ArticlemSystems2023
Inferring microbial co-occurrence networks from amplicon data: a systematic evaluation.
Article in mSystems, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed.
- Metabolite-Resolved Validation of Bacterial Organophosphate Transformation in Soil: A Critical Review of Selected Organophosphate Case Studies.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Specificity of the rhizosphere fungal community in Alsophila spinulosa: structure, function, and co-occurrence networks.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- Observational
- Bayesian inference captures metabolite-bacteria interactions in a microbial community.ISME communications · 2026Article
- Microbial cohorts: bringing ecological meaning to the modularity concept of co-occurrence networks.ISME communications · 2026Article
- Pesticide Residues Reduce Bacterial Diversity but Enhance Stability via Network Motif Restructuring.Toxics · 2025Article
- microbetag: simplifying microbial network interpretation through annotation, enrichment tests, and metabolic complementarity analysis.Genome biology · 2025Article
- Feeding Behavior and Ecological Significance ofBiology · 2025Article
- Cross-validation for training and testing co-occurrence network inference algorithms.BMC bioinformatics · 2025Article
- A novel robust network construction and analysis workflow for mining infant microbiota relationships.mSystems · 2025Article
- SpeSpeNet: an interactive and user-friendly tool to create and explore microbial correlation networks.ISME communications · 2025Article
- Mitigating gaseous nitrogen emissions in cotton fields through green manure and reduced nitrogen fertilization.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- A systematic discussion and comparison of the construction methods of synthetic microbial community.Synthetic and systems biotechnology · 2024Review
- The structure and function of rhizosphere bacterial communities: impact of chemical vs. bio-organic fertilizers on root disease, quality, and yield ofFrontiers in microbiology · 2024Article
- Capturing the dynamics of microbial interactions through individual-specific networks.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Article
- Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Microbes commonly organize into communities consisting of hundreds of species involved in complex interactions with each other. 16S ribosomal RNA (16S rRNA) amplicon profiling provides snapshots that reveal the phylogenies and abundance profiles of these microbial communities. These snapshots, when collected from multiple samples, can reveal the co-occurrence of microbes, providing a glimpse into the network of associations in these communities. However, the inference of networks from 16S data involves numerous steps, each requiring specific tools and parameter choices. Moreover, the extent to which these steps affect the final network is still unclear. In this study, we perform a meticulous analysis of each step of a pipeline that can convert 16S sequencing data into a network of microbial associations. Through this process, we map how different choices of algorithms and parameters affect the co-occurrence network and identify the steps that contribute substantially to the variance. We further determine the tools and parameters that generate robust co-occurrence networks and develop consensus network algorithms based on benchmarks with mock and synthetic data sets. The Microbial Co-occurrence Network Explorer, or MiCoNE (available at https://github.com/segrelab/MiCoNE) follows these default tools and parameters and can help explore the outcome of these combinations of choices on the inferred networks. We envisage that this pipeline could be used for integrating multiple data sets and generating comparative analyses and consensus networks that can guide our understanding of microbial community assembly in different biomes. IMPORTANCE Mapping the interrelationships between different species in a microbial community is important for understanding and controlling their structure and function. The surge in the high-throughput sequencing of microbial communities has led to the creation of thousands of data sets containing information about microbial abundances. These abundances can be transformed into co-occurrence networks, providing a glimpse into the associations within microbiomes. However, processing these data sets to obtain co-occurrence information relies on several complex steps, each of which involves numerous choices of tools and corresponding parameters. These multiple options pose questions about the robustness and uniqueness of the inferred networks. In this study, we address this workflow and provide a systematic analysis of how these choices of tools affect the final network and guidelines on appropriate tool selection for a particular data set. We also develop a consensus network algorithm that helps generate more robust co-occurrence networks based on benchmark synthetic data sets.
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.