Evidence map›Paper›PMID 34785722›Full record

ArticleScientific reports2021

Enhancing diversity analysis by repeatedly rarefying next generation sequencing data describing microbial communities.

Ellen S Cameron, Philip J Schmidt, Benjamin J-M Tremblay, Monica B Emelko, Kirsten M Müller

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Scientific reports, 2021. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 114 papers, 2 of them syntheses that pooled it.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
114citing papers in PubMed, 2 pooled it
–field-weighted citation impact
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

114 citing papers in PubMed, 2 syntheses or guidelines pooled it.

  1. Pooled it
  2. Pooled it
  3. Trial
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Article
  11. Article
  12. Article
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Article
  18. Article
  19. Article
  20. Article

54 more citing papers are in PubMed but not listed here.

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

5 authors.

Ellen S CameronDepartment of Biology, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave. W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Philip J SchmidtDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave. W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Benjamin J-M TremblayDepartment of Biology, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave. W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Monica B EmelkoDepartment of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave. W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada.
Kirsten M MüllerDepartment of Biology, University of Waterloo, 200 University Ave. W, Waterloo, ON, N2L 3G1, Canada. kirsten.muller@uwaterloo.ca.

Funding

Natural Sciences and Engineering Research Council of Canada NETGP-494312-16
6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Amplicon sequencing has revolutionized our ability to study DNA collected from environmental samples by providing a rapid and sensitive technique for microbial community analysis that eliminates the challenges associated with lab cultivation and taxonomic identification through microscopy. In water resources management, it can be especially useful to evaluate ecosystem shifts in response to natural and anthropogenic landscape disturbances to signal potential water quality concerns, such as the detection of toxic cyanobacteria or pathogenic bacteria. Amplicon sequencing data consist of discrete counts of sequence reads, the sum of which is the library size. Groups of samples typically have different library sizes that are not representative of biological variation; library size normalization is required to meaningfully compare diversity between them. Rarefaction is a widely used normalization technique that involves the random subsampling of sequences from the initial sample library to a selected normalized library size. This process is often dismissed as statistically invalid because subsampling effectively discards a portion of the observed sequences, yet it remains prevalent in practice and the suitability of rarefying, relative to many other normalization approaches, for diversity analysis has been argued. Here, repeated rarefying is proposed as a tool to normalize library sizes for diversity analyses. This enables (i) proportionate representation of all observed sequences and (ii) characterization of the random variation introduced to diversity analyses by rarefying to a smaller library size shared by all samples. While many deterministic data transformations are not tailored to produce equal library sizes, repeatedly rarefying reflects the probabilistic process by which amplicon sequencing data are obtained as a representation of the amplified source microbial community. Specifically, it evaluates which data might have been obtained if a particular sample's library size had been smaller and allows graphical representation of the effects of this library size normalization process upon diversity analysis results.

Identifiers

PMID34785722
PMCPMC8595385

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.