Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 292

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 access
Angly, Florent E, Dennis, Paul G, Skarshewski, Adam, Vanwonterghem, Inka, Hugenholtz, Philip, Tyson, Gene W·2014·Microbiome

Abstract

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.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1186/2049-2618-2-11

Cites

11 of 11 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 11 references

Cited by

See all 292

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.