Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25620966›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2014

Reconstructing each cell's genome within complex microbial communities-dream or reality?

Scott Clingenpeel, Alicia Clum, Patrick Schwientek, Christian Rinke, Tanja Woyke

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 44 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
44citing 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

44 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. scMicrobe PTA: Near Complete Genomes from Single Bacterial Cells.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2024
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Microbial single-cell omics: the crux of the matter.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2020
    Review
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  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

5 authors.

Scott ClingenpeelDOE Joint Genome Institute Walnut Creek, CA, USA.
Alicia ClumDOE Joint Genome Institute Walnut Creek, CA, USA.
Patrick SchwientekDOE Joint Genome Institute Walnut Creek, CA, USA.
Christian RinkeDOE Joint Genome Institute Walnut Creek, CA, USA.
Tanja WoykeDOE Joint Genome Institute Walnut Creek, CA, USA.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

As the vast majority of microorganisms have yet to be cultivated in a laboratory setting, access to their genetic makeup has largely been limited to cultivation-independent methods. These methods, namely metagenomics and more recently single-cell genomics, have become cornerstones for microbial ecology and environmental microbiology. One ultimate goal is the recovery of genome sequences from each cell within an environment to move toward a better understanding of community metabolic potential and to provide substrate for experimental work. As single-cell sequencing has the ability to decipher all sequence information contained in an individual cell, this method holds great promise in tackling such challenge. Methodological limitations and inherent biases however do exist, which will be discussed here based on environmental and benchmark data, to assess how far we are from reaching this goal.

Indexed as

environmental microbiologygenome completenessgenome qualitymicrobial ecologymultiple displacement amplificationsingle-cell sequencing

Identifiers

PMID25620966
PMCPMC4287102

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.