↓ Skip to main content

Using strain-resolved analysis to identify contamination in metagenomics data

Overview of attention for article published in Microbiome, March 2023
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • In the top 5% of all research outputs scored by Altmetric
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (94th percentile)
  • High Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source (94th percentile)

Mentioned by

blogs
1 blog
twitter
63 X users
video
1 YouTube creator

Citations

dimensions_citation
10 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
49 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
Using strain-resolved analysis to identify contamination in metagenomics data
Published in
Microbiome, March 2023
DOI 10.1186/s40168-023-01477-2
Pubmed ID
Authors

Yue Clare Lou, Jordan Hoff, Matthew R. Olm, Jacob West-Roberts, Spencer Diamond, Brian A. Firek, Michael J. Morowitz, Jillian F. Banfield

Abstract

Metagenomics analyses can be negatively impacted by DNA contamination. While external sources of contamination such as DNA extraction kits have been widely reported and investigated, contamination originating within the study itself remains underreported. Here, we applied high-resolution strain-resolved analyses to identify contamination in two large-scale clinical metagenomics datasets. By mapping strain sharing to DNA extraction plates, we identified well-to-well contamination in both negative controls and biological samples in one dataset. Such contamination is more likely to occur among samples that are on the same or adjacent columns or rows of the extraction plate than samples that are far apart. Our strain-resolved workflow also reveals the presence of externally derived contamination, primarily in the other dataset. Overall, in both datasets, contamination is more significant in samples with lower biomass. Our work demonstrates that genome-resolved strain tracking, with its essentially genome-wide nucleotide-level resolution, can be used to detect contamination in sequencing-based microbiome studies. Our results underscore the value of strain-specific methods to detect contamination and the critical importance of looking for contamination beyond negative and positive controls. Video Abstract.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 63 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 49 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
Unknown 49 100%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 11 22%
Researcher 11 22%
Student > Master 3 6%
Student > Bachelor 2 4%
Student > Postgraduate 2 4%
Other 5 10%
Unknown 15 31%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 12 24%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 7 14%
Immunology and Microbiology 6 12%
Environmental Science 2 4%
Unspecified 1 2%
Other 2 4%
Unknown 19 39%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 43. 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 19 April 2023.
All research outputs
#1,003,707
of 26,005,389 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
#283
of 1,816 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#21,447
of 427,370 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
#4
of 67 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 26,005,389 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done particularly well and is in the 96th percentile: it's in the top 5% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,816 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 36.9. This one has done well, scoring higher than 84% 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 427,370 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 67 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one has done particularly well, scoring higher than 94% of its contemporaries.