Evidence map›Paper›PMID 30995941›Full record

ArticleMicrobiome2019

Coupling growth kinetics modeling with machine learning reveals microbial immigration impacts and identifies key environmental parameters in a biological wastewater treatment process.

Ran Mei, Jinha Kim, Fernanda P Wilson, Benjamin T W Bocher, Wen-Tso Liu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Microbiome, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 papers, 1 of them a synthesis that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
9citing papers in PubMed, 1 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

9 citing papers in PubMed, 1 synthesis or guideline pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Review
  3. Review
  4. Article
  5. Stabilizing microbial communities by looped mass transfer.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2022
    Article
  6. Mass-immigration determines the assembly of activated sludge microbial communities.Proceedings of the National Academy of Sciences of the United States of America · 2021
    Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Review
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.

Ran MeiDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 3207 Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory, 205 North Mathews Ave, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA.
Jinha KimDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 3207 Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory, 205 North Mathews Ave, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA.
Fernanda P WilsonDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 3207 Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory, 205 North Mathews Ave, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA.
Benjamin T W BocherPetrochemicals Technology, BP America, Naperville, IL, 60563, USA.
Wen-Tso LiuDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 3207 Newmark Civil Engineering Laboratory, 205 North Mathews Ave, Urbana, IL, 61801, USA. wtliu@illinois.edu.

Funding

Yale Clinical and Translational Science Award (U Component)UL1TR001863 · NCATS · YALE UNIVERSITY · PI John H. Krystal, LUCILA OHNO-MACHADO · 2016 to 2026
$102.9M
NCATS NIH HHS UL1 TR001863
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

backgroundUbiquitous in natural and engineered ecosystems, microbial immigration is one of the mechanisms shaping community assemblage. However, quantifying immigration impact remains challenging especially at individual population level. The activities of immigrants in the receiving community are often inadequately considered, leading to potential bias in identifying the relationship between community composition and environmental parameters.

resultsThis study quantified microbial immigration from an upstream full-scale anaerobic reactor to downstream activated sludge reactors. A mass balance was applied to 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing data to calculate the net growth rates of individual populations in the activated sludge reactors. Among the 1178 observed operational taxonomic units (OTUs), 582 had a positive growth rate, including all the populations with abundance > 0.1%. These active populations collectively accounted for 99% of the total sequences in activated sludge. The remaining 596 OTUs with a growth rate ≤ 0 were classified as inactive populations. All the abundant populations in the upstream anaerobic reactor were inactive in the activated sludge process, indicating a negligible immigration impact. We used a supervised learning regressor to predict environmental parameters based on community composition and compared the prediction accuracy based on either the entire community or the active populations. Temperature was the most predictable parameter, and the prediction accuracy was improved when only active populations were used to train the regressor.

conclusionsCalculating growth rate of individual microbial populations in the downstream system provides an effective approach to determine microbial activity and quantify immigration impact. For the studied biological process, a marginal immigration impact was observed, likely due to the significant differences in the growth environments between the upstream and downstream processes. Excluding inactive populations as a result of immigration further enhanced the prediction of key environmental parameters affecting process performance.

Indexed as

Machine LearningMicrobial ConsortiaBacteriaBioreactorsKineticsRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSewageWastewaterRNA, Ribosomal, 16SSewageWastewaterActive populationImmigration impactMachine learning

Identifiers

PMID30995941
PMCPMC6471889

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.