Unraveling city-specific signature and identifying sample origin locations for the data from CAMDA MetaSUB challenge
Open accessPublished version of a preprint
Abstract
Background: Composition of microbial communities can be location-specific, and the different abundance of taxon within location could help us to unravel city-specific signature and predict the sample origin locations accurately. In this study, the whole genome shotgun (WGS) metagenomics data from samples across 16 cities around the world and samples from another 8 cities were provided as the main and mystery datasets respectively as the part of the CAMDA 2019 MetaSUB “Forensic Challenge”. The feature selecting, normalization, three methods of machine learning, PCoA (Principal Coordinates Analysis) and ANCOM (Analysis of composition of microbiomes) were conducted for both the main and mystery datasets. Results: Features selecting, combined with the machines learning methods, revealed that the combination of the common features was effective for predicting the origin of the samples. The average error rates of 11.93 and 30.37% of three machine learning methods were obtained for main and mystery datasets respectively. Using the samples from main dataset to predict the labels of samples from mystery dataset, nearly 89.98% of the test samples could be correctly labeled as “mystery” samples. PCoA showed that nearly 60% of the total variability of the data could be explained by the first two PCoA axes. Although many cities overlapped, the separation of some cities was found in PCoA. The results of ANCOM, combined with importance score from the Random Forest, indicated that the common “family”, “order” of the main-dataset and the common “order” of the mystery dataset provided the most efficient information for prediction respectively. Conclusions: The results of the classification suggested that the composition of the microbiomes was distinctive across the cities, which could be used to identify the sample origins. This was also supported by the results from ANCOM and importance score from the RF. In addition, the accuracy of the prediction could be improved by more samples and better sequencing depth.
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
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.
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?
The human gut contains several discrete, ecologically balanced communities (microbiotypes) that are resilient but can be changed by diet, drugs, and lifestyle.
“The human gut microbiome includes multiple discrete ecologically balanced communities—hereafter referred to as ‘enteric microbiotypes’—that are resilient although still modifiable by diet, drugs and lifestyle47–52.”
From Intestinal microbiota signatures of clinical response and immune-related adverse events in melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 (2022) · cites this paper as [52]
Enteric microbiotypes differ by geographical area, as the gut microbiome is influenced by ethnicity and geographical origin.
“Enteric microbiotypes are distinctive of different geographical areas, as the human gut microbiome is affected by ethnicity and geographical origin48,49,52.”
From Intestinal microbiota signatures of clinical response and immune-related adverse events in melanoma patients treated with anti-PD-1 (2022) · cites this paper as [52]
Self-check
Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.
The self-check needs the paper’s full text.
The citation lists haven’t been fetched yet
References 20 · Cited by 30
Research works printed but not linked: 1
- [18]Balakrishnama S, Ganapathiraju A: Linear Discriminant Analysis—A Brief Tutorial, vol. 11; 1998.
- Authors
- Zhang, R., Walker, A. R., & Datta, S.
- Affiliations
- University of Florida (US)
- Corresponding author
- Datta, Susmita
- Venue
- Biology Direct
- Published
- 2021-01-04
- Volume
- 16
- Issue
- 1
- Pages
- 1-1
- ISSN
- 1745-6150 (ISSN-L)
- PMC
- PMC7780616
- OpenAlex
- W3119089710
- Cited by
- 30
- References
- 20
- Citations by year
- 2026: 2 · 2025: 4 · 2024: 10 · 2023: 2 · 2022: 8 · 2021: 4
- FWCI
- 3.51
- Type
- journal article
- Language
- en
- Open access
- gold
- doi.org
- Locations
- Biology Direct (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- Research Square (acceptedVersion, cc-by)
- Europe PMC (PubMed Central) (publishedVersion, other-oa)
- PubMed Central (publishedVersion, cc-by)
- PubMed (publishedVersion)
- DOAJ (DOAJ: Directory of Open Access Journals) (submittedVersion, cc-by-sa)
- Funders
- National Center for Advancing Translational Sciences (1UL1TR000064)
- 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 › Gut microbiota and health
- Keywords
- human microbiome, feature selection, ANCOM, random forest feature importance, principal coordinates analysis, metagenomics, microbial community composition
- MeSH terms
- Machine Learning, Cities, Humans, Metagenome, Metagenomics, Microbiota
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