Evidence map›Paper›PMID 31848305›Full record

ArticlemSystems2019

Defining and Evaluating Microbial Contributions to Metabolite Variation in Microbiome-Metabolome Association Studies.

Cecilia Noecker, Hsuan-Chao Chiu, Colin P McNally, Elhanan Borenstein

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in mSystems, 2019. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 35 papers, 4 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
35citing papers in PubMed, 4 pooled it
3.6field-weighted citation impact, top 6% of its field
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

35 citing papers in PubMed, 4 syntheses or guidelines pooled it, 67 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Pooled it
  4. Pooled it
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Toward the Next Generation of In Silico Modeling of Dynamic Host-Microbiota Interactions in the Skin.JID innovations : skin science from molecules to population health · 2025
    Review
  8. Article
  9. COmmunity and Single Microbe Optimisation System (COSMOS).NPJ systems biology and applications · 2025
    Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Metabolome and Mycobiome ofPlants (Basel, Switzerland) · 2024
    Article
  13. Review
  14. Article
  15. The endophytic microbiome response patterns ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024
    Article
  16. Article
  17. Review
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. 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

4 authors at 2 institutions in 2 countries.

Cecilia NoeckerDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.ORCID https://orcid.org/0000-0003-1417-2383
Hsuan-Chao ChiuDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Colin P McNallyDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA.
Elhanan BorensteinDepartment of Genome Sciences, University of Washington, Seattle, Washington, USA elbo@uw.edu.
University of Washington · USSanta Fe Institute · US

Funding

INTERDISCIPLINARY TRAINING IN GENOMIC SCIENCEST32HG000035 · NHGRI · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI Bruce Colston Trapnell · 1995 to 2026
$24.2M
A Computational Framework for Designing Microbiome ManipulationDP2AT007802 · NCCIH · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BORENSTEIN, ELHANAN · 2012 to 2012
$2.3M
Metabolic model-based integrative study of the relationship between the gut microbiome, metabolome, and dietR01GM124312 · NIGMS · UNIVERSITY OF WASHINGTON · PI BORENSTEIN, ELHANAN · 2017 to 2018
$593k
NCCIH NIH HHS DP2 AT007802NHGRI NIH HHS T32 HG000035NIGMS NIH HHS R01 GM124312
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Correlation-based analysis of paired microbiome-metabolome data sets is becoming a widespread research approach, aiming to comprehensively identify microbial drivers of metabolic variation. To date, however, the limitations of this approach and other microbiome-metabolome analysis methods have not been comprehensively evaluated. To address this challenge, we have introduced a mathematical framework to quantify the contribution of each taxon to metabolite variation based on uptake and secretion fluxes. We additionally used a multispecies metabolic model to simulate simplified gut communities, generating idealized microbiome-metabolome data sets. We then compared observed taxon-metabolite correlations in these data sets to calculated ground truth taxonomic contribution values. We found that in simulations of both a representative simple 10-species community and complex human gut microbiota, correlation-based analysis poorly identified key contributors, with an extremely low predictive value despite the idealized setting. We further demonstrate that the predictive value of correlation analysis is strongly influenced by both metabolite and taxon properties, as well as by exogenous environmental variation. We finally discuss the practical implications of our findings for interpreting microbiome-metabolome studies.

Indexed as

correlationevaluationmetabolic modelingmetabolomicsmicrobiome

Identifiers

PMID31848305
PMCPMC6918031
OpenAlexW2996577570

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.