Evidence map›Paper›PMID 28928718›Full record

ReviewFrontiers in microbiology2017

Analysing Microbial Community Composition through Amplicon Sequencing: From Sampling to Hypothesis Testing.

Luisa W Hugerth, Anders F Andersson

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in Frontiers in microbiology, 2017. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 132 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
132citing papers in PubMed, 4 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

132 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Fungal backpackers-the mycobiome ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Trial
  6. Trial
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

72 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

2 authors.

Luisa W HugerthDepartment of Molecular, Tumour and Cell Biology, Centre for Translational Microbiome Research, Karolinska InstitutetSolna, Sweden.
Anders F AnderssonDivision of Gene Technology, Science for Life Laboratory, School of Biotechnology, KTH Royal Institute of TechnologySolna, Sweden.

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Microbial ecology as a scientific field is fundamentally driven by technological advance. The past decade's revolution in DNA sequencing cost and throughput has made it possible for most research groups to map microbial community composition in environments of interest. However, the computational and statistical methodology required to analyse this kind of data is often not part of the biologist training. In this review, we give a historical perspective on the use of sequencing data in microbial ecology and restate the current need for this method; but also highlight the major caveats with standard practices for handling these data, from sample collection and library preparation to statistical analysis. Further, we outline the main new analytical tools that have been developed in the past few years to bypass these caveats, as well as highlight the major requirements of common statistical practices and the extent to which they are applicable to microbial data. Besides delving into the meaning of select alpha- and beta-diversity measures, we give special consideration to techniques for finding the main drivers of community dissimilarity and for interaction network construction. While every project design has specific needs, this review should serve as a starting point for considering what options are available.

Indexed as

16S rRNAamplicon sequencingbioinformaticsbiostatisticsmicrobial ecologymicrobiomeNGS

Identifiers

PMID28928718
PMCPMC5591341

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.