ArticleMicrobiome2025
Enhancing microbial predator-prey detection with network and trait-based analyses.
Article in Microbiome, 2025. 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.
- Effects of Nutrient Limitation on Antarctic Microbial Community Diversity, Composition, and Interactions: A Cryoconite Microcosm Study.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- β-Elemonic acid mediated enrichment of Paenibacillus to help Salvia miltiorrhiza Bunge alleviate drought stress.Microbiome · 2025Article
- A Pan-European Whole-Microbiome Study of Wastewater Influent: Prokaryotes, Protists, Fungi, and Metazoa.The Journal of eukaryotic microbiologyArticle
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
7 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
backgroundNetwork analyses are often applied to microbial communities using sequencing survey datasets. However, associations in such networks do not necessarily indicate actual biotic interactions, and even if they do, the nature of the interactions commonly remains unclear. While network analyses are valuable for generating hypotheses, the inferred hypotheses are rarely experimentally confirmed.
resultsWe employed cross-kingdom network analyses, applied trait-based functions to the microorganisms, and subsequently experimentally investigated the found putative predator-prey interactions to evaluate whether, and to what extent, correlations indicate actual predator-prey relationships. For this, we investigated algae and their protistan predators in biocrusts of three distinct polar regions, i.e., Svalbard, the Antarctic Peninsula, and Continental Antarctica. Network analyses using FlashWeave indicated that 89, 138, and 51 correlations occurred between predatory protists and algae, respectively. However, trait assignment revealed that only 4.7-9.3% of said correlations link predators to actually suitable prey. We further confirmed these results with HMSC modeling, which resulted in similar numbers of 7.5% and 4.8% linking predators to suitable prey for full co-occurrence and abundance models, respectively. The combination of network analyses and trait assignment increased confidence in the prediction of predator-prey interactions, as we show that 82% of all experimentally investigated correlations could be verified. Furthermore, we found that more vicious predators, i.e., predators with the highest growth rate in co-culture with their prey, exhibit higher stress and betweenness centrality - giving rise to the future possibility of determining important predators from their network statistics.
conclusionsOur results support the idea of using network analyses for inferring predator-prey interactions, but at the same time call for cautionary consideration of the results, by combining them with trait-based approaches to increase confidence in the prediction of biological interactions. Video Abstract.
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.