ArticleScientific reports2025
Manually weighted taxonomy classifiers improve species-specific rumen microbiome analysis compared to unweighted or average weighted taxonomy classifiers.
Article in Scientific reports, 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.
- Exercise Training Transiently Increases Gut Microbiota Diversity and Short-Chain Fatty Acid Production in a Diet-Dependent Manner in Healthy Adults.Microorganisms · 2026Article
- Integrative Bioinformatics Approaches in Environmental Biotechnology: A Review.TheScientificWorldJournal · 2026Review
- Significant impact of threshold adjustments on microbiome characterization following Nanopore sequencing.ISME communications · 2026Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
Previous research has demonstrated that applying taxonomic weights to shotgun metagenomic data can improve species identification in 16S rRNA gene-based microbiome analysis. However, such an approach does not allow for accurate analysis of samples collected from less studied habitats, such as rumen. In the present study, we developed a method to incorporate taxonomic weights based on relative abundance of species identified from shotgun sequencing and amplicon sequencing data derived from rumen. Using this weighting method, we evaluated latest versions of five prominent databases-SILVA, Greengenes2 (GG2), RDP, NCBI RefSeq, and GTDB-against the BLAST 16S rRNA database, assessing classification counts, fully classified ratios (proportion of ASVs classified to a known genus and species), and error rates. Our results indicated that providing taxonomic weights partially increased classification counts and fully classified ratios, although the extent of improvement varied across databases. A reduction in error rates was also observed compared to the unweighted taxonomy classifier (P < 0.05). While GG2 and SILVA struggled with accurate classification at the species level owing to their inherent database characteristics, GTDB consistently improved all metrics using the manually weighted taxonomy classifier, achieving up to an 8% error rate reduction at the species level. NCBI RefSeq and RDP also exhibited remarkable improvement in the classification counts and fully classified ratios, along with error rate reductions by up to 47% at the species level. These findings demonstrate that amplicon sequencing datasets can enhance rumen microbiome analyses through effective weighting methods. While SILVA is commonly used in metataxonomic analyses of the rumen microbiome, we recommend NCBI RefSeq for species-level classification due to its superior accuracy and minimal ambiguous classification (e.g., "uncultured" or "sp.") in future metataxonomic studies.
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.