Cited by 2,017Microbial Community Ecology and PhysiologyGenomics and Phylogenetic StudiesProtist diversity and phylogeny

The Uncultured Microbial Majority

Rappé, Michael S., Giovannoni, Stephen J.·2003·Annual Review of Microbiology

Abstract

▪ Abstract Since the delineation of 12 bacterial phyla by comparative phylogenetic analyses of 16S ribosomal RNA in 1987 knowledge of microbial diversity has expanded dramatically owing to the sequencing of ribosomal RNA genes cloned from environmental DNA. Currently, only 26 of the approximately 52 identifiable major lineages, or phyla, within the domain Bacteria have cultivated representatives. Evidence from field studies indicates that many of the uncultivated phyla are found in diverse habitats, and some are extraordinarily abundant. In some important environments, including seawater, freshwater, and soil, many biologically and geochemically important organisms are at best only remotely related to any strain that has been characterized by phenotype or by genome sequencing. Genome sequence information that would allow ribosomal RNA gene trees to be related to broader patterns in microbial genome evolution is scant, and therefore microbial diversity remains largely unexplored territory.

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1146/annurev.micro.57.030502.090759

Cites

6 of 6 references verified0 citation errors · 0 not checkable

Statistics

Recomputing p-values needs the paper’s full text.

Claims the paper makes

We couldn’t retrieve this paper’s full text, so its claims and self-check weren’t run. The registry and citation checks still apply.

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?

  • Scientists estimate that, to date, less than 1% of microbial life has been successfully cultivated.

    “Scientists estimate that, to date, less than 1% of microbial life has been successfully cultivated (e.g., grown in the laboratory) (Rappé and Giovannoni, 2003).”

    From The Astrobiology Primer v2.0 (2016) · cites this paper as Rappé and Giovannoni, 2003

Cites

Flagged first, then by citations

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Rappé, M. S., & Giovannoni, S. J.
Affiliations
Oregon State University (US)
Venue
Annual Review of Microbiology
Published
2003-10
Volume
57
Issue
1
Pages
369-394
ISSN
  • 0066-4227 (ISSN-L)
  • 1545-3251
OpenAlex
W2147378425
Cited by
2,017
References
6
Citations by year
2026: 25 · 2025: 51 · 2024: 47 · 2023: 65 · 2022: 89 · 2021: 85 · 2020: 84 · 2019: 88 · 2018: 98 · 2017: 95 · 2016: 96 · 2015: 110 · 2014: 123 · 2013: 116 · 2012: 118
FWCI
6.39
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
closed
Locations
  • Annual Review of Microbiology (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Funders
  • National Science Foundation
  • Oregon State University
Topics
  • Physical Sciences › Environmental Science › Ecology › Microbial Community Ecology and Physiology
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Genomics and Phylogenetic Studies
  • Life Sciences › Biochemistry, Genetics and Molecular Biology › Molecular Biology › Protist diversity and phylogeny
Keywords
uncultured bacteria, bacterial phyla, microbial diversity, 16S rRNA phylogeny, environmental DNA, bacterial culture, soil bacteria, freshwater bacteria, marine bacteria
MeSH terms
DNA, Bacterial, Gram-Negative Bacteria, Gram-Positive Bacteria, Phylogeny, RNA, Ribosomal, 16S, Soil Microbiology, Genetic Variation, Water Microbiology, Genome, Bacterial, Sequence Analysis, DNA, Evolution, Molecular

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