Cited by 19,549

The DOI matches its Crossref record; 1 of the 1 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.

Introducing mothur: Open-Source, Platform-Independent, Community-Supported Software for Describing and Comparing Microbial Communities

Schloss, Patrick D., Westcott, Sarah L., Ryabin, Thomas, Hall, Justine R., Hartmann, Martin, Hollister, Emily B., Lesniewski, Ryan A., Oakley, Brian B., Parks, Donovan H., Robinson, Courtney J., Sahl, Jason W., Stres, Blaz, Thallinger, Gerhard G., Van Horn, David J., Weber, Carolyn F.·2009·Applied and Environmental Microbiology

Abstract

mothur aims to be a comprehensive software package that allows users to use a single piece of software to analyze community sequence data. It builds upon previous tools to provide a flexible and powerful software package for analyzing sequencing data. As a case study, we used mothur to trim, screen, and align sequences; calculate distances; assign sequences to operational taxonomic units; and describe the α and β diversity of eight marine samples previously characterized by pyrosequencing of 16S rRNA gene fragments. This analysis of more than 222,000 sequences was completed in less than 2 h with a laptop computer.

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 · 10.1128/aem.01541-09

Cites

1 of 1 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

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

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 1 references

Research works printed but not linked: 25

  1. 10.1128/IAI.01520-08 · DOI
  2. 10.1128/AEM.65.8.3398-3400.1999 · DOI
  3. 10.1093/nar/gkn879 · DOI
  4. 10.1128/AEM.03006-05 · DOI · Paper page
  5. DeSantis, T. Z., Jr., P. Hugenholtz, K. Keller, E. L. Brodie, N. Larsen, et al. 2006. NAST: a multiple sequence alignment server for comparative analysis of 16S rRNA genes. Nucleic Acids Res.34:W394-W939. · DOI
  6. Felsenstein, J. 1989. PHYLIP—Phylogeny Inference Package. Cladistics5:164-166.
  7. 10.1128/AEM.00233-08 · DOI
  8. 10.1128/AEM.01464-06 · DOI
  9. 10.1093/bioinformatics/btl158 · DOI
  10. 10.1186/1471-2105-7-371 · DOI
  11. 10.1093/nar/gkh293 · DOI
  12. 10.1111/j.1558-5646.1991.tb04385.x · DOI
  13. 10.1128/AEM.68.8.3673-3682.2002 · DOI
  14. 10.1128/AEM.65.4.1721-1730.1999 · DOI
  15. Pace, N. R., D. A. Stahl, D. J. Lane, and G. J. Olsen. 1985. Analyzing natural microbial populations by rRNA sequences. ASM News51:4-12.
  16. 10.1093/nar/gkm864 · DOI
  17. 10.1038/ismej.2008.5 · DOI
  18. 10.1128/AEM.71.3.1501-1506.2005 · DOI
  19. 10.1128/AEM.00474-06 · DOI
  20. 10.1128/AEM.72.4.2379-2384.2006 · DOI
  21. 10.1128/AEM.70.9.5485-5492.2004 · DOI
  22. 10.1128/AEM.67.9.4374-4376.2001 · DOI
  23. 10.1073/pnas.0605127103 · DOI
  24. 10.1038/nature07540 · DOI · Paper page
  25. 10.1038/nature06244 · DOI · Paper page

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Items 101–200 of 381

Metadata

Authors
Schloss, P. D., Westcott, S. L., Ryabin, T., Hall, J. R., Hartmann, M., Hollister, E. B., Lesniewski, R. A., Oakley, B. B., Parks, D. H., Robinson, C. J., Sahl, J. W., Stres, B., Thallinger, G. G., Van Horn, D. J., & Weber, C. F.
Affiliations
  • Department of Microbiology, University of Massachusetts, Amherst, Massachusetts
  • Department of Biology, University of New Mexico, Albuquerque, New Mexico
  • Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of British Columbia, Vancouver, BC, Canada
  • Department of Soil and Crop Sciences, Texas A&M University, College Station, Texas
  • Department of Soil, Water, and Climate, University of Minnesota, St. Paul, Minnesota
  • Department of Biological Sciences, University of Warwick, Coventry, United Kingdom
  • Faculty of Computer Science, Dalhousie University, Halifax, NS, Canada
  • Department of Microbiology and Immunology, University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, Michigan
  • Environmental Science and Engineering, Colorado School of Mines, Golden, Colorado
  • Department of Animal Science, University of Ljubljana, Ljubljana, Slovenia
  • Institute for Genomics and Bioinformatics, Graz University of Technology, Graz, Austria
  • Department of Biological Sciences, Louisiana State University, Baton Rouge, Lousiana
Venue
Applied and Environmental Microbiology
Published
2009-12
Volume
75
Issue
23
Pages
7537-7541
ISSN
  • 0099-2240
  • 1098-5336
Cited by
19,549
References
1
Language
en

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