Evidence map›Paper›PMID 29631623›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2018

Reproducible protocols for metagenomic analysis of human faecal phageomes.

Andrey N Shkoporov, Feargal J Ryan, Lorraine A Draper, Amanda Forde, Stephen R Stockdale, Karen M Daly, Siobhan A McDonnell, James A Nolan, Thomas D S Sutton, Marion Dalmasso and 3 more

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 121 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
121citing 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

121 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Trial
  2. Trial
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Review
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Review
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. The Microbiome and Metabolic Dysfunction-Associated Steatotic Liver Disease.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025
    Review
  20. Article

61 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

13 authors.

Andrey N ShkoporovAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Feargal J RyanAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Lorraine A DraperAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Amanda FordeAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Stephen R StockdaleDepartment of Food Biosciences, Teagasc Food Research Centre, Moorepark, Fermoy, Co. Cork, Ireland.
Karen M DalyAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Siobhan A McDonnellAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
James A NolanAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Thomas D S SuttonAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Marion DalmassoAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Angela McCannAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
R Paul RossAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland.
Colin HillAPC Microbiome Institute, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland. c.hill@ucc.ie.

Funding

Janssen Biotech, Inc N/AScience Foundation Ireland SFI/12/RC/2273Science Foundation Ireland SFI/14/SP APC/B3032
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundRecent studies have demonstrated that the human gut is populated by complex, highly individual and stable communities of viruses, the majority of which are bacteriophages. While disease-specific alterations in the gut phageome have been observed in IBD, AIDS and acute malnutrition, the human gut phageome remains poorly characterised. One important obstacle in metagenomic studies of the human gut phageome is a high level of discrepancy between results obtained by different research groups. This is often due to the use of different protocols for enriching virus-like particles, nucleic acid purification and sequencing. The goal of the present study is to develop a relatively simple, reproducible and cost-efficient protocol for the extraction of viral nucleic acids from human faecal samples, suitable for high-throughput studies. We also analyse the effect of certain potential confounding factors, such as storage conditions, repeated freeze-thaw cycles, and operator bias on the resultant phageome profile. Additionally, spiking of faecal samples with an exogenous phage standard was employed to quantitatively analyse phageomes following metagenomic sequencing. Comparative analysis of phageome profiles to bacteriome profiles was also performed following 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing.

resultsFaecal phageome profiles exhibit an overall greater individual specificity when compared to bacteriome profiles. The phageome and bacteriome both exhibited moderate change when stored at + 4 °C or room temperature. Phageome profiles were less impacted by multiple freeze-thaw cycles than bacteriome profiles, but there was a greater chance for operator effect in phageome processing. The successful spiking of faecal samples with exogenous bacteriophage demonstrated large variations in the total viral load between individual samples.

conclusionsThe faecal phageome sequencing protocol developed in this study provides a valuable additional view of the human gut microbiota that is complementary to 16S amplicon sequencing and/or metagenomic sequencing of total faecal DNA. The protocol was optimised for several confounding factors that are encountered while processing faecal samples, to reduce discrepancies observed within and between research groups studying the human gut phageome. Rapid storage, limited freeze-thaw cycling and spiking of faecal samples with an exogenous phage standard are recommended for optimum results.

Indexed as

Gastrointestinal MicrobiomeMetagenomeMetagenomicsBacteriaBacteriophagesFecesHumansReproducibility of ResultsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SRNA, Ribosomal, 16SBacteriophageHuman gut microbiomeMetagenomicsPhageomeVirome

Identifiers

PMID29631623
PMCPMC5892011

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.