ArticleFrontiers in genetics2019
Embracing Ambiguity in the Taxonomic Classification of Microbiome Sequencing Data.
Article in Frontiers in genetics, 2019. 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.
- Challenges and Opportunities in Analyzing Cancer-Associated Microbiomes.Cancer research · 2025Review
- Analyzing microbiome data with taxonomic misclassification using a zero-inflated Dirichlet-multinomial model.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- A Polyclonal Aptamer Library for the Specific Binding of the Gut BacteriumInternational journal of molecular sciences · 2022Article
- Linking microbial communities to ecosystem functions: what we can learn from genotype-phenotype mapping in organisms.Philosophical transactions of the Royal Society of London. Series B, Biological sciences · 2020Article
- Gut microbiota changes associated withGut microbesReview
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
The advent of high throughput sequencing has enabled in-depth characterization of human and environmental microbiomes. Determining the taxonomic origin of microbial sequences is one of the first, and frequently only, analysis performed on microbiome samples. Substantial research has focused on the development of methods for taxonomic annotation, often making trade-offs in computational efficiency and classification accuracy. A side-effect of these efforts has been a reexamination of the bacterial taxonomy itself. Taxonomies developed prior to the genomic revolution captured complex relationships between organisms that went beyond uniform taxonomic levels such as species, genus, and family. Driven in part by the need to simplify computational workflows, the bacterial taxonomies used most commonly today have been regularized to fit within a standard seven taxonomic levels. Consequently, modern analyses of microbial communities are relatively coarse-grained. Few methods make classifications below the genus level, impacting our ability to capture biologically relevant signals. Here, we present ATLAS, a novel strategy for taxonomic annotation that uses significant outliers within database search results to group sequences in the database into partitions. These partitions capture the extent of taxonomic ambiguity within the classification of a sample. The ATLAS pipeline can be found on GitHub [https://github.com/shahnidhi/outlier_in_BLAST_hits]. We demonstrate that ATLAS provides similar annotations to phylogenetic placement methods, but with higher computational efficiency. When applied to human microbiome data, ATLAS is able to identify previously characterized taxonomic groupings, such as those in the class
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.