↓ Skip to main content

Influence of fecal collection conditions and 16S rRNA gene sequencing at two centers on human gut microbiota analysis

Overview of attention for article published in Scientific Reports, March 2018
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 25% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (86th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (85th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
17 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
45 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
122 Mendeley
Title
Influence of fecal collection conditions and 16S rRNA gene sequencing at two centers on human gut microbiota analysis
Published in
Scientific Reports, March 2018
DOI 10.1038/s41598-018-22491-7
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jocelyn Sietsma Penington, Megan A. S. Penno, Katrina M. Ngui, Nadim J. Ajami, Alexandra J. Roth-Schulze, Stephen A. Wilcox, Esther Bandala-Sanchez, John M. Wentworth, Simon C. Barry, Cheryl Y. Brown, Jennifer J. Couper, Joseph F. Petrosino, Anthony T. Papenfuss, Leonard C. Harrison, ENDIA Study Group*

Abstract

To optimise fecal sampling for reproducible analysis of the gut microbiome, we compared different methods of sample collection and sequencing of 16S rRNA genes at two centers. Samples collected from six individuals on three consecutive days were placed in commercial collection tubes (OMNIgeneGut OMR-200) or in sterile screw-top tubes in a home fridge or home freezer for 6-24 h, before transfer and storage at -80 °C. Replicate samples were shipped to centers in Australia and the USA for DNA extraction and sequencing by their respective PCR protocols, and analysed with the same bioinformatic pipeline. Variation in gut microbiome was dominated by differences between individuals. Minor differences in the abundance of taxa were found between collection-processing methods and day of collection, and between the two centers. We conclude that collection with storage and transport at 4 °C within 24 h is adequate for 16S rRNA analysis of the gut microbiome. Other factors including differences in PCR and sequencing methods account for relatively minor variation compared to differences between individuals.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 17 X users who shared this research output. Click here to find out more about how the information was compiled.
Mendeley readers

Mendeley readers

The data shown below were compiled from readership statistics for 122 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 122 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 30 25%
Student > Master 17 14%
Student > Bachelor 16 13%
Student > Ph. D. Student 12 10%
Student > Doctoral Student 6 5%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 28 23%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 23 19%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 22 18%
Immunology and Microbiology 17 14%
Medicine and Dentistry 13 11%
Computer Science 3 2%
Other 13 11%
Unknown 31 25%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 17. This is our high-level measure of the quality and quantity of online attention that it has received. This Attention Score, as well as the ranking and number of research outputs shown below, was calculated when the research output was last mentioned on 12 October 2020.
All research outputs
#1,952,520
of 23,498,099 outputs
Outputs from Scientific Reports
#17,802
of 127,016 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#44,217
of 333,826 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Scientific Reports
#560
of 3,755 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,498,099 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 91st percentile: it's in the top 10% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 127,016 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 18.3. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its peers.
Older research outputs will score higher simply because they've had more time to accumulate mentions. To account for age we can compare this Altmetric Attention Score to the 333,826 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done well, scoring higher than 86% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 3,755 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 85% of its contemporaries.