Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 369

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 9 of the 9 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Saliva microbiomes distinguish caries-active from healthy human populations

Open access
Yang, Fang, Zeng, Xiaowei, Ning, Kang, Liu, Kuan-Liang, Lo, Chien-Chi, Wang, Wei, Chen, Jie, Wang, Dongmei, Huang, Ranran, Chang, Xingzhi, Chain, Patrick S, Xie, Gary, Ling, Junqi, Xu, Jian·2012·The ISME Journal

Abstract

The etiology of dental caries remains elusive because of our limited understanding of the complex oral microbiomes. The current methodologies have been limited by insufficient depth and breadth of microbial sampling, paucity of data for diseased hosts particularly at the population level, inconsistency of sampled sites and the inability to distinguish the underlying microbial factors. By cross-validating 16S rRNA gene amplicon-based and whole-genome-based deep-sequencing technologies, we report the most in-depth, comprehensive and collaborated view to date of the adult saliva microbiomes in pilot populations of 19 caries-active and 26 healthy human hosts. We found that: first, saliva microbiomes in human population were featured by a vast phylogenetic diversity yet a minimal organismal core; second, caries microbiomes were significantly more variable in community structure whereas the healthy ones were relatively conserved; third, abundance changes of certain taxa such as overabundance of Prevotella Genus distinguished caries microbiota from healthy ones, and furthermore, caries-active and normal individuals carried different arrays of Prevotella species; and finally, no ‘caries-specific’ operational taxonomic units (OTUs) were detected, yet 147 OTUs were ‘caries associated’, that is, differentially distributed yet present in both healthy and caries-active populations. These findings underscored the necessity of species- and strain-level resolution for caries prognosis, and were consistent with the ecological hypothesis where the shifts in community structure, instead of the presence or absence of particular groups of microbes, underlie the cariogenesis.

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 · 10.1038/ismej.2011.71

Cites

9 of 9 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

Show all 9 references

Cited by

See all 369

Metadata

Authors
Yang, F., Zeng, X., Ning, K., Liu, K.-L., Lo, C.-C., Wang, W., Chen, J., Wang, D., Huang, R., Chang, X., Chain, P. S., Xie, G., Ling, J., & Xu, J.
Venue
The ISME Journal
Published
2011-06-30
Volume
6
Issue
1
Pages
1-10
ISSN
  • 1751-7362 (ISSN-L)
  • 1751-7370
OpenAlex
W2017727472
Cited by
369
References
9
FWCI
27.25
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

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: Saliva microbiomes distinguish caries-active from healthy human populations. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1038/ismej.2011.71
The paper
Yang, F., Zeng, X., Ning, K., Liu, K.-L., Lo, C.-C., Wang, W., Chen, J., Wang, D., Huang, R., Chang, X., Chain, P. S., Xie, G., Ling, J., & Xu, J. (2012). Saliva microbiomes distinguish caries-active from healthy human populations. The ISME Journal. https://doi.org/10.1038/ismej.2011.71

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.