ArticlePloS one2022
An optimized approach for processing of frozen lung and lavage samples for microbiome studies.
Article in PloS one, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 10 citations in OpenAlex.
- Mitochondria Meet the Lung Microbiome: A Bidirectional Dialogue in Inflammation and Respiratory Diseases.Biomedicines · 2026Review
- Blood-based targeted sequencing of microbial cell-free DNA in severe pneumonia-associated sepsis.Respiratory research · 2026Article
- Benefits and challenges of host depletion methods in profiling the upper and lower respiratory microbiome.NPJ biofilms and microbiomes · 2025Article
- Sampling techniques and genomic analysis of biological material from artworks.Journal of forensic sciences · 2025Article
- Lung Microbiome in Lung Cancer: A Systematic Review.Microorganisms · 2024Review
- Article
- DNA extraction protocol impacts ocular surface microbiome profile.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Gut and lung microbiome profiles in pregnant mice.Frontiers in microbiology · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
The respiratory tract has a resident microbiome with low biomass and limited diversity. This results in difficulties with sample preparation for sequencing due to uneven bacteria-to-host DNA ratio, especially for small tissue samples such as mouse lungs. We compared effectiveness of current procedures used for DNA extraction in microbiome studies. Bronchoalveolar lavage fluid (BALF) and lung tissue samples were collected to test different forms of sample pre-treatment and extraction methods to increase bacterial DNA yield and optimize library preparation. DNA extraction using a pre-treatment method of mechanical lysis (lung tissue) and one-step centrifugation (BALF) increased DNA yield and bacterial content of samples. In contrast, a significant increase of environmental contamination was detected after phenol chloroform isoamyl alcohol (PCI) extraction and nested PCR. While PCI has been a standard procedure used in microbiome studies, our data suggests that it is not efficient for DNA extraction of frozen low biomass samples. Finally, a DNA Enrichment kit was tested and found to improve the 16S copy number of lung tissue with a minor shift in microbial composition. Overall, we present a standardized method to provide high yielding DNA and improve sequencing coverage of low microbial biomass frozen samples with minimal contamination.
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.