↓ Skip to main content

Pipeline for amplifying and analyzing amplicons of the V1–V3 region of the 16S rRNA gene

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Research Notes, August 2016
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 (81st percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (89th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
3 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
56 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
136 Mendeley
You are seeing a free-to-access but limited selection of the activity Altmetric has collected about this research output. Click here to find out more.
Title
Pipeline for amplifying and analyzing amplicons of the V1–V3 region of the 16S rRNA gene
Published in
BMC Research Notes, August 2016
DOI 10.1186/s13104-016-2172-6
Pubmed ID
Authors

Heather K. Allen, Darrell O. Bayles, Torey Looft, Julian Trachsel, Benjamin E. Bass, David P. Alt, Shawn M. D. Bearson, Tracy Nicholson, Thomas A. Casey

Abstract

Profiling of 16S rRNA gene sequences is an important tool for testing hypotheses in complex microbial communities, and analysis methods must be updated and validated as sequencing technologies advance. In host-associated bacterial communities, the V1-V3 region of the 16S rRNA gene is a valuable region to profile because it provides a useful level of taxonomic resolution; however, use of Illumina MiSeq data for experiments targeting this region needs validation. Using a MiSeq machine and the version 3 (300 × 2) chemistry, we sequenced the V1-V3 region of the 16S rRNA gene within a mock community. Nineteen bacteria and one archaeon comprised the mock community, and 12 replicate amplifications of the community were performed and sequenced. Sequencing the large fragment (490 bp) that encompasses V1-V3 yielded a higher error rate (3.6 %) than has been reported when using smaller fragment sizes. This higher error rate was due to a large number of sequences that occurred only one or two times among all mock community samples. Removing sequences that occurred one time among all samples (singletons) reduced the error rate to 1.4 %. Diversity estimates of the mock community containing all sequences were inflated, whereas estimates following singleton removal more closely reflected the actual mock community membership. A higher percentage of the sequences could be taxonomically assigned after singleton and doubleton sequences were removed, and the assignments reflected the membership of the input DNA. Sequencing the V1-V3 region of the 16S rRNA gene on the MiSeq platform may require additional sequence curation in silico, and improved error rates and diversity estimates show that removing low-frequency sequences is reasonable. When datasets have a high number of singletons, these singletons can be removed from the analysis without losing statistical power while reducing error and improving microbiota assessment.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 3 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 136 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 2 1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
France 1 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
Unknown 131 96%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 26 19%
Researcher 24 18%
Student > Master 22 16%
Student > Doctoral Student 10 7%
Student > Bachelor 9 7%
Other 21 15%
Unknown 24 18%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 48 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 17 13%
Immunology and Microbiology 13 10%
Environmental Science 7 5%
Veterinary Science and Veterinary Medicine 6 4%
Other 16 12%
Unknown 29 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 9. 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 05 August 2016.
All research outputs
#3,683,514
of 22,881,964 outputs
Outputs from BMC Research Notes
#529
of 4,269 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#67,946
of 366,909 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Research Notes
#9
of 82 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 22,881,964 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 83rd percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,269 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a little more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 5.5. This one has done well, scoring higher than 87% 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 366,909 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 81% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 82 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done well, scoring higher than 89% of its contemporaries.