ArticlePLoS biology2020
Every fifth published metagenome is not available to science.
Article in PLoS biology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Standardized and batch effect-independent technologies enable global collaboration in microbiome research.The ISME journal · 2026Article
- subMG automates data submission for metagenomics studies.BioData mining · 2025Article
- Article
- A cost and community perspective on the barriers to microbiome data reuse.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Promoting Data Sharing: The Moral Obligations of Public Funding Agencies.Science and engineering ethics · 2024Article
- A comprehensive overview of microbiome data in the light of machine learning applications: categorization, accessibility, and future directions.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Review
- Scientific concepts and methods for moving persistence assessments into the 21st century.Integrated environmental assessment and management · 2022Review
- Strategies to access biosynthetic novelty in bacterial genomes for drug discovery.Nature reviews. Drug discovery · 2022Review
- Public human microbiome data are dominated by highly developed countries.PLoS biology · 2022Article
- EMBRACE-WATERS statement: Recommendations for reporting of studies on antimicrobial resistance in wastewater and related aquatic environments.One health (Amsterdam, Netherlands) · 2021Article
- Data sharing practices and data availability upon request differ across scientific disciplines.Scientific data · 2021Article
- Microbiome Metadata Standards: Report of the National Microbiome Data Collaborative's Workshop and Follow-On Activities.mSystems · 2021Article
- Viral discovery in the 'realm' of COVID-19.Environmental microbiology reports · 2021Article
- Article
- Editorial: Microbial Ecotoxicology.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
- Ignoring social distancing: advances in understanding multi-species bacterial interactions.Faculty reviews · 2020Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
14 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Have you ever sought to use metagenomic DNA sequences reported in scientific publications? Were you successful? Here, we reveal that metagenomes from no fewer than 20% of the papers found in our literature search, published between 2016 and 2019, were not deposited in a repository or were simply inaccessible. The proportion of inaccessible data within the literature has been increasing year-on-year. Noncompliance with Open Data is best predicted by the scientific discipline of the journal. The number of citations, journal type (e.g., Open Access or subscription journals), and publisher are not good predictors of data accessibility. However, many publications in high-impact factor journals do display a higher likelihood of accessible metagenomic data sets. Twenty-first century science demands compliance with the ethical standard of data sharing of metagenomes and DNA sequence data more broadly. Data accessibility must become one of the routine and mandatory components of manuscript submissions-a requirement that should be applicable across the increasing number of disciplines using metagenomics. Compliance must be ensured and reinforced by funders, publishers, editors, reviewers, and, ultimately, the authors.
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.