ArticleNature communications2024
Missing microbial eukaryotes and misleading meta-omic conclusions.
Article in Nature communications, 2024. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 4 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
4 citing papers in PubMed.
- Integrated transcriptomic and hormonomic insights into cadmium tolerance of aMicrobiology (Reading, England) · 2026Article
- Photodynamic Therapy with Protoporphyrin IX Precursors Using Artificial Daylight Improves Skin Antisepsis for Orthopedic Surgeries.Microorganisms · 2025Article
- Microeukaryote metabolism across the western North Atlantic Ocean revealed through autonomous underwater profiling.Nature communications · 2024Article
- Lessons from Extremophiles: Functional Adaptations and Genomic Innovations across the Eukaryotic Tree of Life.Genome biology and evolution · 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
8 authors.
Funding
Abstract
Meta-omics is commonly used for large-scale analyses of microbial eukaryotes, including species or taxonomic group distribution mapping, gene catalog construction, and inference on the functional roles and activities of microbial eukaryotes in situ. Here, we explore the potential pitfalls of common approaches to taxonomic annotation of protistan meta-omic datasets. We re-analyze three environmental datasets at three levels of taxonomic hierarchy in order to illustrate the crucial importance of database completeness and curation in enabling accurate environmental interpretation. We show that taxonomic membership of sequence clusters estimates community composition more accurately than returning exact sequence labels, and overlap between clusters can address database shortcomings. Clustering approaches can be applied to diverse environments while continuing to exploit the wealth of annotation data collated in databases, and selecting and evaluating these databases is a critical part of correctly annotating protistan taxonomy in environmental datasets. We argue that ongoing curation of genetic resources is crucial in accurately annotating protists in in situ meta-omic datasets. Moreover, we propose that precise taxonomic annotation of meta-omic data is a clustering problem rather than a feasible alignment problem.
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.