ArticleMicrobes and environments2018
Comparing Two Common DNA Extraction Kits for the Characterization of Symbiotic Microbial Communities from Ascidian Tissue.
Article in Microbes and environments, 2018. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Article
- Metagenomic Profiling Reveals Extensive Bacterial Diversity in Chicken Manure and Associated Contaminated Wastewater.International journal of molecular sciences · 2026Article
- Depuration of a solitary ascidian depletes transient bacteria without altering microbiome alpha-diversity.FEMS microbiology ecology · 2025Article
- An experimental design for obtaining DNA of a target species and its diet from a single non-invasive genetic protocol.Ecology and evolution · 2023Article
- Microbiome Variability across the Native and Invasive Ranges of the Ascidian Clavelina oblonga.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2021Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Various DNA extraction methods are often used interchangeably for the characterization of microbial communities despite indications that different techniques produce disparate results. The microbiomes of two ascidian species were herein characterized using two common DNA extraction kits, the DNeasy Blood and Tissue Kit (Qiagen) and the PowerSoil DNA Isolation Kit (Mo Bio Laboratories), followed by next-generation (Illumina) sequencing of partial 16S rRNA genes. Significant differences were detected in microbial community diversity and structure between ascidian species, but not between kits, suggesting similar recovery of biological variation and low technical variation between the two extraction methods for ascidian microbiome characterization.
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.