ReviewJournal of the Indian Institute of Science2023
Big Data for a Small World: A Review on Databases and Resources for Studying Microbiomes.
Review in Journal of the Indian Institute of Science, 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.
- Large-scale classification of metagenomic samples: a comparative analysis of classical machine learning techniques vs a novel brain-inspired hyperdimensional computing approach.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Computational Metagenomics: State of the Art.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Review
- Do we need a standardized 16S rRNA gene amplicon sequencing analysis protocol for poultry microbiota research?Poultry science · 2025Review
- Non-Targeted RNA Sequencing: Towards the Development of Universal Clinical Diagnosis Methods for Human and Veterinary Infectious Diseases.Veterinary sciences · 2024Review
- Celiac disease gut microbiome studies in the third millennium: reviewing the findings and gaps of available literature.Frontiers in medical technology · 2024Review
- Twnbiome: a public database of the healthy Taiwanese gut microbiome.BMC bioinformatics · 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
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Microorganisms are ubiquitous in nature and form complex community networks to survive in various environments. This community structure depends on numerous factors like nutrient availability, abiotic factors like temperature and pH as well as microbial composition. Categorising accessible biomes according to their habitats would help in understanding the complexity of the environment-specific communities. Owing to the recent improvements in sequencing facilities, researchers have started to explore diverse microbiomes rapidly and attempts have been made to study microbial crosstalk. However, different metagenomics sampling, preprocessing, and annotation methods make it difficult to compare multiple studies and hinder the recycling of data. Huge datasets originating from these experiments demand systematic computational methods to extract biological information beyond microbial compositions. Further exploration of microbial co-occurring patterns across the biomes could help us in designing cross-biome experiments. In this review, we catalogue databases with system-specific microbiomes, discussing publicly available common databases as well as specialised databases for a range of microbiomes. If the new datasets generated in the future could maintain at least biome-specific annotation, then researchers could use those contemporary tools for relevant and bias-free analysis of complex metagenomics data.
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.