ArticleWorld journal of microbiology & biotechnology2024
Comparative genomic analysis and characterization of novel high-quality draft genomes from the coal metagenome.
Article in World journal of microbiology & biotechnology, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 3 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
3 citing papers in PubMed.
- Acinetobacter baumannii's ecology- more than meets the eye.Nature communications · 2026Article
- Article
- 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
2 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Coal, a sedimentary rock harbours a complex microbial community that plays a significant role in its formation and characteristics. However, coal metagenome sequencing and studies were less, limiting our understanding of this complex ecosystem. This study aimed to reconstruct high-quality metagenome-assembled genomes (MAGs) from the coal sample collected in the Neyveli mine to explore the unrevealed diversity of the coal microbiome. Using Illumina sequencing, we obtained high-quality raw reads in FASTQ format. Subsequently, de novo assembly and binning with metaWRAP software facilitated the reconstruction of coal MAGs. Quality assessment using CheckM identified 10 High-Quality MAGs (HQ MAGs), 7 medium-quality MAGs (MQ MAGs), and 6 low-quality MAGs (LQ MAGs). Further analysis using GTDB-Tk revealed four HQ MAGs as known species like Dermacoccus abyssi, Sphingomonas aquatilis, Acinetobacter baumannii, and Burkholderia cenocepacia. The remaining six HQ MAGs were classified as Comamonas, Arthrobacter, Noviherbaspirillum, Acidovorax, Oxalicibacterium, and Bordetella and designated as novel genomes by the validation of digital DNA-DNA hybridization (dDDH). Phylogenetic analysis and further pangenome analysis across the phylogenetic groups revealed a similar pattern with a high proportion of cloud genes. We further analysed the functional potential of these MAGs and closely related genomes using COG. The comparative functional genomics revealed that novel genomes are highly versatile, potentially reflecting adaptations to the coal environment. BlastKOALA was used to conduct a detailed analysis of the metabolic pathways associated with the MAGs. This study highlights the comparative genomic analysis of novel coal genomes with their closely related genomes to understand the evolutionary relationships and functional properties.
Indexed as
Identifiers
39485561What 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.