ArticleISME communications2022
Fast quantification of gut bacterial species in cocultures using flow cytometry and supervised classification.
Article in ISME communications, 2022. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 8 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
8 citing papers in PubMed, 21 citations in OpenAlex.
- Absolute quantification of prokaryotes in the microbiome by 16S rRNA qPCR or ddPCR.Nature protocols · 2025Review
- Uncertainty Modeling Outperforms Machine Learning for Microbiome Data Analysis.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Quantifying synthetic bacterial community composition with flow cytometry: efficacy in mock communities and challenges in co-cultures.mSystems · 2025Article
- Article
- Starvation responses impact interaction dynamics of human gut bacteria Bacteroides thetaiotaomicron and Roseburia intestinalis.The ISME journal · 2023Article
- Opportunities in optical and electrical single-cell technologies to study microbial ecosystems.Frontiers in microbiology · 2023Review
- Exploration of microbiome diversity of stacked fermented grains by flow cytometry and cell sorting.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
8 authors at 2 institutions in 1 country.
Funding
Abstract
A bottleneck for microbial community experiments with many samples and/or replicates is the fast quantification of individual taxon abundances, which is commonly achieved through sequencing marker genes such as the 16S rRNA gene. Here, we propose a new approach for high-throughput and high-quality enumeration of human gut bacteria in a defined community, combining flow cytometry and supervised classification to identify and quantify species mixed in silico and in defined communities in vitro. We identified species in a 5-species in silico community with an F1 score of 71%. In addition, we demonstrate in vitro that our method performs equally well or better than 16S rRNA gene sequencing in two-species cocultures and agrees with 16S rRNA gene sequencing data on the most abundant species in a four-species community. We found that shape and size differences alone are insufficient to distinguish species, and that it is thus necessary to exploit the multivariate nature of flow cytometry data. Finally, we observed that variability of flow cytometry data across replicates differs between gut bacterial species. In conclusion, the performance of supervised classification of gut species in flow cytometry data is species-dependent, but is for some combinations accurate enough to serve as a faster alternative to 16S rRNA gene sequencing.
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.