↓ Skip to main content

Phylogenetic approaches to microbial community classification

Overview of attention for article published in Microbiome, October 2015
Altmetric Badge

About this Attention Score

  • Good Attention Score compared to outputs of the same age (73rd percentile)

Mentioned by

twitter
10 X users

Citations

dimensions_citation
40 Dimensions

Readers on

mendeley
143 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
Phylogenetic approaches to microbial community classification
Published in
Microbiome, October 2015
DOI 10.1186/s40168-015-0114-5
Pubmed ID
Authors

Jie Ning, Robert G. Beiko

Abstract

The microbiota from different body sites are dominated by different major groups of microbes, but the variations within a body site such as the mouth can be more subtle. Accurate predictive models can serve as useful tools for distinguishing sub-sites and understanding key organisms and their roles and can highlight deviations from expected distributions of microbes. Good classification depends on choosing the right combination of classifier, feature representation, and learning model. Machine-learning procedures have been used in the past for supervised classification, but increased attention to feature representation and selection may produce better models and predictions. We focused our attention on the classification of nine oral sites and dental plaque in particular, using data collected from the Human Microbiome Project. A key focus of our representations was the use of phylogenetic information, both as the basis for custom kernels and as a way to represent sets of microbes to the classifier. We also used the PICRUSt software, which draws on phylogenetic relationships to predict molecular functions and to generate additional features for the classifier. Custom kernels based on the UniFrac measure of community dissimilarity did not improve performance. However, feature representation was vital to classification accuracy, with microbial clade and function representations providing useful information to the classifier; combining the two types of features did not yield increased prediction accuracy. Many of the best-performing clades and functions had clear associations with oral microflora. The classification of oral microbiota remains a challenging problem; our best accuracy on the plaque dataset was approximately 81 %. Perfect accuracy may be unattainable due to the close proximity of the sites and intra-individual variation. However, further exploration of the space of both classifiers and feature representations is likely to increase the accuracy of predictive models.

X Demographics

X Demographics

The data shown below were collected from the profiles of 10 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 143 Mendeley readers of this research output. Click here to see the associated Mendeley record.

Geographical breakdown

Country Count As %
United States 3 2%
Canada 2 1%
Sweden 1 <1%
Estonia 1 <1%
Mexico 1 <1%
Unknown 135 94%

Demographic breakdown

Readers by professional status Count As %
Student > Ph. D. Student 32 22%
Student > Master 20 14%
Unspecified 17 12%
Researcher 16 11%
Student > Bachelor 11 8%
Other 30 21%
Unknown 17 12%
Readers by discipline Count As %
Agricultural and Biological Sciences 44 31%
Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology 19 13%
Unspecified 17 12%
Computer Science 10 7%
Immunology and Microbiology 7 5%
Other 27 19%
Unknown 19 13%
Attention Score in Context

Attention Score in Context

This research output has an Altmetric Attention Score of 5. 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 17 November 2017.
All research outputs
#6,699,016
of 24,885,505 outputs
Outputs from Microbiome
#1,430
of 1,705 outputs
Outputs of similar age
#75,446
of 283,424 outputs
Outputs of similar age from Microbiome
#19
of 20 outputs
Altmetric has tracked 24,885,505 research outputs across all sources so far. This one has received more attention than most of these and is in the 72nd percentile.
So far Altmetric has tracked 1,705 research outputs from this source. They typically receive a lot more attention than average, with a mean Attention Score of 38.5. This one is in the 16th percentile – i.e., 16% 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 283,424 tracked outputs that were published within six weeks on either side of this one in any source. This one has gotten more attention than average, scoring higher than 73% of its contemporaries.
We're also able to compare this research output to 20 others from the same source and published within six weeks on either side of this one. This one is in the 10th percentile – i.e., 10% of its contemporaries scored the same or lower than it.