Evidence map›Paper›PMID 22761935›Full record

ArticlePloS one2012

Reconstruction of ribosomal RNA genes from metagenomic data.

Lu Fan, Kerensa McElroy, Torsten Thomas

Abstract read
In one paragraph

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 20 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
20citing 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

20 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Planktonic Growth ofInternational journal of otolaryngology · 2017
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Impact of methionine on a partial-nitritation biofilter.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2016
    Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Reconstructing 16S rRNA genes in metagenomic data.Bioinformatics (Oxford, England) · 2015
    Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article
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.

Lu FanSchool of Biotechnology and Biomolecular Sciences and Centre for Marine Bio-Innovation, University of New South Wales, Sydney, New South Wales, Australia.
Kerensa McElroy
Torsten Thomas

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Direct sequencing of environmental DNA (metagenomics) has a great potential for describing the 16S rRNA gene diversity of microbial communities. However current approaches using this 16S rRNA gene information to describe community diversity suffer from low taxonomic resolution or chimera problems. Here we describe a new strategy that involves stringent assembly and data filtering to reconstruct full-length 16S rRNA genes from metagenomicpyrosequencing data. Simulations showed that reconstructed 16S rRNA genes provided a true picture of the community diversity, had minimal rates of chimera formation and gave taxonomic resolution down to genus level. The strategy was furthermore compared to PCR-based methods to determine the microbial diversity in two marine sponges. This showed that about 30% of the abundant phylotypes reconstructed from metagenomic data failed to be amplified by PCR. Our approach is readily applicable to existing metagenomic datasets and is expected to lead to the discovery of new microbial phylotypes.

Indexed as

MetagenomicsBase SequenceDNA PrimersPhylogenyPolymerase Chain ReactionRNA, Ribosomal, 16SDNA PrimersRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID22761935
PMCPMC3384625

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.