Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28592823›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2017

Comparison of the active and resident community of a coastal microbial mat.

Daniela Clara Cardoso, Anna Sandionigi, Mariana Silvia Cretoiu, Maurizio Casiraghi, Lucas Stal, Henk Bolhuis

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 15 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
15citing 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

15 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Targeting the Active Rhizosphere Microbiome ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2021
    Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. 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

6 authors.

Daniela Clara CardosoDepartment of Marine Microbiology and Biogeochemistry, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, and Utrecht University, Den Hoorn, The Netherlands.
Anna SandionigiDepartment of Biotechnology and Biosciences, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-5257-0027
Mariana Silvia CretoiuDepartment of Marine Microbiology and Biogeochemistry, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, and Utrecht University, Den Hoorn, The Netherlands.
Maurizio CasiraghiDepartment of Biotechnology and Biosciences, University of Milan-Bicocca, Milan, Italy.ORCID 0000-0002-2733-2094
Lucas StalDepartment of Marine Microbiology and Biogeochemistry, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, and Utrecht University, Den Hoorn, The Netherlands.
Henk BolhuisDepartment of Marine Microbiology and Biogeochemistry, Royal Netherlands Institute for Sea Research, and Utrecht University, Den Hoorn, The Netherlands. henk.bolhuis@nioz.nl.ORCID 0000-0002-4772-1898

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Coastal microbial mats form a nearly closed micro-scale ecosystem harboring a complex microbial community. Previous DNA based analysis did not necessarily provide information about the active fraction of the microbial community because it includes dormant, inactive cells as well as a potential stable pool of extracellular DNA. Here we focused on the active microbial community by comparing 16S rRNA sequences obtained from the ribosomal RNA pool with gene sequences obtained from the DNA fraction. In addition, we aimed to establish an optimal and feasible sampling protocol that takes potential spatial and temporal heterogeneity into account. The coastal microbial mat investigated here was sampled randomly and at regular time points during one 24-h period. DNA and RNA was extracted and after conversion of the RNA fraction to cDNA, the V1-V3 and the V3-V4 regions of the 16S rRNA gene were targeted for high-throughput amplicon sequencing. We show that the community composition varies little in time and space whereas two amplified 16S regions gave significant different results. The largest differences were found when comparing the "resident community" (DNA) with the "active community" (cDNA/RNA); in the latter, Cyanobacteria dominated for almost 95% while they represented 60% of the resident fraction.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaSeawaterWater MicrobiologyBacteriaMetagenomeMetagenomicsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16S

Identifiers

PMID28592823
PMCPMC5462767

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.