ArticlemSystems2021
Evaluation of CRISPR Diversity in the Human Skin Microbiome for Personal Identification.
Article in mSystems, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 9 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
9 citing papers in PubMed, 17 citations in OpenAlex.
- Metagenomic sequencing of CRISPRs as a new marker to aid in personal identification with low-biomass samples.mSystems · 2024Article
- NeoGenesis MB-1 with CRISPR Technology Reduces the Effects of the Viruses (Phages) Associated with Acne - Case Report.Integrative medicine (Encinitas, Calif.) · 2024Article
- Explore variation of salivary bacteria across time and geolocations.International journal of legal medicine · 2024Article
- Application of Microbiome in Forensics.Genomics, proteomics & bioinformatics · 2023Review
- Analysis of genetic structure and function of clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats loci in 110Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Identification and characterization of two CRISPR/Cas systems associated with the mosquito microbiome.Access microbiology · 2023Article
- Towards standardized and reproducible research in skin microbiomes.Environmental microbiology · 2022Review
- Comparative Evaluation of the Salivary and Buccal Mucosal Microbiota by 16S rRNA Sequencing for Forensic Investigations.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
- Using metagenomic data to boost protein structure prediction and discovery.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2022Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The highly personalized human skin microbiome may serve as a viable marker in personal identification. Amplicon sequencing resolution using 16S rRNA cannot identify bacterial communities sufficiently to discriminate between individuals. Thus, novel higher-resolution genetic markers are required for forensic purposes. The clustered regularly interspaced short palindromic repeats (CRISPRs) are prokaryotic genetic elements that can provide a history of infections encountered by the bacteria. The sequencing of CRISPR spacers may provide phylogenetic information with higher resolution than other markers. However, using spacer sequencing for discrimination of personal skin microbiome is difficult due to limited information on CRISPRs in human skin microbiomes. It remains unclear whether personal microbiome discrimination can be achieved using spacer diversity or which CRISPRs will be forensically relevant. We identified common CRISPRs in the human skin microbiome via metagenomic reconstruction and used amplicon sequencing for deep sequencing of spacers. We successfully reconstructed 24 putative CRISPR arrays using metagenomic data sets. A total of 1,223,462 reads from three CRISPR arrays revealed that spacers in the skin microbiome were highly personalized, and conserved repeats were commonly shared between individuals. These individual specificities observed using CRISPR typing were confirmed by comparing the CRISPR diversity to microbiome diversity assessed using 16S rRNA amplicon sequencing. CRISPR typing achieved 95.2% accuracy in personal classification, whereas 16S rRNA sequencing only achieved 52.6%. These results suggest that sequencing CRISPRs in the skin microbiome may be a more powerful approach for personal identification and ecological studies compared to conventional 16S rRNA sequencing.
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.