Evidence map›Paper›PMID 27602022›Full record

ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2016

Evaluation of 16S rRNA Gene Primer Pairs for Monitoring Microbial Community Structures Showed High Reproducibility within and Low Comparability between Datasets Generated with Multiple Archaeal and Bacterial Primer Pairs.

Martin A Fischer, Simon Güllert, Sven C Neulinger, Wolfgang R Streit, Ruth A Schmitz

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2016. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 37 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
37citing 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

37 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Quercetin alleviates CClBiochemistry and biophysics reports · 2026
    Article
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Effects ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2026
    Article
  5. Review
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Review
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. 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

5 authors.

Martin A FischerDepartment of Biology, Institute for General Microbiology, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Kiel, Germany.
Simon GüllertBiozentrum Klein Flottbek, Institute of Microbiology & Biotechnology, Universität Hamburg Hamburg, Germany.
Sven C NeulingerDepartment of Biology, Institute for General Microbiology, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu KielKiel, Germany; omics2view.consulting GbRKiel, Germany.
Wolfgang R StreitBiozentrum Klein Flottbek, Institute of Microbiology & Biotechnology, Universität Hamburg Hamburg, Germany.
Ruth A SchmitzDepartment of Biology, Institute for General Microbiology, Christian-Albrechts-Universität zu Kiel Kiel, Germany.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The application of next-generation sequencing technology in microbial community analysis increased our knowledge and understanding of the complexity and diversity of a variety of ecosystems. In contrast to Bacteria, the archaeal domain was often not particularly addressed in the analysis of microbial communities. Consequently, established primers specifically amplifying the archaeal 16S ribosomal gene region are scarce compared to the variety of primers targeting bacterial sequences. In this study, we aimed to validate archaeal primers suitable for high throughput next generation sequencing. Three archaeal 16S primer pairs as well as two bacterial and one general microbial 16S primer pairs were comprehensively tested by in-silico evaluation and performing an experimental analysis of a complex microbial community of a biogas reactor. The results obtained clearly demonstrate that comparability of community profiles established using different primer pairs is difficult. 16S rRNA gene data derived from a shotgun metagenome of the same reactor sample added an additional perspective on the community structure. Furthermore, in-silico evaluation of primers, especially those for amplification of archaeal 16S rRNA gene regions, does not necessarily reflect the results obtained in experimental approaches. In the latter, archaeal primer pair ArchV34 showed the highest similarity to the archaeal community structure compared to observed by the metagenomic approach and thus appears to be the appropriate for analyzing archaeal communities in biogas reactors. However, a disadvantage of this primer pair was its low specificity for the archaeal domain in the experimental application leading to high amounts of bacterial sequences within the dataset. Overall our results indicate a rather limited comparability between community structures investigated and determined using different primer pairs as well as between metagenome and 16S rRNA gene amplicon based community structure analysis. This finding, previously shown for Bacteria, was as well observed for the archaeal domain.

Indexed as

16S microbial communityamplicon sequencingarchaeametagenomemicrobial communitiesnext-generation sequencing

Identifiers

PMID27602022
PMCPMC4994424

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.