↓ Skip to main content

PyroTRF-ID: a novel bioinformatics methodology for the affiliation of terminal-restriction fragments using 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing data

Overview of attention for article published in BMC Microbiology, December 2012
Altmetric Badge

Mentioned by

twitter
1 X user

Readers on

mendeley
69 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
PyroTRF-ID: a novel bioinformatics methodology for the affiliation of terminal-restriction fragments using 16S rRNA gene pyrosequencing data
Published in
BMC Microbiology, December 2012
DOI 10.1186/1471-2180-12-306
Pubmed ID
Authors

David G Weissbrodt, Noam Shani, Lucas Sinclair, Grégory Lefebvre, Pierre Rossi, Julien Maillard, Jacques Rougemont, Christof Holliger

Abstract

In molecular microbial ecology, massive sequencing is gradually replacing classical fingerprinting techniques such as terminal-restriction fragment length polymorphism (T-RFLP) combined with cloning-sequencing for the characterization of microbiomes. Here, a bioinformatics methodology for pyrosequencing-based T-RF identification (PyroTRF-ID) was developed to combine pyrosequencing and T-RFLP approaches for the description of microbial communities. The strength of this methodology relies on the identification of T-RFs by comparison of experimental and digital T-RFLP profiles obtained from the same samples. DNA extracts were subjected to amplification of the 16S rRNA gene pool, T-RFLP with the HaeIII restriction enzyme, 454 tag encoded FLX amplicon pyrosequencing, and PyroTRF-ID analysis. Digital T-RFLP profiles were generated from the denoised full pyrosequencing datasets, and the sequences contributing to each digital T-RF were classified to taxonomic bins using the Greengenes reference database. The method was tested both on bacterial communities found in chloroethene-contaminated groundwater samples and in aerobic granular sludge biofilms originating from wastewater treatment systems.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profile of 1 X user 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 69 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Japan 2 3%
United States 2 3%
Indonesia 1 1%
Brazil 1 1%
United Kingdom 1 1%
Portugal 1 1%
Finland 1 1%
Luxembourg 1 1%
Unknown 59 86%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 21 30%
Researcher 13 19%
Student > Master 5 7%
Student > Doctoral Student 4 6%
Professor 4 6%
Other 14 20%
Unknown 8 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 32 46%
Environmental Science 10 14%
Engineering 5 7%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 4 6%
Chemical Engineering 2 3%
Other 6 9%
Unknown 10 14%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 1. 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 29 December 2012.
All research outputs
#18,345,259
of 23,577,654 outputs
Outputs from BMC Microbiology
#2,050
of 3,260 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#214,388
of 284,780 outputs
Outputs of similar age from BMC Microbiology
#73
of 98 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 23,577,654 research outputs across all sources so far. This one is in the 19th percentile – i.e., 19% of other outputs scored the same or lower than it.
So far Altmetric has tracked 3,260 research outputs from this source. They receive a mean Attention Score of 4.2. This one is in the 29th percentile – i.e., 29% of its peers scored the same or lower than it.
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 284,780 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one is in the 21st percentile – i.e., 21% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.
We're also able to compare this research output to 98 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 22nd percentile – i.e., 22% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.