Evidence map›Paper›PMID 25626903›Full record

ReviewmBio2015

High-throughput metagenomic technologies for complex microbial community analysis: open and closed formats.

Jizhong Zhou, Zhili He, Yunfeng Yang, Ye Deng, Susannah G Tringe, Lisa Alvarez-Cohen

Abstract readEvaluation StudyReview
In one paragraph

Review in mBio, 2015. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 142 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
142citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–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

142 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Review
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

82 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

6 authors.

Jizhong Zhoujzhou@ou.edu.
Zhili HeInstitute for Environmental Genomics and Department of Microbiology and Plant Biology, University of Oklahoma, Norman, Oklahoma, USA.
Yunfeng YangState Key Joint Laboratory of Environment Simulation and Pollution Control, School of Environment, Tsinghua University, Beijing, China.
Ye Deng
Susannah G TringeDepartment of Energy Joint Genome Institute, Walnut Creek, California, USA.
Lisa Alvarez-Cohen

Funding

Training CoreP42ES004705 · NIEHS · UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA BERKELEY · PI MORELLO-FROSCH, RACHEL ADELE · 1987 to 2025
$74.6M
NIEHS NIH HHS P42 ES004705NIEHS NIH HHS P42ES004705
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Understanding the structure, functions, activities and dynamics of microbial communities in natural environments is one of the grand challenges of 21st century science. To address this challenge, over the past decade, numerous technologies have been developed for interrogating microbial communities, of which some are amenable to exploratory work (e.g., high-throughput sequencing and phenotypic screening) and others depend on reference genes or genomes (e.g., phylogenetic and functional gene arrays). Here, we provide a critical review and synthesis of the most commonly applied "open-format" and "closed-format" detection technologies. We discuss their characteristics, advantages, and disadvantages within the context of environmental applications and focus on analysis of complex microbial systems, such as those in soils, in which diversity is high and reference genomes are few. In addition, we discuss crucial issues and considerations associated with applying complementary high-throughput molecular technologies to address important ecological questions.

Indexed as

BacteriaEcosystemHigh-Throughput Nucleotide SequencingMetagenomicsSoil Microbiology

Identifiers

PMID25626903
PMCPMC4324309

What OpenQuestion holds

Textmetadata
LicenceCC BY-NC-SA
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.