The DOI matches its Crossref record; 11 of the 11 references it cites were found in a registry or an index.
CopyRighter: a rapid tool for improving the accuracy of microbial community profiles through lineage-specific gene copy number correction
Open accessAbstract
BACKGROUND: Culture-independent molecular surveys targeting conserved marker genes, most notably 16S rRNA, to assess microbial diversity remain semi-quantitative due to variations in the number of gene copies between species. RESULTS: Based on 2,900 sequenced reference genomes, we show that 16S rRNA gene copy number (GCN) is strongly linked to microbial phylogenetic taxonomy, potentially under-representing Archaea in amplicon microbial profiles. Using this relationship, we inferred the GCN of all bacterial and archaeal lineages in the Greengenes database within a phylogenetic framework. We created CopyRighter, new software which uses these estimates to correct 16S rRNA amplicon microbial profiles and associated quantitative (q)PCR total abundance. CopyRighter parses microbial profiles and, because GCN estimates are pre-computed for all taxa in the reference taxonomy, rapidly corrects GCN bias. Software validation with in silico and in vitro mock communities indicated that GCN correction results in more accurate estimates of microbial relative abundance and improves the agreement between metagenomic and amplicon profiles. Analyses of human-associated and anaerobic digester microbiomes illustrate that correction makes tangible changes to estimates of qPCR total abundance, α and β diversity, and can significantly change biological interpretation. For example, human gut microbiomes from twins were reclassified into three rather than two enterotypes after GCN correction. CONCLUSIONS: The CopyRighter bioinformatic tools permits rapid correction of GCN in microbial surveys, resulting in improved estimates of microbial abundance, α and β diversity.
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.
Integrity signals
Registry
Cites
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.
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
Emergence of Scaling in Random Networks
Barabási, A.-L., & Albert, R. (1999) · Science · doi:10.1126/science.286.5439.509 · Cited by 36,135
Phylogenies and the Comparative Method
Felsenstein, J. (1985) · The American Naturalist · doi:10.1086/284325 · Cited by 9,793
Human gut microbes associated with obesity
Ley, R. E., Turnbaugh, P. J., Klein, S., & Gordon, J. I. (2006) · Nature · doi:10.1038/4441022a · Cited by 8,785
Ecologically meaningful transformations for ordination of species data
Legendre, P., & Gallagher, E. D. (2001) · Oecologia · doi:10.1007/s004420100716 · Cited by 5,556
Gut Microbiota in Human Adults with Type 2 Diabetes Differs from Non-Diabetic Adults
Larsen, N., Vogensen, F. K., van den Berg, F. W. J., Nielsen, D. S., Andreasen, A. S., Pedersen, B. K., Al-Soud, W. A., Sørensen, S. J., Hansen, L. H., & Jakobsen, M. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0009085 · Cited by 2,952
Evaluation of Methods for the Extraction and Purification of DNA from the Human Microbiome
Yuan, S., Cohen, D. B., Ravel, J., Abdo, Z., & Forney, L. J. (2012) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0033865 · Cited by 511
Koren, O., Knights, D., Gonzalez, A., Waldron, L., Segata, N., Knight, R., Huttenhower, C., & Ley, R. E. (2013) · PLoS Computational Biology · doi:10.1371/journal.pcbi.1002863 · Cited by 508
Mapping the Tree of Life: Progress and Prospects
Pace, N. R. (2009) · Microbiology and Molecular Biology Reviews · doi:10.1128/mmbr.00033-09 · Cited by 286
Effects of GC Bias in Next-Generation-Sequencing Data on De Novo Genome Assembly
Chen, Y.-C., Liu, T., Yu, C.-H., Chiang, T.-Y., & Hwang, C.-C. (2013) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0062856 · Cited by 285 · cited 1×
“For example, given appropriate pre-computed estimates (Figure 1A), CopyRighter could correct the GC percent bias introduced by sequencing microbial samples [66,67], genome length bias in metagenome profiles [68], or improve fungal surveys, in which the internal transcribed spacer sequenced can vary by two orders of ma…”
BackgroundMetagenomic Sequencing of an In Vitro-Simulated Microbial Community
Morgan, J. L., Darling, A. E., & Eisen, J. A. (2010) · PLoS ONE · doi:10.1371/journal.pone.0010209 · Cited by 248
Cited by
The Madness of Microbiome: Attempting To Find Consensus “Best Practice” for 16S Microbiome Studies
Pollock, J., Glendinning, L., Wisedchanwet, T., & Watson, M. (2018) · Applied and Environmental Microbiology · doi:10.1128/aem.02627-17 · Cited by 575
Pérez-Cobas, A. E., Gomez-Valero, L., & Buchrieser, C. (2020) · Microbial Genomics · doi:10.1099/mgen.0.000409 · Cited by 314
Identifying biases and their potential solutions in human microbiome studies
Nearing, J. T., Comeau, A. M., & Langille, M. G. I. (2021) · Microbiome · doi:10.1186/s40168-021-01059-0 · Cited by 240
A clinician's guide to microbiome analysis
Claesson, M. J., Clooney, A. G., & O'Toole, P. W. (2017) · Nature Reviews Gastroenterology & Hepatology · doi:10.1038/nrgastro.2017.97 · Cited by 153
Dynamic bacterial and fungal microbiomes during sweet sorghum ensiling impact bioethanol production
Gallagher, D., Parker, D., Allen, D. J., & Tsesmetzis, N. (2018) · Bioresource Technology · doi:10.1016/j.biortech.2018.05.053 · Cited by 54
Metadata
- Authors
- Angly, F. E., Dennis, P. G., Skarshewski, A., Vanwonterghem, I., Hugenholtz, P., & Tyson, G. W.
- Venue
- Microbiome
- Published
- 2014-04-07
- Volume
- 2
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 11-11
- ISSN
- 2049-2618 (ISSN-L)
- OpenAlex
- W2157929705
- Cited by
- 292
- References
- 11
- Type
- paratext
- 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
How to cite
Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.
- This page
- CoChat. (2026). Citation check: CopyRighter: a rapid tool for improving the accuracy of microbial community profiles through lineage-specific gene copy number correction. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1186/2049-2618-2-11
- The paper
- Angly, F. E., Dennis, P. G., Skarshewski, A., Vanwonterghem, I., Hugenholtz, P., & Tyson, G. W. (2014). CopyRighter: a rapid tool for improving the accuracy of microbial community profiles through lineage-specific gene copy number correction. Microbiome. https://doi.org/10.1186/2049-2618-2-11
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.