Evidence map›Paper›PMID 24814788›Full record

ArticleApplied and environmental microbiology2014

Investigating microbial eukaryotic diversity from a global census: insights from a comparison of pyrotag and full-length sequences of 18S rRNA genes.

Alle A Y Lie, Zhenfeng Liu, Sarah K Hu, Adriane C Jones, Diane Y Kim, Peter D Countway, Linda A Amaral-Zettler, S Craig Cary, Evelyn B Sherr, Barry F Sherr and 2 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Applied and environmental microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 19 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
19citing 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

19 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Molecular characterization and phylogenetic analysis ofJournal of parasitic diseases : official organ of the Indian Society for Parasitology · 2023
    Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. 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

12 authors.

Alle A Y LieDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA alie@usc.edu.
Zhenfeng LiuDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Sarah K HuDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Adriane C JonesDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Diane Y KimDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.
Peter D CountwayBigelow Laboratory for Ocean Sciences, East Boothbay, Maine, USA.
Linda A Amaral-ZettlerThe Josephine Bay Paul Center for Comparative Molecular Biology and Evolution, Marine Biological Laboratory, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA Department of Geological Sciences, Brown University, Providence, Rhode Island, USA.
S Craig CaryEnvironmental Research Institute, School of Science, University of Waikato, Hamilton, New Zealand College of Earth, Ocean, and Environment, University of Delaware, Lewes, Delaware, USA.
Evelyn B SherrCollege of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
Barry F SherrCollege of Oceanic and Atmospheric Sciences, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon, USA.
Rebecca J GastWoods Hole Oceanographic Institution, Woods Hole, Massachusetts, USA.
David A CaronDepartment of Biological Sciences, University of Southern California, Los Angeles, California, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Next-generation DNA sequencing (NGS) approaches are rapidly surpassing Sanger sequencing for characterizing the diversity of natural microbial communities. Despite this rapid transition, few comparisons exist between Sanger sequences and the generally much shorter reads of NGS. Operational taxonomic units (OTUs) derived from full-length (Sanger sequencing) and pyrotag (454 sequencing of the V9 hypervariable region) sequences of 18S rRNA genes from 10 global samples were analyzed in order to compare the resulting protistan community structures and species richness. Pyrotag OTUs called at 98% sequence similarity yielded numbers of OTUs that were similar overall to those for full-length sequences when the latter were called at 97% similarity. Singleton OTUs strongly influenced estimates of species richness but not the higher-level taxonomic composition of the community. The pyrotag and full-length sequence data sets had slightly different taxonomic compositions of rhizarians, stramenopiles, cryptophytes, and haptophytes, but the two data sets had similarly high compositions of alveolates. Pyrotag-based OTUs were often derived from sequences that mapped to multiple full-length OTUs at 100% similarity. Thus, pyrotags sequenced from a single hypervariable region might not be appropriate for establishing protistan species-level OTUs. However, nonmetric multidimensional scaling plots constructed with the two data sets yielded similar clusters, indicating that beta diversity analysis results were similar for the Sanger and NGS sequences. Short pyrotag sequences can provide holistic assessments of protistan communities, although care must be taken in interpreting the results. The longer reads (>500 bp) that are now becoming available through NGS should provide powerful tools for assessing the diversity of microbial eukaryotic assemblages.

Indexed as

BiodiversityChromosome MappingEukaryotaHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingRNA, Ribosomal, 18SSeawaterSequence Analysis, DNAWater MicrobiologyRNA, Ribosomal, 18S

Identifiers

PMID24814788
PMCPMC4068655

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
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.