine and Sea Ice.mSystems · 2020Article
- The Influence of DNA Extraction and Lipid Removal on Human Milk Bacterial Profiles.Methods and protocols · 2020Article
- Optimizing 16S rRNA gene profile analysis from low biomass nasopharyngeal and induced sputum specimens.BMC microbiology · 2020Article
9 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.
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
Barcoded amplicon sequencing is rapidly becoming a standard method for profiling microbial communities, including the human respiratory microbiome. While this approach has less bias than standard cultivation, several steps can introduce variation including the type of DNA extraction method used. Here we assessed five different extraction methods on pediatric bronchoalveolar lavage (BAL) samples and a mock community comprised of nine bacterial genera to determine method reproducibility and detection limits for these typically low complexity communities. Additionally, using the mock community, we were able to evaluate contamination and select a relative abundance cut-off threshold based on the geometric distribution that optimizes the trade off between detecting bona fide operational taxonomic units and filtering out spurious ones. Using this threshold, the majority of genera in the mock community were predictably detected by all extraction methods including the hard-to-lyse Gram-positive genus Staphylococcus. Differences between extraction methods were significantly greater than between technical replicates for both the mock community and BAL samples emphasizing the importance of using a standardized methodology for microbiome studies. However, regardless of method used, individual patients retained unique diagnostic profiles. Furthermore, despite being stored as raw frozen samples for over five years, community profiles from BAL samples were consistent with historical culturing results. The culture-independent profiling of these samples also identified a number of anaerobic genera that are gaining acceptance as being part of the respiratory microbiome. This study should help guide researchers to formulate sampling, extraction and analysis strategies for respiratory and other human microbiome samples.
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.