ReviewHeliyon2024
Current status and future developments of assessing microbiome composition and dynamics in anaerobic digestion systems using metagenomic approaches.
Review in Heliyon, 2024. 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.
- Using feeding regime as a microbial selective pressure to optimise biogas production and digestate sanitisation from slurry-based anaerobic digestion.Environmental microbiome · 2026Article
- Targeting Microorganisms in Lignocellulosic Biomass to Produce Biogas and Ensure Sanitation and Hygiene.Microorganisms · 2026Review
- Methane Concentration Prediction in Anaerobic Codigestion Using Multiple Linear Regression with Integrated Microbial and Operational Data.Bioengineering (Basel, Switzerland) · 2025Article
- Can Metagenomic Analyses Be Used Effectively in Safe Food Production?Food science & nutrition · 2025Review
- Article
- Modeling and forecasting biogas production from anaerobic digestion process for sustainable resource energy recovery.Heliyon · 2024Article
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
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The metagenomic approach stands as a powerful technique for examining the composition of microbial communities and their involvement in various anaerobic digestion (AD) systems. Understanding the structure, function, and dynamics of microbial communities becomes pivotal for optimizing the biogas process, enhancing its stability and improving overall performance. Currently, taxonomic profiling of biogas-producing communities relies mainly on high-throughput 16S rRNA sequencing, offering insights into the bacterial and archaeal structures of AD assemblages and their correlations with fed substrates and process parameters. To delve even deeper, shotgun and genome-centric metagenomic approaches are employed to recover individual genomes from the metagenome. This provides a nuanced understanding of collective functionalities, interspecies interactions, and microbial associations with abiotic factors. The application of OMICs in AD systems holds the potential to revolutionize the field, leading to more efficient and sustainable waste management practices particularly through the implementation of precision anaerobic digestion systems. As ongoing research in this area progresses, anticipations are high for further exciting developments in the future. This review serves to explore the current landscape of metagenomic analyses, with focus on advancing our comprehension and critically evaluating biases and recommendations in the analysis of microbial communities in anaerobic digesters. Its objective is to explore how contemporary metagenomic approaches can be effectively applied to enhance our understanding and contribute to the refinement of the AD process. This marks a substantial stride towards achieving a more comprehensive understanding of anaerobic digestion systems.
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.