ReviewMicrobial biotechnology2016
Biome engineering-2020.
Review in Microbial biotechnology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 12 papers.
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.
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.
Who cites it
12 citing papers in PubMed.
- The role of Micro-biome engineering in enhancing Food safety and quality.Biotechnology notes (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2025Review
- Modulating the Gut Microbiota of Humans by Dietary Intervention with Plant Glycans.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2021Review
- Risk factors for type 1 diabetes, including environmental, behavioural and gut microbial factors: a case-control study.Scientific reports · 2020Article
- Substrate Use Prioritization by a Coculture of Five Species of Gut Bacteria Fed Mixtures of Arabinoxylan, Xyloglucan, β-Glucan, and Pectin.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2020Article
- Biointerfacial self-assembly generates lipid membrane coated bacteria for enhanced oral delivery and treatment.Nature communications · 2019Article
- Synthetic consortia of nanobody-coupled and formatted bacteria for prophylaxis and therapy interventions targeting microbiome dysbiosis-associated diseases and co-morbidities.Microbial biotechnology · 2019Article
- Bifidobacterium pseudolongum in the Ceca of Rats Fed Hi-Maize Starch Has Characteristics of a Keystone Species in Bifidobacterial Blooms.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2018Article
- Cultivation and sequencing of rumen microbiome members from the Hungate1000 Collection.Nature biotechnology · 2018Article
- The remedy within: will the microbiome fulfill its therapeutic promise?Journal of molecular medicine (Berlin, Germany) · 2017Review
- Modulation of Type 1 Diabetes Risk by the Intestinal Microbiome.Current diabetes reports · 2017Review
- Treatment and management of chronic fatigue syndrome/myalgic encephalomyelitis: all roads lead to Rome.British journal of pharmacology · 2017Review
- Biome engineering-2020.Microbial biotechnology · 2016Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The gut microbiome research is going from a descriptive into an intervention phase. To optimize beneficial microbe-host interaction, we need to understand how to steer the system by modulating the nutrient input with which the system is literally fed (e.g. diets, fibres, prebiotics, human milk oligosaccharides), and we must learn how to modulate the composition of the gut microbiota by adding beneficial microbes (e.g. probiotics, faecal transplants) and by eliminating disturbing microbial members using, for example, bacteriophages in this highly complex ecosystem. The current status of the field is reviewed together with an outlook what might be expected until 2020, highlighting obstacles to progress and possible solutions to these problems.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
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.