Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 400

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 2 of the 2 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Assessment of microbial diversity in human colonic samples by 16S rDNA sequence analysis

Open access
Hold, G·2002·FEMS Microbiology Ecology

Abstract

Abstract The bacterial species diversity of three colonic tissue samples from elderly people was investigated by sequence analysis of randomly cloned eubacterial 16S rDNA. The majority of sequences (87%) clustered within three bacterial groups: (1) Bacteroides; (2) low G+C content Gram-positives related to Clostridium coccoides (cluster XIVa); (3) Gram-positives related to Clostridium leptum (cluster IV). These groups have been shown to dominate the human faecal flora. Only 25% of sequences were closely related (>97%) to current species type strains, and 28% were less than 97% related to any database entry. 19% of sequences were most closely related to recently isolated butyrate-producing bacteria belonging to clusters XIVa and IV, with a further 18% of the sequences most closely related to Ruminococcus obeum and Ruminococcus torques (members of cluster XIVa). These results provide the first molecular information on the microbial diversity present in human colonic samples.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/s0168-6496(01)00190-8

Cites

2 of 2 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cites

Cited by

See all 400

Metadata

Authors
Hold, G.
Venue
FEMS Microbiology Ecology
Published
2002-01
Volume
39
Issue
1
Pages
33-39
ISSN
0168-6496 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2172174856
Cited by
400
References
2
FWCI
6.26
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
bronze

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.