ArticleISME communications2025
Differences in metagenome coverage may confound abundance-based and diversity conclusions and how to deal with them.
Article in ISME communications, 2025. 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.
- A Metagenome-Based Methodology to Track Genomically Recoded Strains and Assess Their Effects on Indigenous Microbes.Environmental science & technology · 2026Article
- Uncovering transcriptional processes in microbial communities adapted to differing saline conditions in salt-weathered historic buildings.Microbiome · 2026Article
- Effects of marine heatwaves on the dynamics of marine coastal microbial communities.Environmental microbiome · 2026Article
- Uneven sequencing (coverage) depth can bias microbial intraspecies diversity estimates and how to account for it.ISME communications · 2025Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
3 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
The importance of rarefying ecological or amplicon sequencing data to a standardized level of diversity coverage for reliable diversity comparisons across samples is well recognized. However, the importance of diversity coverage, i.e. the fraction of the genomic diversity of a sample sequenced, in comparative shotgun metagenomic studies remains frequently overlooked. Using both
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.