ArticleHuman reproduction open2026
Comprehensive 16S rRNA gene sequencing and meta-transcriptomic analyses of the female reproductive tract microbiota: two molecular profiles with different messages.
Article in Human reproduction open, 2026. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 5 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
5 citing papers in PubMed.
- Assessing the female urogenital-rectal axis microbiome: focus on endometriosis and recurrent implantation failure.Reproductive biology and endocrinology : RB&E · 2026Article
- Bacterial Extracellular Vesicles: New Hype or Hope to Explain Reproductive Host-Microbiota Interactions.Journal of extracellular vesicles · 2026Review
- Oral and plasma microbiome in the context of acute febrile illness.medRxiv : the preprint server for health sciences · 2026Article
- Vaginal Nugent Lactobacillus morphotype score and endometrial pathogen detection: a two-centre retrospective study.Frontiers in endocrinology · 2026Observational
- Retrospective comparative analysis of pre-IVF vaginal and semen microbiological cultures in infertile couples highlights absence of microbial concordance.Frontiers in cellular and infection microbiology · 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
17 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
study questionDoes the analysis of endometrial microbes provide the same information when using DNA or RNA sequencing-based techniques? SUMMARY ANSWER: DNA vs RNA-based microbial analysis techniques demonstrated significant microbial compositional differences and lack of transcriptionally active lactobacilli in the endometrium. WHAT IS KNOWN ALREADY: Our understanding of the endometrial microbiome is primarily based on DNA-based 16S rRNA gene profiling, but DNA detection does not imply the presence of living microbes. While this method is cost-effective and widely used, it has notable limitations, including the underestimation of microbial diversity, abundance, and functionality, as well as limited species-level resolution. While the microbiome reflects DNA-based characterization, the microbiota more precisely captures metabolically active communities. In this context, meta-transcriptomic analysis, an RNA-based approach, addresses these shortcomings by capturing functional transcripts that are actively expressed in living microbes. STUDY DESIGN SIZE DURATION: This cross-sectional study consisted of 49 reproductive-aged women (27-42 years old) who were receiving ART. By simultaneously analysing the microbial composition and gene expression within female reproductive tract samples, we sought to provide a more comprehensive understanding of the microbiota and functional potential of these samples. PARTICIPANTS/MATERIALS SETTING
methodsVaginal swabs, endometrial brushing, and endometrial biopsy samples were collected from 49 participants during the mid-secretory phase of their menstrual cycle, 6-9 days after the luteinizing hormone surge for parallel 16S rRNA gene sequencing and meta-transcriptome analyses. For DNA-based analysis, the 16S rRNA gene V4 region was sequenced. For RNA-based analysis, total RNA was extracted followed by ribosomal RNA depletion. Strand-specific total RNA sequencing libraries were prepared and sequenced. Taxonomy was assigned by using Kraken2 (v2.2.1), and Bracken (v2.7). MAIN RESULTS AND THE ROLE OF CHANCE: Our findings suggest that in low-microbial-biomass environments such as the endometrium, the correlation between 16S rRNA gene sequencing and meta-transcriptomics is relatively weak. This highlights the limitations of microbial analysis of low-microbial-biomass samples. Alternatively, microbial functions and genome activity may be tissue-specific and dependent on the host tissue environment. Moreover, RNA-based analysis provides higher resolution in detecting certain pathogens, even within the endometrium. LARGE SCALE DATA: The data presented in the study are deposited in the NCBI SRA Database, accession number PRJNA1247240. LIMITATIONS REASONS FOR CAUTION: High levels of host RNA and the low abundance of microbial reads in the endometrium complicate microbial identification. Our findings indicate that RNA-seq enables precise profiling of the vaginal microbiome and, in cases of dysbiosis, reveals higher pathogen activity than DNA-based approaches. However, the limited sample size restricts the generalization of these conclusions. WIDER IMPLICATIONS OF THE
findingsContrary to the general belief of the dominance of STUDY FUNDING/COMPETING INTERESTS: This work was supported by the projects Endo-Map PID2021-127280OB-I00, ROSY CNS2022-135999, and ENDORE SAF2017-87526-R funded by MICIU/AEI/10.13039/501100011033 and by FEDER, EU. This work was also supported by the Estonian Research Council grants (PSG1082 and PRG1076), Swedish Research Council grant no. 2024-02530 and Novo Nordisk Foundation grant no. NNF24OC0092384. Additionally, A.S.L. and I.P.P. acknowledge Becas Fundación Ramón Areces para Estudios Postdoctorales-Convocatorias XXXV and XXXVI, para Ampliación de Estudios en el Extranjero en Ciencias de la Vida y de la Materia. A.S. is supported by Horizon Europe (NESTOR, grant no. 101120075) and the Ministry of Education and Research Centres of Excellence grant TK214 name of CoE. All the authors declare no conflict of interest.
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.