↓ Skip to main content

Temporal and technical variability of human gut metagenomes

Overview of attention for article published in Genome Biology, April 2015
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 (88th percentile)
  • Average Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age and source

Mentioned by

twitter
27 X users
facebook
1 Facebook page

Citations

dimensions_citation
154 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
297 Mendeley
citeulike
4 CiteULike
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
Temporal and technical variability of human gut metagenomes
Published in
Genome Biology, April 2015
DOI 10.1186/s13059-015-0639-8
Pubmed ID
Authors

Anita Y Voigt, Paul I Costea, Jens Roat Kultima, Simone S Li, Georg Zeller, Shinichi Sunagawa, Peer Bork

Abstract

Metagenomics has become a prominent approach for exploring the role of the gut microbiota in human health. However, the temporal variability of the healthy gut microbiome has not yet been studied in depth using metagenomics and little is known about the effects of different sampling and preservation approaches. We performed metagenomic analysis on fecal samples from seven subjects collected over a period of up to two years to investigate temporal variability and assess preservation-induced variation, specifically, fresh frozen compared to RNALater. We also monitored short-term disturbances caused by antibiotic treatment and bowel cleansing in one subject. We find that the human gut microbiome is temporally stable and highly personalized at both taxonomic and functional levels. Over multiple time points, samples from the same subject clustered together, even in the context of a large dataset of 888 European and American fecal metagenomes. One exception was observed in an antibiotic intervention case where, more than one year after the treatment, samples did not resemble the pre-treatment state. Clustering was not affected by the preservation method. No species differed significantly in abundance, and only 0.36% of gene families were differentially abundant between preservation methods. Technical variability is small compared to the temporal variability of an unperturbed gut microbiome, which in turn is much smaller than the observed between-subject variability. Thus, short-term preservation of fecal samples in RNALater is an appropriate and cost-effective alternative to freezing of fecal samples for metagenomic studies.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 27 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 297 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 6 2%
Germany 5 2%
Brazil 2 <1%
New Zealand 2 <1%
Denmark 2 <1%
Canada 1 <1%
United Kingdom 1 <1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Belgium 1 <1%
Other 2 <1%
Unknown 274 92%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Researcher 72 24%
Student > Ph. D. Student 69 23%
Student > Master 39 13%
Student > Doctoral Student 17 6%
Student > Bachelor 17 6%
Other 41 14%
Unknown 42 14%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 104 35%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 56 19%
Immunology and Microbiology 19 6%
Medicine and Dentistry 19 6%
Computer Science 8 3%
Other 30 10%
Unknown 61 21%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 14. 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 February 2019.
All research outputs
#2,562,464
of 25,374,917 outputs
Outputs from Genome Biology
#2,053
of 4,467 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#32,269
of 279,944 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Genome Biology
#38
of 66 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 25,374,917 research outputs across all sources so far. Compared to these this one has done well and is in the 89th percentile: it's in the top 25% of all research outputs ever tracked by Altmetric.
So far Altmetric has tracked 4,467 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 27.6. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 53% 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 279,944 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 88% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 66 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 42nd percentile – i.e., 42% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.