ArticleISME communications2022
Relationship between bacterial phylotype and specialized metabolite production in the culturable microbiome of two freshwater sponges.
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 7 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
7 citing papers in PubMed.
- IDBac: an open-access web platform to identify bacteria and analyze relationships in culture collections using MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Taxonomic and functional diversity of the microbiome associated with the freshwater sponge Metania sp. (Haplosclerida: Metaniidae) from the Brazilian Cerrado, a metagenomic approach.BMC microbiology · 2026Article
- IDBac: an open-access web platform and compendium for the identification of bacteria by MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry.bioRxiv : the preprint server for biology · 2025Article
- Article
- Use of MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and IDBac to mine for understudied bacterial genera from the environment.ISME communications · 2025Article
- High microbiome and metabolome diversification in coexisting sponges with different bio-ecological traits.Communications biology · 2024Article
- Freshwater Sponges as a Neglected Reservoir of Bacterial Biodiversity.Microorganisms · 2023Review
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
10 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Microbial drug discovery programs rely heavily on accessing bacterial diversity from the environment to acquire new specialized metabolite (SM) lead compounds for the therapeutic pipeline. Therefore, knowledge of how commonly culturable bacterial taxa are distributed in nature, in addition to the degree of variation of SM production within those taxa, is critical to informing these front-end discovery efforts and making the overall sample collection and bacterial library creation process more efficient. In the current study, we employed MALDI-TOF mass spectrometry and the bioinformatics pipeline IDBac to analyze diversity within phylotype groupings and SM profiles of hundreds of bacterial isolates from two Eunapius fragilis freshwater sponges, collected 1.5 km apart. We demonstrated that within two sponge samples of the same species, the culturable bacterial populations contained significant overlap in approximate genus-level phylotypes but mostly nonoverlapping populations of isolates when grouped lower than the level of genus. Further, correlations between bacterial phylotype and SM production varied at the species level and below, suggesting SM distribution within bacterial taxa must be analyzed on a case-by-case basis. Our results suggest that two E. fragilis freshwater sponges collected in similar environments can exhibit large culturable diversity on a species-level scale, thus researchers should scrutinize the isolates with analyses that take both phylogeny and SM production into account to optimize the chemical space entering into a downstream bacterial library.
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.