Evidence map›Paper›PMID 36227846›Full record

ReviewPLoS computational biology2022

Calibrating spatiotemporal models of microbial communities to microscopy data: A review.

Aaron Yip, Julien Smith-Roberge, Sara Haghayegh Khorasani, Marc G Aucoin, Brian P Ingalls

Abstract readReview
In one paragraph

Review in PLoS computational biology, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
5citing papers in PubMed
–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

5 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Review
  2. Article
  3. Review
  4. Deciphering and designing microbial communities by genome-scale metabolic modelling.Computational and structural biotechnology journal · 2024
    Review
  5. 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

5 authors.

Aaron YipDepartment of Chemical Engineering, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-4442-0432
Julien Smith-RobergeDepartment of Applied Mathematics, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.
Sara Haghayegh KhorasaniDepartment of Chemical Engineering, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0002-8661-5326
Marc G AucoinDepartment of Chemical Engineering, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0001-9393-5558
Brian P IngallsDepartment of Chemical Engineering, University of Waterloo, Ontario, Canada.ORCID 0000-0003-2118-3881

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

Spatiotemporal models that account for heterogeneity within microbial communities rely on single-cell data for calibration and validation. Such data, commonly collected via microscopy and flow cytometry, have been made more accessible by recent advances in microfluidics platforms and data processing pipelines. However, validating models against such data poses significant challenges. Validation practices vary widely between modelling studies; systematic and rigorous methods have not been widely adopted. Similar challenges are faced by the (macrobial) ecology community, in which systematic calibration approaches are often employed to improve quantitative predictions from computational models. Here, we review single-cell observation techniques that are being applied to study microbial communities and the calibration strategies that are being employed for accompanying spatiotemporal models. To facilitate future calibration efforts, we have compiled a list of summary statistics relevant for quantifying spatiotemporal patterns in microbial communities. Finally, we highlight some recently developed techniques that hold promise for improved model calibration, including algorithmic guidance of summary statistic selection and machine learning approaches for efficient model simulation.

Indexed as

MicrobiotaMicroscopyBiotaCalibrationMachine Learning

Identifiers

PMID36227846
PMCPMC9560168

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.