Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 363

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 44 of the 44 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Modular approach to customise sample preparation procedures for viral metagenomics: a reproducible protocol for virome analysis

Open access
Conceição-Neto, Nádia, Zeller, Mark, Lefrère, Hanne, De Bruyn, Pieter, Beller, Leen, Deboutte, Ward, Yinda, Claude Kwe, Lavigne, Rob, Maes, Piet, Ranst, Marc Van, Heylen, Elisabeth, Matthijnssens, Jelle·2015·Scientific Reports

Abstract

A major limitation for better understanding the role of the human gut virome in health and disease is the lack of validated methods that allow high throughput virome analysis. To overcome this, we evaluated the quantitative effect of homogenisation, centrifugation, filtration, chloroform treatment and random amplification on a mock-virome (containing nine highly diverse viruses) and a bacterial mock-community (containing four faecal bacterial species) using quantitative PCR and next-generation sequencing. This resulted in an optimised protocol that was able to recover all viruses present in the mock-virome and strongly alters the ratio of viral versus bacterial and 16S rRNA genetic material in favour of viruses (from 43.2% to 96.7% viral reads and from 47.6% to 0.19% bacterial reads). Furthermore, our study indicated that most of the currently used virome protocols, using small filter pores and/or stringent centrifugation conditions may have largely overlooked large viruses present in viromes. We propose NetoVIR (N ovel e nrichment t echnique o f VIR omes), which allows for a fast, reproducible and high throughput sample preparation for viral metagenomics studies, introducing minimal bias. This procedure is optimised mainly for faecal samples, but with appropriate concentration steps can also be used for other sample types with lower initial viral loads.

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/srep16532

Cites

44 of 44 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 363

Metadata

Authors
Conceição-Neto, N., Zeller, M., Lefrère, H., De Bruyn, P., Beller, L., Deboutte, W., Yinda, C. K., Lavigne, R., Maes, P., Ranst, M. V., Heylen, E., & Matthijnssens, J.
Venue
Scientific Reports
Published
2015-11-12
Volume
5
Issue
1
Pages
16532-16532
ISSN
2045-2322 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2410580207
Cited by
363
References
44
FWCI
15.15
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
gold

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.