ArticleFrontiers in microbiology2020
Variations of Gut Microbiome Profile Under Different Storage Conditions and Preservation Periods: A Multi-Dimensional Evaluation.
Article in Frontiers in microbiology, 2020. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 20 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
20 citing papers in PubMed, 31 citations in OpenAlex.
- Post-defecation exposure alters gut microbiota of forest musk deer with implications for conservation metagenomics.Applied microbiology and biotechnology · 2026Article
- Optimised human stool sample collection for multi-omic microbiota analysis.Scientific reports · 2024Article
- Assessment of fecal bacterial viability and diversity in fresh and frozen fecal microbiota transplant (FMT) product in horses.BMC veterinary research · 2024Article
- Effects of variation in sample storage conditions and swab order on 16S vaginal microbiome analyses.Microbiology spectrum · 2024Article
- Article
- Effects of storage conditions on the microbiota of fecal samples collected from dairy cattle.PloS one · 2024Article
- Best practice for wildlife gut microbiome research: A comprehensive review of methodology for 16S rRNA gene investigations.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Diversity of the microbiota communities found in the various regions of the intestinal tract in healthy individuals and inflammatory bowel diseases.Frontiers in immunology · 2023Review
- Assessing and removing the effect of unwanted technical variations in microbiome data.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Experimental methods modestly impact interpretation of the effect of environmental exposures on the larval zebrafish gut microbiome.Scientific reports · 2022Article
- Article
- Evaluating Methods of Preserving Aquatic Invertebrates for Microbiome Analysis.Microorganisms · 2022Article
- Storage of soil microbiome for application in sustainable agriculture: prospects and challenges.Environmental science and pollution research international · 2022Review
- Stabilization of swine faecal samples influences taxonomic and functional results in microbiome analyses.MethodsX · 2022Article
- ddPCR allows 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing of very small DNA amounts from low-biomass samples.BMC microbiology · 2021Article
- The maintenance of microbial community in human fecal samples by a cost effective preservation buffer.Scientific reports · 2021Article
- Effect of Freezing on Gut Microbiota Composition and Functionality for In Vitro Fermentation Experiments.Nutrients · 2021Article
- Optimisation of sample storage and DNA extraction for human gut microbiota studies.BMC microbiology · 2021Article
- Article
- Variations of Gut Microbiome Profile Under Different Storage Conditions and Preservation Periods: A Multi-Dimensional Evaluation.Frontiers in microbiology · 2020Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
17 authors at 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Gut dysbiosis is heavily involved in the development of various human diseases. There are thousands of publications per year for investigating the role of gut microbiota in diseases. However, emerging evidence has indicated the frequent data inconsistency between different studies, which is largely overlooked. There are many factors that can cause data variation and inconsistency during the process of microbiota study, in particular, sample storage conditions and sequencing process. Here, we systemically evaluated the impacts of six fecal sample storage conditions (three non-commercial storage protocols, -80°C, -80°C with 70% ethanol (ET_-80°C), 4°C with 70% ethanol (ET_4°C), and three commercial storage reagents, OMNIgeneGUT OMR-200 (GT) and MGIEasy (MGIE) at room temperature, and Longsee at 4°C (LS) on gut microbiome profile based on 16S rRNA gene sequencing. In addition, we also investigated the impacts of storage periods (1 and 2 weeks, or 6 months) and sequencing platform on microbiome profile. The efficacy of storage conditions was evaluated by DNA yield and quality, α and β diversity, relative abundance of the dominant and functional bacteria associated with short-chain fatty acid (SCFA) production, and BAs metabolism. Our current study suggested that -80°C was acceptable for fecal sample storage, and the addition of 70% ethanol had some benefits in maintaining the microbial community structure. Meanwhile, we found that samples in ET_4°C and GT reagents were comparable, both of them introduced some biases in α or β diversity, and the relative abundance of functional bacteria. Samples stored in MGIE reagent resulted in the least variation, whereas the most obvious variations were introduced by LS reagents. In addition, our results indicated that variations caused by storage condition were larger than that of storage time and sequencing platform. Collectively, our study provided a multi-dimensional evaluation on the impacts of storage conditions, storage time periods, and sequencing platform on gut microbial profile.
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.