ArticleInterface focus2023
Evaluation of different 16S rRNA gene hypervariable regions and reference databases for profiling engineered microbiota structure and functional guilds in a swine wastewater treatment plant.
Article in Interface focus, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 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
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- Safety, Tolerability, and Gut Microbiota Impact of Sericin-Derived Oligopeptides (SDOs) from Yellow Silk Cocoons in Healthy Adults: A Randomized, Double-Blind, Placebo-Controlled Trial.Foods (Basel, Switzerland) · 2026Article
- Harnessing Engineered Microbial Consortia for Xenobiotic Bioremediation: Integrating Multi-Omics and AI for Next-Generation Wastewater Treatment.Journal of xenobiotics · 2025Review
- Impacts of Tick Parasitism on the Rodent Gut Microbiome.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Comparison of fecal microbiota and metabolites in diarrheal piglets pre-and post-weaning.Frontiers in veterinary science · 2025Article
- Efficacy of novel bacterial consortia in degrading fipronil and thiobencarb in paddy soil: a survey for community structure and metabolic pathways.Frontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Evaluation of different 16S rRNA gene hypervariable regions and reference databases for profiling engineered microbiota structure and functional guilds in a swine wastewater treatment plant.Interface focus · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
High-throughput 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing technology is widely applied for environmental microbiota structure analysis to derive knowledge that informs microbiome-based surveillance and oriented bioengineering. However, it remains elusive how the selection of 16S rRNA gene hypervariable regions and reference databases affects microbiota diversity and structure profiling. This study systematically evaluated the fitness of different frequently used reference databases (i.e. SILVA 138 SSU, GTDB bact120_r207, Greengenes 13_5 and MiDAS 4.8) and primers of 16S rRNA gene in microbiota profiling of anaerobic digestion and activated sludge collected from a full-scale swine wastewater treatment plant (WWTP). The comparative results showed that MiDAS 4.8 achieved the highest levels of taxonomic diversity and species-level assignment rate. For whichever sample groups, microbiota richness captured by different primers decreased in the following order: V4 > V4-V5 > V3-V4 > V6-V8/V1-V3. Using primer-bias-free metagenomic data results as the judging standard, V4 region also best characterized microbiota structure and well represented typical functional guilds (e.g. methanogens, ammonium oxidizers and denitrifiers), while V6-V8 regions largely overestimated the archaeal methanogens (mainly
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.