Evidence map›Paper›PMID 35101122›Full record

ArticleEnvironmental microbiome2022

In-situ sequencing reveals the effect of storage on lacustrine sediment microbiome demographics and functionality.

Richard K Tennant, Ann L Power, Sara K Burton, Norman Sinclair, David A Parker, Richard T Jones, Rob Lee, John Love

Open access · goldAbstract read
In one paragraph

Article in Environmental microbiome, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 7 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
7citing papers in PubMed
2.0field-weighted citation impact, top 14% 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

7 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.

  1. Article
  2. Laboratory and In-Field Metagenomics for Environmental Monitoring.Methods in molecular biology (Clifton, N.J.) · 2025
    Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
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

8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.

Richard K TennantGeography, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4RJ, UK. R.K.Tennant@exeter.ac.uk.
Ann L PowerBiosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QD, UK.
Sara K BurtonBiosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QD, UK.
Norman SinclairThe Orkney Brewery, Quoyloo, Stromness, Orkney, KW16 3LT, UK.
David A ParkerBiosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QD, UK.
Richard T JonesBiosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QD, UK.
Rob LeeBiosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QD, UK.
John LoveBiosciences, College of Life and Environmental Sciences, The University of Exeter, Exeter, EX4 4QD, UK.
University of Exeter · GBBalfour Hospital · GB

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

The sediment microbiome is a demographically diverse and functionally active biosphere. Ensuring that data acquired from sediment is truly representative of the microbiome is critical to achieving robust analyses. Sample storage and the processing and timing of nucleic acid purification after environmental sample extraction may fundamentally affect the detectable microbial community and thereby significantly alter resultant data. Direct sequencing of environmental samples is increasingly commonplace due to the advent of the portable Oxford Nanopore MinION sequencing device. Here we demonstrate that storing sediment subsamples at - 20 °C or storing the cores at 4 °C for 10 weeks prior to analysis, has a significant effect on the sediment microbiome analysed using sedimentary DNA (sedDNA), especially for Alpha-, Beta- and Deltaproteobacteria species. Furthermore, these significant differences are observed regardless of sediment type. We show that the taxa which are predominantly affected by storage are Proteobacteria, and therefore recommend on-site purifications are performed to ensure an accurate representation of these taxa are observed in the microbiome. Comparisons of sedimentary RNA (sedRNA) analyses, revealed substantial differences between samples purified and sequenced immediately on-site, samples that were frozen before transportation, and cores that were stored at 4 °C prior to analysis. Our data therefore suggest that a more accurate representation of the sediment microbiome demography and functionality may be achieved by environmental sequencing as rapidly as possible to minimise confounding effects of storage.

Indexed as

BioinformaticsHolocene sedimentsMicrobiomeONT MinION sequencingsedDNAsedRNAStorage

Identifiers

PMID35101122
PMCPMC8805238
OpenAlexW4210743265

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.