ArticleResearch & reviews. Journal of microbiology and biotechnology2023
Accelerating Gut Microbiome Research with Robust Sample Collection.
Article in Research & reviews. Journal of microbiology and biotechnology, 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.
- The impact of regular sauerkraut consumption on the human gut microbiota: a crossover intervention trial.Microbiome · 2025Trial
- Gut-testis axis: how microbiota influence male reproductive health.Asian biomedicine : research, reviews and news · 2026Review
- Early life gut microbiome and its impact on childhood health and chronic conditions.Gut microbes · 2025Review
- Plasma Metabolites as Mediators Between Gut Microbiota and Parkinson's Disease: Insights from Mendelian Randomization.Molecular neurobiology · 2025Article
- Using short-read 16S rRNA sequencing of multiple variable regions to generate high-quality results to a species level.Frontiers in bioinformatics · 2025Article
- Individual variability in patterns and dynamics of fecal gluten immunogenic peptides excretion after low gluten intake.European journal of nutrition · 2022Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
5 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Background: Inferior quality of biological material compromises data, slows discovery, and wastes research funds. The gut microbiome plays a critical role in human health and disease, yet little attention has been given to optimizing collection and processing methods of human stool. Methods: We collected the entire bowel movement from 2 healthy volunteers: one to examine stool sample heterogeneity and one to test stool sample handling parameters. Sequencing and bioinformatic analyses were used to examine the microbiome composition. Results: The microbiome profile varied depending on where the subsample was obtained from the stool. The exterior cortex of the stool was rich in specific phyla and deficient in others while the interior core of the stool revealed opposite microbiome profiles. Sample processing also resulted in varying microbiome profiles. Homogenization and stabilization at 4°C gave superior microbial diversity profiles compared to the fresh or frozen subsamples of the same stool sample. Bacterial proliferation continued in the fresh subsample when processed at ambient temperature. Conclusion: The microbiome profile is specific to the section of the stool being sampled. Stool sample collection, homogenization and stabilization at 4°C for 24 hours provides a neat, high-quality sample of sufficient quantity that can be banked into aliquots with nearly identical microbial diversity profiles. This collection pipeline is essential to accelerate our understanding of the gut microbiome in health and disease.
Indexed as
Identifiers
37388571PMC10308701What 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.