Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22587947›Full record

ArticleMicrobial informatics and experimentation2012

Metagenomics - a guide from sampling to data analysis.

Torsten Thomas, Jack Gilbert, Folker Meyer

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbial informatics and experimentation, 2012. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 341 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
341citing 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

341 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Enhanced Yield ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026
    Article
  4. Review
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Review
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Review
  16. Article
  17. Microbial dysbiosis and inferred functional profiling reveals the potential role ofFrontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 2026
    Article
  18. Review
  19. Review
  20. Article

281 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

3 authors.

Torsten ThomasSchool of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences & Centre for Marine Bio-Innovation, The University of New South Wales, Sydney, NSW 2052, Australia. t.thomas@unsw.edu.au.
Jack Gilbert
Folker Meyer

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Metagenomics applies a suite of genomic technologies and bioinformatics tools to directly access the genetic content of entire communities of organisms. The field of metagenomics has been responsible for substantial advances in microbial ecology, evolution, and diversity over the past 5 to 10 years, and many research laboratories are actively engaged in it now. With the growing numbers of activities also comes a plethora of methodological knowledge and expertise that should guide future developments in the field. This review summarizes the current opinions in metagenomics, and provides practical guidance and advice on sample processing, sequencing technology, assembly, binning, annotation, experimental design, statistical analysis, data storage, and data sharing. As more metagenomic datasets are generated, the availability of standardized procedures and shared data storage and analysis becomes increasingly important to ensure that output of individual projects can be assessed and compared.

Identifiers

PMID22587947
PMCPMC3351745

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.