ArticleScientific reports2024
Comparison of DNA extraction methods on different sample matrices within the same terrestrial ecosystem.
Article in Scientific reports, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 16 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
16 citing papers in PubMed, 25 citations in OpenAlex.
- Comparative metagenomic assessment of Illumina-compatible library preparation methods, short-read lengths, and PacBio HiFi sequencing reveals differences in microbial and functional diversity recovery from a complex environmental sample.Microbiology spectrum · 2026Article
- Article
- Evaluating effects of tissue type, preservation method, and decomposition on DNA quality to support genetic sampling in stranded small cetaceans.Scientific reports · 2026Article
- Comparative performance of traditional and commercial DNA extraction methods for fish gut microbiota analysis.Molecular biology reports · 2026Article
- Towards standardization in pig microbiome research based on a comprehensive twenty-year review.Animal microbiome · 2026Review
- Characterization of the Endometrial Microbiota of Healthy Mares Across the Estrous Cycle.Animals : an open access journal from MDPI · 2026Article
- From population science to the clinic? Limits of epigenetic clocks as personal biomarkers.Epigenomics · 2025Article
- Microbial community characterization in Red Sea-derived samples using a field-deployable DNA extraction system and nanopore sequencing.Environmental microbiome · 2025Article
- Analyzing human gut microbiome data from global populations: challenges and resources.Trends in microbiology · 2025Review
- How sequencing technology shapes our understanding of river water microbiomes and resistomes: a comparative study.Applied and environmental microbiology · 2025Article
- Impact of DNA Extraction and 16S rRNA Gene Amplification Strategy on Microbiota Profiling of Faecal Samples.International journal of molecular sciences · 2025Article
- A blueprint for contemporary studies of microbiomes.Microbiome · 2025Article
- Microbiome dysbiosis and endometriosis: a systematic scoping review of current literature and knowledge gaps.Human reproduction open · 2025Review
- Comparative evaluation of sequencing technologies and primer sets for mouse gut microbiota profiling.Frontiers in microbiology · 2025Article
- A global comparison of surface and subsurface microbiomes reveals large-scale biodiversity gradients, and a marine-terrestrial divide.Science advances · 2024Article
- 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 4 institutions in 2 countries.
Funding
Abstract
Metataxonomic studies of ecosystem microbiotas require the simultaneous processing of samples with contrasting physical and biochemical traits. However, there are no published studies of comparisons of different DNA extraction kits to characterize the microbiotas of the main components of terrestrial ecosystems. Here, and to our knowledge for the first time, five DNA extraction kits were used to investigate the composition and diversity of the microbiota of a subset of samples typically studied in terrestrial ecosystems such as bulk soil, rhizosphere soil, invertebrate taxa and mammalian feces. DNA extraction kit was associated with changes in the relative abundance of hundreds of ASVs, in the same samples, resulting in significant differences in alpha and beta diversity estimates of their microbiotas. Importantly, the impact of DNA extraction kit on sample diversity varies according to sample type, with mammalian feces and soil samples showing the most and least consistent diversity estimates across DNA extraction kits, respectively. We show that the MACHEREY-NAGEL NucleoSpin® Soil kit was associated with the highest alpha diversity estimates, providing the highest contribution to the overall sample diversity, as indicated by comparisons with computationally assembled reference communities, and is recommended to be used for any large-scale microbiota study of terrestrial ecosystems.
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.