Evidence map›Paper›PMID 37301942›Full record

ArticleISME communications2023

Accounting for 16S rRNA copy number prediction uncertainty and its implications in bacterial diversity analyses.

Yingnan Gao, Martin Wu

Abstract read
In one paragraph

Article in ISME communications, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 25 papers.

0numbers the graph read from it
0cells of the map it votes in
25citing 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

25 citing papers in PubMed.

  1. Article
  2. Article
  3. Article
  4. Article
  5. Article
  6. Article
  7. Article
  8. Article
  9. Article
  10. Review
  11. Article
  12. Review
  13. Article
  14. Article
  15. Article
  16. Article
  17. Diversity of endophytic bacteria in mulberry (Frontiers in microbiology · 2025
    Article
  18. Article
  19. Review
  20. Review
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

2 authors.

Yingnan GaoDepartment of Biology, University of Virginia, 485 McCormick Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22904, USA.
Martin WuDepartment of Biology, University of Virginia, 485 McCormick Road, Charlottesville, VA, 22904, USA. mw4yv@virginia.edu.ORCID http://orcid.org/0000-0003-3093-4077

Funding

No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.

6 · The paper itself

Abstract

16S rRNA gene copy number (16S GCN) varies among bacterial species and this variation introduces potential biases to microbial diversity analyses using 16S rRNA read counts. To correct the biases, methods have been developed to predict 16S GCN. A recent study suggests that the prediction uncertainty can be so great that copy number correction is not justified in practice. Here we develop RasperGade16S, a novel method and software to better model and capture the inherent uncertainty in 16S GCN prediction. RasperGade16S implements a maximum likelihood framework of pulsed evolution model and explicitly accounts for intraspecific GCN variation and heterogeneous GCN evolution rates among species. Using cross-validation, we show that our method provides robust confidence estimates for the GCN predictions and outperforms other methods in both precision and recall. We have predicted GCN for 592605 OTUs in the SILVA database and tested 113842 bacterial communities that represent an exhaustive and diverse list of engineered and natural environments. We found that the prediction uncertainty is small enough for 99% of the communities that 16S GCN correction should improve their compositional and functional profiles estimated using 16S rRNA reads. On the other hand, we found that GCN variation has limited impacts on beta-diversity analyses such as PCoA, NMDS, PERMANOVA and random-forest test.

Identifiers

PMID37301942
PMCPMC10257666

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.